12 November 2014 (Host: Baker Hughes)

DEA Technology Forum – 12 November 2014

LOCATION: Baker Hughes

2001 Rankin Road
Houston, Texas  77073

15 September 2014 (Host: Halliburton)

DEA Technology Forum – 15 September 2014

LOCATION: Halliburton

3000 North Sam Houston Pkwy E
Houston, TX 77032

11 June 2014 (Host: Weatherford)

DEA Technology Forum – 11 June 2014

LOCATION: Weatherford

2000 St. James Place
Houston, Texas 77056

12 March 2014 (Host: NOV)

DEA Technology Forum – 12 March 2014

LOCATION: NOV

5200 North Sam Houston Pkwy. W, Suite 100
Houston, TX 77086

Minutes:

The meeting was hosted by NOV at their 5200 North Sam Houston Pkwy. W, Houston, Texas facility. Ben Bloys, Chevron, opened the meeting. A representative with NOV shared a brief video on building safety and procedures.

The following presentations were made:

Well Control Considerations of MPD on Deepwater Rigs – Don Hannegan, P.E., Weatherford

Well Control Training – Josh Beaver, Wild Well Control

Overview of the IADC UBO/MPD Committee and Current Initiatives – David Pavel, IADC UBO/MPD Vice Chairman, AF Global

Ben Bloys announced DEA will become an IADC committee. More information to follow.

The committee took a moment to thank Ron Bland, Baker Hughes, for his years of service and participation in DEA and on the DEA Board.

Having no other business, the meeting was then adjourned.

13 November 2013 (Host: Baker Hughes)

DEA Technology Forum – 13 November 2013

LOCATION: Baker Hughes

2001 Rankin Road
Houston, Texas  77073

Minutes:

The meeting was hosted by Baker Hughes at their 2001 Rankin Road, Houston, Texas facility. Ron Bland, Baker Hughes, opened the meeting and briefed attendees on safety procedures.

Ben Bloys, Chevron, made welcoming remarks and discussed potential 2014 forum themes. Suggested topics included:

  • Environmental issues. How to make sites environmentally friendly.
  • Technology around shale
  • Getting high data rates from down hole
  • Automation and adapted well construction – real time data to make alterations and decisions on the fly
  • Push towards human-machine interface

The following presentations were made:

WI-AZIP Tool for Expandable Metal Packers – Alex Kosmala, Saltel Industries

High Strength Elastically Expanded Monobore Assemblies – Jeff Spray, Dynamic Tubular

Lowering Drilling costs, Improving Safety and Environmental Impact Through Zonal Isolations in Horizontal Wells (RPSEA Project) – Jessica McDaniel, CSI

Durable Cement Systems for Long Term Zonal Isolation – Deepak Khatri, Baker Hughes

Micro-seismic: Monitoring Hydraulic Fracturing – Dick Zinno, Weatherford

Well Abandonment and Late-Stage Intervention Total Service Package – Delaney Olstad, Weatherford

Safety and Efficiency Through Advanced Video Processing – John Kozicz and Trent Martin, Transocean, and Mark Hibbard and Peter Torrione, CoVar Applied Technologies

Having no other business, the meeting was then adjourned.

12 June 2013 (Host: Weatherford)

DEA Technology Forum – 12 June 2013

LOCATION: Weatherford

2000 St. James Place
Houston, Texas 77056

Minutes:

The meeting was hosted by Weatherford at their facility, 2000 Saint James Place, Houston, Texas. Tom Gee, Weatherford, opened the meeting and briefed attendees on safety procedures. Ben Bloyds, Chevron, made welcoming remarks.

The following presentations were made:

IADC KSA Project – Brooke Comeaux, IADC

Slide Drilling Automation – Automatically Optimizing ROP while Contrilling Tool Face – Eric Maidla, Slider (Presentation not provided for web posting)

Enabling Tertiary Formation to be Economics (ESTMZ) – Ricki Jannise, Halliburton

Shale Shaker Technology and Performance – The HyperpoolTM  Shaker – Sam Bridges, Derrick

Improving UPTIME for Drilling Rigs – Why Modular Control Systems Make Sense – Margaret Buckley, DTC International, Inc.

TergoVis I Efficiency Fluid – Colby Ballew, Halliburton

Having no other business, the meeting was then adjourned.

20 March 2013 (Host: NOV)

DEA Technology Forum – 20 March 2013

LOCATION: National Oilwell Varco

7909 Parkwood Circle
Houston, Texas 77036

Minutes:

The meeting was hosted by NOV at their facility, 7909 Parkwood Circle, Houston, Texas.  Ben Bloys, Chevron, opened the meeting and briefed everyone on safety procedures. He also made welcoming remarks.

The following presentations were made:

New Residue Free Fracturing Service Helps Increase Production – Harvey Fitzpatrick, PE Product Manager – Frac/Acid, Halliburton (Presentation not provided for web posting)

Video Processing for Improved Drilling – Dr. Pete Torrione and Mark Hibbard, CoVar Applied Technologies

An Assesment of Research Needs Related to Improving Cement Isolation of Formations in Deep Offshore Wells – Dr. Barbara Kutchko, National Energy Technology Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy

Having no other business, the meeting was then adjourned.

 

Teledrill Inc.

Company:

Teledrill Inc.
18303 W. Little York
Katy, TX 77449
www.teledrill.com

 

Representative:

Bob Macdonald
18303 W. Little York
Katy, TX 77449
Tele: 281-550-0434
bob.macdonald@teledrill.com

 

Alternate:

Ben Jennings
18303 W. Little York
Katy, TX 77449
Tele: 281-550-0434
ben.jennings@teledrill.com

Bench Tree Group, LLC

Company:

Bench Tree Group, LLC
PO Box 1878
Georgetown, TX 78627
www.benchtree.net

 

Representative:

Aubrey Holt
PO Box 1878
Georgetown, TX 78627
Tele: +1 512 869 6900
Fax: +1 512 519 8167

 

Alternate:

April Newman
PO Box 1878
Georgetown, TX 78627
Tele: +1 512 869 6900
Fax: +1 512 519 8167

 

Drilling Systems (UK) Ltd.

Company:

Drilling Systems (UK) Ltd
Hurn View House
5 Aviation Park West
Bournemouth International Airport
Dorset
BH23 6EW
Tele: +44 1202  582255
Fax:  +44 1202 582288
www.drillingsystems.com

 

Representative:

Clive Battisby – Operations Director
Hurn View House
5 Aviation Park West
Bournemouth International Airport
Dorset
BH23 6EW
Tele:  +44 1202 582255
Fax:  +44  1202 582288

 

Alternate:

Ed Ramsay – Marketing Director
Drilling Systems (UK) Ltd
Hurn View House
5 Aviation Park West
Bournemouth International Airport
Dorset
BH23 6EW
Tele: +44 1202 582255
Fax:  +44 1202 582288

DrillScan US Inc.

Company

DrillScan US Inc.
2000 South Dairy Ashford, Suite 420
Houston, Texas 77077
Website: www.drillscan.com

Representative  

Stephane Menand
2000 South Dairy Ashford, Suite 420
Houston, Texas 77077
Tel: +1 (281) 679-6370

Alternate 

Ludovic Macresy
2000 South Dairy Ashford, Suite 420
Houston, Texas 77077

FMC Technologies

Company:

FMC Technologies
20515 SH 249
Houston, Texas 77070-2607

 

Representative:
Bernie McCoy, Jr.
20515 SH 249
Houston, Texas 77070-2607
Tele: (281) 591 4000
Fax: (281) 878 7751

Alternate:
Chelsi Kaltwasser
20515 SH 249
Houston, Texas 77070-2607
Tele: (281) 260 2899
Fax: (281) 878 7751

Pipe Maintenance Inc.

Company:

Pipe Maintenance Inc.
P.O Box 1753
Kilgore, Texas 75663
www.pipemaintenanceus.com

Main Representative:
Dave Andrews
1400 N Sam Houston Parkway East
Suite 190
Houston, Texas 77032
Tel: (281) 227-0000
Fax: (281) 227-0062

Alternate:
Tubular Identification
1400 N Sam Houston Parkway East
Suite 190
Houston, Texas 77032

14 November 2012 (Host: Baker Hughes)

DEA Technology Forum – 14 November 2012

LOCATION: Baker Hughes
2001 Rankin Road
Houston, Texas  77073

 

Minutes:

The meeting was hosted by Baker Hughes at 2001 Rankin Road, Houston, Texas.  Ron Bland, Baker Hughes opened the meeting and briefed everyone on safety procedures. He also made welcoming remarks.

The following presentations were made:

“WHP” Waste Heat-to-Power Fuel and Emission Free Power - Robin Dahlheim, Gulf Coast Green Energy
 Quik-Wedge – “Another One Size Fits Many” Lost Circulation Material for Sealing Unknown Fractures- Max Wang, Sharp-Rock Technologies, Inc.
Proposal: A Study to Identify and Measure the Environmental Impact of Onshore Drilling  – Natalie Wagner, NOV & Thomas Williams, EFDP

 TxIS – An Engineering & Research Services Company – Laslo Olah, TXIS

Having no other business, the meeting was then adjourned.

27 September 2012 (Host: Halliburton)

DEA Technology Forum – 27 September 2012

LOCATION: Halliburton North Belt Facility

3000 North Sam Houston Pkwy East
Houston, TX 77032
8:30 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.

The meeting was hosted by Halliburton at 3000 North Sam Houston Pkwy East, Houston, Texas.  Glenda Wylie, Halliburton opened the meeting and briefed everyone on safety procedures. Ben Bloys, DEA Chairman, made welcoming remarks.

The following presentations were made:

 Technology Changes Driven by Increased Water Depth – John Kozicz, Technology Manager, Transocean
Drilling Automation 2012 – Who, What, When, Where?  - Jim Rogers, Apache Corporation
 Water/Fluid Treatment Technologies and the Art of Applying Technology to Address Reuse and Recycling Challenges in the Oil and Gas Field – Thomas Steinke, Global Applications Manager, Johnson Screens

 Sentry™ Closed-Loop Separation System for Air Drilling – David Vieraitis, Craig Lagrandeur, R.K. Bansal, Weatherford

Having no other business, the meeting was then adjourned.

27 June 2012 (Host: Weatherford)

DEA Technology Forum – 27 June 2012

LOCATION: Weatherford

2000 St. James Place
Houston, Texas 77056
Marcellus Conference Room

Minutes for the DEA Technology Forum:

The meeting was hosted by Weatherford at 2000 St. James Place, Houston, Texas.  Tom Gee, Weatherford opened the meeting and briefed everyone on safety procedures. Ben Bloys, DEA Chairman, made welcoming remarks.

The following presentations were made:

Optimize Drilling Fluid Solutions with Inline Particle & Droplet Size Measurements – Ben Smith, Market Manager, Mettler Toledo

LWD Sonic – ShockWave in Real-Time – Mohamed Diab, Sonic LWD Product Champion, Weatherford International Ltd.

National Labs as a Technology Resource –  Ben Bloys, Manager – Los Alamos Technology Alliance, Chevron Corporation

Controlled Pressure Cementing –  Don Hannegan, P.E., Strategic Technologies Development Manager, Weatherford International Ltd.

Controlling Well Path Trajectory using Rate of Penetration Modulation  Wendell Bassarath, MotarySteerable Product Champion, Weatherford International Ltd.

TurboCaser –  Lance Davis, CEO, Deep Casing Tools

Update on DEA-164 – Son Pham, ConocoPhillips

RPSEA & Environmentally Friendly Drilling Program sponsored Small Scale Field Trials to Optimize Treatment Methods of Produced Brines to Reduce Cost and Maximize Volume of Recycled Brine Frank Platt, TEES Research Engineer, Harold Vance Department of Petroleum Engineering, Texas A&M University

Upon completion of the presentations, Ben Bloys, DEA Chairman, gauged attendees for interest in having a forum that focused on shale drilling, fracturing, and other related topics. The responses are to be discussed by the planning committee.

Having no other business, the meeting was then adjourned.


21 March 2012 (Host: NOV)

DEA Technology Forum – 21 March 2012

LOCATION: National Oilwell Varco

7909 Parkwood Circle
Houston, Texas 77036

Forum Minutes:

The meeting was hosted by National Oilwell Varco at 7909 Parkwood Circle, Houston, Texas. Jim Brock, NOV, opened the meeting and briefed everyone on safety procedures.  Ron Bland, Baker Hughes, made welcoming remarks.

The following presentations were made:

Having no other business, the meeting was then adjourned.

DEA-164 – Requirements for Advanced MWD Directional with Ranging, for Safety in Intersection, SAGD, Anti-Collision

NOTE: DEA-164 was closed in February 2013 after the sponsor withdrew. Date Submitted:  11 November 2011 Technical Area:  Production Title: Requirements for Advanced MWD Directional with Ranging, for Safety in Intersection, SAGD, Anti-Collision. Click  here for a letter of initiation to participate in the JIP. Business Impact (IMPORTANT): Industry needs directional MWD tools that can quickly and efficiently drill relief wells, assure anti-collision, steer parallel SAGD wells, and provide more everyday safety.  This is more important now than ever for environmental and personnel safety, with SAGD & intersection applications growing.  Sadly, today’s tools have not advanced in functionality in decades.  Next generation tools should be used routinely for better well placement and safety, gaining revenue to defray development costs.  Service companies need a consensus from industry on what specifications are required, and what operators are willing to pay for such advanced MWD services. Technical Objectives: Assess requirements for well applications:

  • Intersection – relief or P&A
  • Collision avoidance
  • SAGD and parallel unconventional
  • Single- and two-well ranging

Report on available technologies for ranging to adjacent casing – range, accuracy, power, environmental, patent restrictions. Assess market willingness to pay daily rates for additional safety and readiness in everyday MWD tools. Methodology: Independent consultants to gather data from operators to define requirements and specs.  Assess price tolerance for next generation MWD service for multiple applications.  Assess technical requirements and gaps.  Assess IP barriers for key technologies.  Determine whether multiple service suppliers can develop the solution.  Recommend a path forward for industry. This will be done through a series of face-to-face interviews with key managers and drilling engineers in operators’ drilling departments, and service companies. Deliverables: Report with operator survey findings, needs assessment & recommendations.  Final report will include: Proposed next generation directional MWD (functional specification) Cost/benefit analyses for significant scenarios Safety and HS&E liabilities Well shut-in cost vs better proximity determination Development, deployment, R&M expectations Comments: This was on the April, 2011, DEA agenda as a discussion item.  After Conoco Phillips agreed to be the sponsor, this is being submitted as a JIP proposal in November, 2011.

17 November 2011 (Host: Baker Hughes)

DEA Technology Forum – 17 November 2011

LOCATION: Baker Hughes, 2001 Rankin Rd.  Houston, Texas 77046

Forum Minutes:

 

The meeting was hosted by Baker Hughes at 2001 Rankin Road, Houston, Texas.  Ron Bland, Baker Hughes, opened the meeting and briefed everyone on safety procedures. Ben Bloys, DEA Chairman, made welcoming remarks.

The following presentations were made:

Having no other business, the meeting was then adjourned.

 

ARNCO Technology

Company:

ARNCO Technology
3657 Briarpark Drive
Houston, Texas 77042
www.arncotech.com

Main Representative:
Paul Bosman
3657 Briarpark Drive
Houston, Texas 77042
Tel: (832) 214-5208
Fax: (832) 214-5205

Alternate:
Jason Arnoldy
3657 Briarpark Drive
Houston, Texas 77042
Tel: (832) 214-5206
Fax: (832) 214-5205

 

Enventure GT

Company

Enventure GT
15995 N Barkers Landing, Suite 350
Houston, TX 77079
+1 281 552 2200
Web Site http://www.enventuregt.com/home

Representative

GREG NUTTER
Enventure GT
15995 N Barkers Landing, Suite 350
Houston, TX 77079
+1 281 253 0897

Alternative

MIKE BULLOCK
Enventure GT
15995 N Barkers Landing, Suite 350
Houston, TX 77079
+1 281 552 2344

Nautilus International LLC

Company

Nautilus International LLC
400 N. Sam Houston Pkwy East, Suite 105
Houston, TX 77060
http://nautilus-int.com

Representative

THOMAS WILLIAMS
400 N. Sam Houston Pkwy East, Suite 105
Houston, TX 77060
Tel: +1 281 447 8400
Fax: +1 281 447 8408

Alternative

KEITH MILLHEIM, PH.D
400 N. Sam Houston Pkwy East, Suite 105
Houston, TX 77060
Tel: +1 281 447 8400
Fax: +1 281 447 8408

Vallourec & Mannesmann USA Corp

Company

Vallourec & Mannesmann USA Corp
4424 West Sam Houston Parkway North, Suite 150
Houston, Texas 77041

Representative

VASTAN TCHOKOEV
Vallourec & Mannesmann USA Corp
4424 West Sam Houston Parkway North, Suite 150
Houston, Texas 77041
Tel: (713) 479-3299

Alternative

MARCO MAY
Vallourec & Mannesman USA Corp
4424 West Sam Houston Parkway North, Suite 150
Houston, Texas 77041
Tel: (713) 479-3254

DEA-163 – CoilFlat CT Liner Technology Demonstration

DEA Project Summary [163]

Date Submitted: November 17, 2010

Technical Area: 
Exploration, Production

Sponsor: 
TOTAL E&P R&D
Arnaud Sudre
TOTAL – Office CB 265
Avenue Larribau
64018 Pau Cedex

Title:
CoilFlat CT Liner Technology Demonstration

Submitted by:
MARINOVATION
2 avenue Fernand Martin
F-06230 VILLEFRANCHE
Ph 33-4 9340 8219 Fax 33-4 9370 7680

Principal Investigators(s):
Philippe C. NOBILEAU
Ph 33-6 85 17 41 62

 Business Impact (IMPORTANT):
The CoilFlat CT Liner Technology will deliver a high collapse gas tight Monobore casing solution resulting in simplified well architecture, improved zonal isolation and lowering drilling cost in reducing :
- the size of the well control equipment while offering flexibility in the number of string;
- reducing the volume drilled and the associated cost of disposal;
- reducing the tonnage of steel.

 Technical Objectives:
Demonstrate the excellent collapse performances of the CoilFlat CT Liner for large production casing.

 Methodology:
Institute of Petroleum Engineering Pressure Test Lab
Agricolastraße 10
D-38678 Clausthal-Zellerfeld

Deliverables:
Witnessing of collapse and burst of deployed and cemented CoilFlat10 sections

Startup Date: December 1st 2010

Project Duration: 3 to 6 months

Project Cost: 150.000 Euros

Cost Per Participant: 50.000 Euros

Comments:

Sparta Oil Tools

Company

Sparta Oil Tools
B-59, Pitamber Society
Old Padra Road
Vadodara-390015
Gujarat State
INDIA
Web site: http://www.spartaoiltools.com

Representative

SUNIR SHARMA
B-59, Pitamber Society
Old Padra Road
Vadodara-390015
Gujarat State
INDIA
Tel: +00 91 96011 96395

29 September 2011 (Host: Halliburton)

 

DEA Technology Forum Minutes

0900, Thursday, 29 September 2011

 

The meeting was hosted by Halliburton at 10200 Bellaire Blvd, Houston, Texas.  Glenda Wylie, Halliburton, opened the meeting and briefed everyone on safety procedures. Ben Bloys, DEA Chairman, made welcoming remarks.

The following presentations were made:

Upon completion of the presentations, Ben Bloys, DEA Chairman, gauged attendees for interest in having a forum that focused on shale drilling, fracturing, and other related topics. The response for having such a forum was quite favorable and is to be discussed by the planning committee.

Having no other business, the meeting was then adjourned.


 

 

4th Quarter DEA Meeting, 18 November

DEA Q4 2010 Meeting Minutes
0900, Thursday, 18 November 2010

DEA Chairman Morris Keene, Oxy, opened the meeting and welcomed the attendees. The meeting was graciously hosted by Baker Hughes at its Rankin Road facility. 

Next came the presentation, nomination and election of officers for 2-year terms beginning in 2011. The slate of candidates was: 

Ben Bloys, Chevron – Chairman
Don Campo, Bluescape Resources – Vice Chairman
Mike Killalea, IADC – Secretary-Treasurer
David Dowell, Chevron – Advisory Board
Bernie McCoy, FMC Technologies – Advisory Board
Ron Bland, Baker Hughes Drilling Fluids – Advisory Board
Roy Long, NETL-DOE – Advisory Board
John Kozicz, Transocean – Advisory Board
Glenda Wylie, Halliburton Energy Services – Advisory Board
Thomas Gee, Weatherford International – Advisory Board
Michael Jellison, National Oilwell Varco – Advisory Board
Ali Daneshy, University of Houston – Advisory Board
JC Cunha, Ph.D., P.Eng., Petrobras Americas – Advisory Board
Keith Lynch, ConocoPhillips – Advisory Board 

There were no nominations from the floor. There were sufficient members present to constitute a quorum. The members present approved the slate of candidates. 

Then Secretary-Treasurer Mike Killalea presented the year-end financial report. As of 18 November, the association is in sound financial condition. DEA possesses $7,551 in its checking and $17,685 in its savings account, for a total of $25,236.

 Then the presentations began. These were: 

Following the presentations, the meeting was adjourned.

3rd Quarter DEA Meeting, 28 September

3rd Quarter DEA Meeting Minutes
1:30 p.m., Tuesday 28 September 2010

The event was hosted by Halliburton at its Bellaire Blvd, Houston, facility. DEA appreciates Halliburton’s generous sponsorship.

Morris Keene, DEA Chairman, opened the meeting and welcomed the attendees. He then announced the following slate of officer and advisory committee nominees:

Ben Bloys, Chevron – Chairman
Don Campo, Bluescape Resources – Vice Chairman
Mike Killalea, IADC – Secretary-Treasurer
David Dowell, Chevron – Advisory Board
Bernie McCoy, FMC Technologies – Advisory Board
Ron Bland, Baker Hughes Drilling Fluids – Advisory Board
Roy Long, NETL-DOE, – Advisory Board
John Kozicz, Transocean – Advisory Board
Glenda Wylie, Halliburton Energy Services – Advisory Board
Thomas Gee, Weatherford International – Advisory Board
Michael Jellison, National Oilwell Varco – Advisory Board
Ali Daneshy, University of Houston – Advisory Board

(Note:  Subsequent to the meeting, the following individuals were added to the slate of candidates for the DEA Advisory Board)

JC Cunha, Ph.D., Petrobras America Inc.
Keith Lynch, Conoco Phillips

The slate of candidates will be voted on at the Q4 meeting on 18 November, which will be hosted by Baker Hughes at its Rankin Road, Houston, facility.

The following presentations were made. Presentations that DEA has received permission to post are available on www.dea-global.org through the links below.

Gary McGuffey of Baker Hughes gave a presentation on the Baker-Squeez™ LCM Pill.

Phil Snider of Marathon gave a presentation on RFID Drilling Reamer Development.

Heather Thomas of Baker Hughes gave a presentation on the Eco-Centre Waste Processing Center.

King Anderson of EXT Energy gave a presentation on Inficomm.

Gerard Simon and Heath Lynch of Chevron presented on Field Trial of Triple Deck Shakers.

Morris Keene thanked everyone for coming and adjourned the meeting.

23 June 2011 (Host: Weatherford)

DEA Technology Forum Minutes
0900, Thursday, 23 June 2011

The meeting was hosted by Weatherford at 515 Post Oak Boulevard, 6th Floor, Houston, Texas.  Tom Gee, Weatherford, opened the meeting and welcomed participants. As a safety message, Charlie Easter of Weatherford presented on Distracted Driving.  Ben Bloys, DEA Chairman, made welcoming remarks.

The following presentations were made:

Following the presentations, Mr. Bloys adjourned the meeting.

28 April 2011 (Host: Occidental Petroleum)

DEA Technology Forum Minutes
0900, Thursday, 28 April 2011

Ben Bloys, DEA Chairman, opened the meeting and welcomed participants. The meeting was hosted by Occidental Petroleum in the Crescent Conference Room located on the Concourse Level at Greenway Plaza.

The following presentations were made:

Extreme Drilling Efficiencies: The Thailand Experience– Kim McHugh, Chevron
Understanding Technology Acceptance – Steve Jacobs, Decision Strategies
MaxDrill: A Wholistic Approach to Drilling Efficiency – Graham Mensa-Wilmot, Chevron
Drilling Disconnect for Emergency Release, Fishing and Wireline Logging – Chad Evans, Weatherford
• Recap & Lessons Learned from DEA JIP 160: Shoulder/Thread Verifier System – Ray Dishaw, Global Systems Inc.
Multi-Sensor Directional MWD Requirements for Relief Wells, SAGD, Safety – Robert Estes, Baker Hughes, Gordon Richardson, TechRich Consulting & Robert Waters

Following the presentations, Mr. Bloys adjourned the meeting.

Sunstone Technologies, LLC

Company

Sunstone Technologies, LLC
101 North Robinson Ste 800
Oklahoma City, OK 73102


Representative

Jim Hughes
101 North Robinson Ste 800
Oklahoma City, OK 73102
Tele: +1 303 887 5242


Fearnley Procter Inc.

Company
1001 S. Dairy Ashford, Ste 120
Houston, TX 77077
www.fearnleyproctergroup.com

Representative
Simon Ward
1001 S. Dairy Ashford, Ste 120
Houston, TX 77077
+1 281 870 1333 phone
+1 281 870 1319 fax
+1 832 646 1872 cell


Alternative

Ray Procter
Peregrine Road
Westhill Business Park
Westhill, Aberdeenshire
AB32 6JL
Scotland, UK
+44 (0)1224 748600 office

DEA-162 – DeepTrek JIP for Advancing Deep, Hard Rock Drilling Performance through Controlled, Full-scale Laboratory Drilling Experiments with Aggressive Bits and Specialized Fluids

DEA Project Summary [162]

Date Submitted: February 20, 2007

Technical Area:  Exploration

Sponsor:  BP / Robert Coolidge /  281-366-5916 / robert.coolidge@bp.com

Title: “DeepTrek JIP for Advancing Deep, Hard Rock Drilling Performance Through Controlled, Full-scale Laboratory Drilling Experiments with Aggressive Bits and Specialized Fluids”

Principle Investigator:    Homer Robertson, TerraTek, a Schlumberger company

Business Impact:

A critical cost in future deep oil and gas recovery is the cost to drill a well.  This cost is dominated by the rate of penetration (ROP) that becomes increasingly important with increasing depth.  Improving the technology of drilling and increasing the ROP will lower the cost to drill a well.  This improves the economics of deep exploration and development, potentially increasing drilling activity, increasing production and supply, lowering the cost to the consumer and improving the economy.

For domestic operations involving hard rock and deep oil and gas plays, improvements in drilling penetration rates are an opportunity to reduce well costs and make viable certain field developments. These regions include the Rocky Mountains, Tuscaloosa trend, Arbuckle formation, Anadarko basin, and several other areas. An estimate of North American hard rock drilling costs is in excess of $1,200 MM. Thus potential savings of $200 MM to $600 MM are possible if penetration rates are doubled [and assuming bit life is reasonable]. The net result for operators is improved profit margin as well as an improved position on reserves.

Some of the challenges of drilling in deep and hard formations include;

  • Rock strength increases with increased depth. Also seen are increased shale plasticity and bit balling tendencies.
  • High overbalance (Borehole – Pore Pressure) resulting in chip hold down.
  • High mud solids, high density, increased viscosity, lower spurt-loss fluids in Deep Wells
  • Rig and operational limitations i.e. low hydraulics, bit wear, friction losses, differential sticking, lost circulation, etc.

Figure below shows example time – depth curves for example Tuscaloosa wells

presented by BP’s John Shaughnessy to the Department of Energy, 2001

(times below 18,000 ft Measured Depth are long)

image002.gif

Figure below shows average ROP vs. bottomhole pressure;

presented by BP’s Richard H. Reiley to the Department of Energy, 2002

image004

Industry partners and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) successfully completed benchmark testing of advanced diamond bits and high pressure/high temperature (HP/HT) drilling fluids at high pressures.  The results of this testing identified factors limiting ROP performance at great depth, and the development of drilling fluid systems and bit design philosophy to significantly improve drilling performance.  Benchmark results match very well with data from target field applications.  This project was part of the DOE Deep Trek program.  Thirty-seven full-scale tests of 6 inch bits were conducted at wellbore pressures greater than 10,000 psi. Results from high-pressure tests with water and base oil showed very high ROPs are possible before mudding up.  When drilling through hard sandstone penetration rates can drop 70 to 80% on switching to a weighted mud.  These data emphasize the importance of mud technology in high-pressure applications.  Performance of polycrystalline diamond compact (PDC) bits showed in many cases substantial improvements over roller cone insert and impregnated bits.   Substantial improvements in penetration rate were achieved with a low solids weighted fluid (cesium formate), a Manganese based weighting material and an alternate sized and distributed weighting material.  Cuttings from Carthage marble and Mancos shale appear to be compressed agglomerates of fine particles and Carthage marble cuttings had low compressive strengths.

The study has concluded that opportunities for improvements in both bit design and smart HP/HT drilling fluids are possible. While rock properties change continuously with pressure, the cutting mechanisms at great depths change much more dramatically. Changes in bit design and mud composition, using next generation technology, will be evaluated in Phase II testing.  The significance of improved ROP for deep oil and gas plays include opportunities to reduce well costs and improve the economics of deep exploration and development plays. The net result for operators is cost reduction as well as an improved position on reserves.

The test matrices and example results for the Deep Trek project are shown below:

DeepTrek Phase 1 Benchmark Test Matrix

image006.gif

DeepTrek Phase 2 Advanced Fluids and Bits Test Matrix

image008.gif

image010.gif

Example of Phase 1 Benchmark ROP Results Above

image012.gif

Example of Phase 2 ROP Improvements Above

Technical Impact:

The proposed project will be an extension of the recently completed Deep Trek testing program which has demonstrated potential for marked improvements in deep drilling performance through aggressive bit design and use of specialized drilling fluids.  The testing would involve 6” diameter bits, drilling fluids in the 11 to 16 ppg range, 10,000 psi borehole pressure, 11-12,000 psi confining pressure and overburden stress and flow rates up to 300 gpm.  The rock types will be the same as used in the Deep Trek project including Crab Orchard sandstone, Carthage marble and Mancos shale, but also could included other challenging formations i.e. a balling shale like Pierre 1 shale.  The compressive strength versus confining pressure of these three rocks are shown below:

image014.gif

The impact of the proposed extension of the industry and DOE sponsored Deep Trek project will be the testing and evaluation of a number of potential drilling fluid and bit improvements nominated for testing by the operator and service company participants by leveraging resources of a number of companies who are facing the same drilling challenge.  A good example of what can be identified and developed with such a program is the DEA 90 project on deep drilling in soft, balling shale with water-based fluids conducted at TerraTek in the later 1990’s and early 2000’s.  In this project, mechanisms related to bit design and fluid properties were identified which cause bit balling and slow ROP, bit and drilling fluid improvements of reduce bit balling and fluid additives (ROP enhancer to dramatically improved penetration rate.  Also, whereas the Deep Trek project was supported by one service company, who supplied bits, fluids and supplemental pumping services, the proposed Deep Trek JIP would be expanded to included several service companies.

Methodology:

Along with the full-scale laboratory drilling test results i.e. ROP versus WOB, RPM. Flow Rate and Borehole Pressure (simulated depth), the cuttings recovered will be analyzed to determine cutting mechanisms, fluid/rock interaction, etc.  In addition, Mechanical Specific Energy based on ROP, torque, WOB, etc. will be calculated and analyzed to determine drilling efficiency.

Deliverables:

A kick and initial planning meeting and at least one planning meeting part way through the project will be held in Houston or Salt Lake City to nominate bits and fluids for testing and to review results.  After completion of the project, a report will be prepared and a lesson’s learned meeting will be held.  There will be a three year confidentiality period from the date of the issuance of the report.

Start Up Date: January 1, 2008

Project Duration:  12 months (8 months preparation, 2 months testing, 2 months Analysis and reporting)

Project Cost: Minimum of $700,000 in cash and in-kind (7 participants) which could include four operators at 2 tests each and three service companies at 1 test each or a total of 11 tests

Cost per Participant:

  • Operators participation fee will be $100,000 cash (can nominate two high pressure drilling tests)
  • Standard service company participation fee will be $50,000 cash plus $50,000 in-kind for supply of bits and drilling fluids (can nominate one high pressure drilling test)
  • Special service company participation fee will be $0 cash plus $50,000 in-kind for supply of bits and drilling fluids and $50,000  in-kind for supply of supplemental pumping capacity of 150 gpm  at 11,000 psi for a period of 8 weeks (can nominate one high pressure drilling test)
  • Note: It is possible for an operator to nominate a bit or drilling fluid from a service company who is not a participant in the Deep Trek JIP, but the non-participating service company would not   receive the test results on there product

Comments:                   This is a new proposal

DEA-161 – A Proposal to Develop an Improved Methodology for Wellbore Stability Predictiona

DEA Project Summary

To download the presentation of DEA Project 161 in PDF format, click here.
To download the full JIP proposal in PDF format, click here.
To download the JIP agreement in PDF format, click here.
To download the brochure for DEA Project 161 in PDF format, click here.

Date Submitted: August 31, 2006
Technical Area: Exploration
Sponsor: Marathon Oil Company/John Jones/Advanced Senior Drilling Engineer/jfjones@marathonoil.com/713-296-3331
Title: A Proposal to Develop an Improved Methodology for Wellbore Stability Prediction
Submitted by: Knowledge Systems Inc./William Standifird/Senior Vice President/standifird@knowsys.com/281-243-4300
Principal Investigator(s): William Standifird, Officer in charge, standifird@knowsys.com; AJ Rizvi, Project Manager, rizvi@knowsys.com; Dr. Jon Zhang, Chief Project Geoscientist, zhang@knowsys.com; Dr. Xinpu Shen, Geomechanics Specialist, xinpushen@vip.sina.com; Dr. Joel Gevirtz, Modeling Specialist, gevirtz@knowsys.com; Dr. Martin D. Matthews, Modeling Specialist, matthews@knowsys.com
Business Impact: Loss of wellbore stability is the major source of non-productive time while drilling, causing an estimated $8 billion in world-wide losses each year. A clear goal of this project is to identify practical methods that will reduce or eliminate the incidence of unstable wellbores at a fraction of the cost of remediation.

Specifically, this project is intended to increase the effectiveness of drilling engineers in planning for wellbore stability such that the business of the project participants will be improved in the following ways:

* Reduced well construction time and cost
o Reduced casing related costs
o Reduced mud costs
o Reduced dependence on contingency casing designs
* Improve quality of formation evaluation data
* Maintain hole integrity for maximum production

Technical Objectives: The objective of the project is the identification and development of best practices for practical wellbore stability analysis. The resulting methodologies should be readily applicable by drilling engineers.

There are five essential ingredients that form the basis for this proposed project:

1. A detailed wellbore stability analysis of a significant number of wells (~50 per geographic area) using all available data to include seismic, wireline, drilling and pressure test data such as MDT’s, mini-frac’s and LOT’s.
2. A multi-disciplinary team that includes engineering and geoscience specialists to study the results of these analyses and formulate the improved methodology.
3. The improved methodologies will be blind-tested rigorously and completely documented to validate the performance improvements.
4. The results of all the analyses will be aggregated, sorted and distilled into best practices for practical wellbore stability analysis.
5. The best practices will be delivered via workshops to ensure operations personnel receive maximum benefit from the study and improved methodologies.

It is anticipated that this improved methodology will include some combination of possible new wellbore stability analysis models and/or guidelines for applying existing ones. New tools for defining and constraining rock strength may include temperature effects, a streamlined workflow, or the use of stochastic modeling to constrain highly unknown parameters.

Implementation of the methodology will be accomplished by a combination of technical forums, training courses, reference manuals, an electronic or “smart” manual and an internet web page for keeping the methodology updated.
Methodology: Research of Current Practices
We will conduct a thorough review of industry wellbore stability analysis practices, then use the results to select the most promising modeling methods. From available sources, gather the necessary data to test the selected models on a representative sampling of wells.

Data Gathering, Quality Control and Validation
An assessment will be made to determine the relative priority of data types. Based on the assessment, data will be acquired from available resources and organized within a project database.

Determination of in-situ stress and rock strength
Assumptions regarding in-situ stress and rock strength parameters are key factors in developing and validating wellbore stability models. A best practice will be developed and validated against available rock strength data from core samples, and used to provide consistent inputs to the wellbore stability models.

Wellbore Stability Analysis
For each of the selected wellbore stability modeling methods, an analytical wellbore stability prediction will be generated for the selected wells, using the information available pre-drill. Similarly, we will analyze how these predictions could have been modified using information available while drilling.

Separately, a definitive wellbore stability diagnosis will be prepared for each well using the best practices previously identified. The analyses will be correlated to known wellbore instability indicators like deformation, cavings and pack-offs.

Under certain geomechanical conditions analytical methods may not produce reliable results. Numerical methods for modeling wellbore failure mechanisms, like finite element analysis, will be considered as an alternative, provided that such methods are practical and efficient.

These predictions will be rigorously compared to the actual well diagnoses to determine the best practices for wellbore stability estimation both pre-drill and while drilling.

Documentation and Communication of Findings
Project findings will be documented and distributed among participants using appropriate methods, including manuals, expert systems, workshops and training courses.

The final scope of work will be agreed by the project participants.
Deliverables: This project will produce the following deliverables to the participants:

1. Monthly project status reports and more detailed interim project progress reports every six months during the project.
2. Based on a study of the analysis results from this project, an improved methodology will be determined for the prognosis of wellbore stability. This methodology is anticipated to be some combination of methods, models, data and procedures that result in an improved prognosis. It may include new models that better fit the analysis results, recommendations for different approaches for generating velocity data from surface seismic data, and/or recommended well planning procedures.
3. Any new models, algorithms and/or methods for wellbore stability analysis that are developed as a result of this project will be distributed to each participant in digital programmatic form such that they can be directly used in DrillWorks Expert as a User Defined Method or User Defined Program, or, alternatively they can be built into other software by the participant. Each participant will be able to distribute unlimited copies of such new methods within the participant’s company.
4. The methodology will be documented and described in a Wellbore Stability Prognosis Manual. It is anticipated that the manual will be in the range of 100 to 200 pages. Each participant will receive five copies of the manual. Additional copies will be available at cost.
5. The methodology will also be provided in electronic manual form, using a rule-based expert system structure that runs under Windows. Each participant will receive a corporate license to the electronic manual that allows unlimited copies within participant’s corporation.
6. A Wellbore Stability School specifically designed for drilling engineers will be held in each of the project’s geographic areas (five proposed). The course will be 3 days in length and cover the practical aspects of wellbore stability modeling and the associated best practices.
7. The data and analysis results will be maintained in digital form in a relational database such that it will be available for future research and study to include testing new models and methods.
8. A Wellbore Stability website will be created and maintained that contains project results, available data and updated information. This website will require password access and each project participant will be provided with a password that will be updated periodically. It will also include an FTP site that will permit downloading of data in digital form as the owners of the data provide permission for disclosure.

Startup Date: January 1, 2007
Project Cost: 1,470,000.00
Cost per Participant: 98,900.00

2nd Quarter DEA Meeting, 24 June

Minutes of Second Quarter 2010 DEA Meeting – 24 June 2010

LOCATION: Weatherford, 515 Post Oak Blvd Houston, TX 77027

MINUTES:

Ben Bloys, Chevron, Advisory Committee Member, opened the meeting and welcomed the attendees.

Mike Killalea, IADC, Secretary-Treasurer, gave a financial report. He also discussed IADC’s efforts to lift the offshore drilling moratorium in the Gulf of Mexico and encouraged members to go to www.IADC.org/Offshore_GOM_Reform for information about IADC efforts and on how industry professionals can help.

MK also discussed forthcoming IADC events related to drilling technology:

  • IADC Stick Slip Workshop, 1-5 pm Thursday, 15 July, Omni Houston Westside Hotel. Click here to view the agenda and register. $50 registration, payable at the door with cash, credit card or company check. Evening reception is sponsored by Canrig, Nabors, National Oilwell Varco and Pride International. For more information, contact mike.killalea@iadc.org or holly.shock@iadc.org.
  • IADC Advanced Rig Technology Conference, 18 August, Omni Houston Westside Hotel. “A look at key elements defining the state of the art in rig technology, both today and tomorrow”. Click here to view the agenda and register. Pride International, Siemens and Global Energy Services are Silver Sponsors. $350 registration fee, payable on line via credit card, by faxing a registration form with credit card information, or on site by credit card, cash or company check.

Mr Bloys then introduced the following presentations:

Mud Watcher Instrumentation – Reg Minton, Mossaric Services

REPSEA UDW Project Review – Tom Williams

Safety Torque Adaptor for API Flange Make-up – Bob Pudwill, Weatherford

13-5/8″ Slimbore Subsea Wellhead System with In-Wellhead Tubing Hanger Completion – Chelsi Kaltwasser, FMC North America Subsea Wellhead Application Engineering Manager

Low Cost Intervention with a Self-Standing Riser – Tom Williams, Nautilus International

CoilFlat CT Liner: High Collapse Monobore Liner on Road Size Reel – Philippe Nobileau, Marinovation  CoilFlat Description

Attendees enjoyed a lunch sponsored by Weatherford.

Following the presentations, Mr Bloys adjourned the meeting.

MAP:

Registration
  1. Contact Info
  2. (required)
  3. (required)
  4. (required)
  5. (required)
  6. (required)
  7. Address
  8. (required)
  9. (required)
  10. (required)
  11. (required)
  12. (valid email required)
  13. Staying for Lunch?
  14. CAPTCHA
  15. Captcha
 

cforms contact form by delicious:days

1st Quarter DEA Meeting, 23 March

First Quarter DEA Meeting – 23 March 2010

LOCATION: Oxy, 5 Greenway Plaza  Houston, Texas 77046

AGENDA:

8:30 am  Coffee & Business Cards

8:55 am  Welcome & Review of Agenda: Morris Keene, Oxy

9:00 am  DEA Project Proposal: Drill Pipe Fatigue Tracking System Validation: Ken Newman, CTES NOV

9:30 am  Vacuum Shale Conveyor: A Safer, Cleaner Alternative to Traditional Solids Control Equipment: Charles Mowrey, Cubility

10:00 am  Break

10:15 am  Light Weight, Ultra-high-strength Drill Pipe for Extended Reach and Critical Deep Drilling: Michael Jellison, NOV Grant Prideco

10:45 am  RPSEA Deepwater Riserless Intervention System: Bill Parks, DTC

11:15 am  Hughes Christensen Kymera™ Hybrid Bit Technology: Tim Marvel, Baker Hughes Inc  (Not available for posting)

11:45 pm  Adjourn: Morris Keene

12:00 pm Lunch


DEA-160 – Shoulder/Thread Verifier System

DEA Project Summary

DEA-160 – Shoulder/Thread Verifier System

To download the presentation of DEA Project 160 in PDF format, click here.

Date Submitted: June 29 2005
Technical Area: ExplorationProduction
Sponsor: Conoco/Phillips/Gary Collins/281-293-6969/gary.j.collins@conocophillips.com
Title: Shoulder/Thread Verifier System
Submitted by: Global Systems Inc/12865 CR 577, Anna, Tx. 75409/972-924-5000/exsearch@msn.com
Principal Investigator(s): Raymond J Dishaw/exsearch@msn.com
Business Impact: no drill pipe twist-off due to lack of shoulder engagment and/or torque. No casing/tubing leaks due to lack of seal or thread engagement. Ability to see & analyze any connection at a later date.
Technical Objectives: Verify shoulder connections and thread and seal engagement on various connections. Tailor sofware and communications offshore/onshore for oil companies. Develop connection verification database.
Methodology: Verifify shoulder engagement and torque on drill pipe. Verify complete thread and seal engagement and torque on casing and tubing in real time before going into the hole with-out any down time. Ability to see thread engagement
Deliverables: Good and bad made-up connection reports, graphs & pictures. Other to be determined.
Startup Date: Jan 2006
Project Duration: 12-18 months
Project Cost: 375,000.00
Cost per Participant: 75,000.00

DEA-159 – Implementing Plug and Play for Computer Controlled Drilling Equipment

Implementing Plug and Play for Computer Controlled Drilling Equipment

Date submitted: October 15, 2004

Sponsor: BP, Mike Payne, (281) 366-2848
(alternate is Cheryl Stark, (281) 366-7604)

Title: Implementing Plug and Play for Computer Controlled Drilling Equipment

Submitted by:

Submitted on behalf of the Athens Group by
Keith Womer, KW Technology Services, Inc.
936 Blue Spring Circle
Round Rock , TX
512-255-5745
kwomer@kwtechnologyservices.com

The Athens Group
4201 Southwest Freeway, Suite 220
Houston, Texas 77027
Phone: 713.960.5094 x117
www.athensgroup.com

Principal Investigator:

Don Shafer, Chief Technology Officer
Don.Shafer@athensgroup.com

For the DEA Project 159 Participation Agreement in downloadable PDF format, click here.

For an updated presentation of DEA Project 159 with more information on the JIP deliverables, click here.

Business Impact:

Schedule delays, cost overruns, operational problems, and potential safety issues have plagued the installation, commissioning and start-up of large, integrated drilling control systems.  A root cause of these problems is that the software interface between the computer controlled equipment (like Top Drives, Pipe Handling Equipment, Drawworks, and Iron Roughnecks) and the integrated control systems (like Cyberbase, V-ICIS, and DMCS) is not standardized.  That puts the onus on the integrated control system to resolve any differences in the location and meaning of the various software interface points.  Since there can be anywhere from 2000-8000 such points, the potential for errors are great, and the time to discover and resolve the errors can be long.  Worse, these errors are often only be detected when the equipment is physically integrated together at installation time.

In contrast, using an example familiar to our industry, standards for grading drillpipe and classifying types of connections assure that drillpipe, regardless of manufacturer, can be effectively and safely integrated at the rig site and be fit for the purpose intended.  There is no equivalent standard for drilling equipment.  This situation is most acute when multiple vendors are used, but even exists when one vendor is used, since internally one vendor may have many product lines, and multiple products within those lines.

The development of standards equivalent to those developed for drillpipe would address many of these issues.

Other industries, notably the automotive and semiconductor manufacturing industries, wrestled with exactly the same situation 10-15 years ago.  In response, the semiconductor industry has developed a set of standards known as SECS(SEMI Equipment Communications Standard)/GEM (Generic Equipment Model)  to allow fabrication equipment from multiple vendors to integrate seamlessly on the factory floor.  These standards were developed from similar standards which were developed for the automotive industry.  SECS/GEM standards implement functionality familiar to computer users as “Plug and Play”.

An excerpt describing the functionality of GEM-compliant equipment demonstrates the potential applicability to drilling equipment:  “All GEM compliant manufacturing equipment share a consistent interface and certain consistent behavior. All may communicate with a GEM capable host using either TCP/IP (using the HSMS standard, SEMI E37) or RS-232 based protocol (using the SECS-I standard, SEMI E4). Often both protocols are supported. Each piece of equipment may be monitored and controlled using a common set of line management tools defined by GEM. When an equipment has has GEM interface, it takes just minutes (or even seconds) for factory GEM host software to establish communication and begin monitoring the machine’s activity. This means that equipment manufacturers may spend more time and money improving the machine’s quality by providing a common interface to all factories. It means that factories may spend more time and money improving production and processes, rather than setting up communication to the machines.” Cimetrix, An Introduciton to the GEM Standard, http://www.cimetrix.com/gemintro.cfm)

The Athens Group has experience in developing and implementing SECS/GEM standards and software tools for the semiconductor industry.  In our industry, they have consulted on several major rig construction projects involving integrated drilling systems, verifying the proper function of the integrated software systems, and identifying software and software development process problems.

Based on their experience in these industries, the Athens Group believes that SECS/GEM standards can be effectively applied to computer controlled drilling equipment and their networked control systems.  Like Plug and Play commonly seen on Windows PC’s, this will allow standards-compliant equipment to integrate easily on the rig floor, regardless of vendor.

The benefits to the operator and drilling contractor are a major reduction in risk during all phases of major rig construction projects and particularly in installation, commissioning and start-up.  Potential safety issues arising from improper integration (such as a misreading of important alarms) would be minimized.  Equipment vendors benefit from a clear standard to which they can manufacture their equipment.  This minimizes miscommunication between buyer and seller regarding equipment functionality during the contract or implementation phases, which can lead to warranty issues later on.  Further, tests such as FAT’s and FMEA’s become more meaningful and consistent when the equipment can be tested to an established standard.  Personnel required for installation and commissioning would be reduced, benefiting everyone.

The potential monetary impact per rig project could clearly be in the millions, the savings in time in months, and the avoidance of potential safety issues incalculable.

Technical Objectives:

1.     Phase I: with equipment providers, contractors, and operators as consulting partners, Athens Group to assess the technical feasibility of applying the SECS/GEM standard to the drilling industry

2.     Phase II: if feasibility is demonstrated, have major equipment suppliers develop software interfaces compliant to the standards developed in Phase I to demonstrate inter-operability at the software level.

3.     Phase III: if interoperability is demonstrated, create a committee to develop a set of standards based on those demonstrated in Phase II for the drilling industry.  This phase could be sponsored by the DEA, API, or a “coalition of the willing” as was done for WITSML

4.     For all phases, as progress is demonstrated, communicate and evangelize the standard both internally (equipment suppliers, drilling contractors and operators through workshops and demonstrations) and externally (in professional journals)

Methodology:

The work would be organized in three phases.  Each phase results in a deliverable which the DEA can review and as appropriate fund the subsequent Phase.

Phase I

1.     development by the Athens Group of a feasibility model of a SECS/GEM equivalent system for drilling, demonstrating potential solutions for the pain points of computer-based drilling equipment integration.  See further description under “deliverables” below.

2.     consult with key equipment developers to determine the most meaningful short set of equipment commands to be modeled in the feasibility model.

3.     consult with key drilling contractors and operator-participants to insure that the proper installation and commissioning pain points have been identified

4.     demonstration of the feasibility model at an Athens Group-sponsored workshop for operators, contractors, and equipment suppliers.

Phase II

1.     Athens Group to lead a “coalition of the willing” of equipment developers like NOI, Varco, (or NOI-Varco), MH, and Weatherford.  They would independently construct software-only interfaces compliant to those developed for the model for key pieces of drilling equipment for 2 theoretical rigs.  The equipment suppliers would be supported in this effort by funding from the DEA.  Athens Group would provide technical leadership and project management.

2.     Demonstration of the integration of the models at a workshop.  This would dramatically demonstrate the inter-operability and ease-of-integration features inherent in the standard.

3.     Evangelization of the effort at SPE events and in articles

Phase III

1.     Development of the standard for drilling based on the learnings from Phases I and II.  This may be a DEA sponsored project, an API activity, or another “coalition of the willing” like WITSML.

2.     Evangelization of the standard

3.     Optional “early adopter” program while standard is being developed.  For example, NOI, Varco, or Maritime Hydraulics may want to take the lead to produce Phase II-compliant equipment for a rig package

Deliverables:

Phase I

1.     feasibility model of a SECS/GEM equivalent system for drilling, developed by the Athens Group, demonstrating potential solutions for the pain points of computer-based drilling equipment integration.  Specifically, the feasibility model would include models for a Top Drive, a Pipe Handler, a Drawworks, and an Iron Roughneck, along with a Cyberbase-V-ICIS.  The model would demonstrate solutions to installation issues, such as automatic discovery, miswiring resolution, capability changes, automatic alarm mapping and reporting.  Consultation with drilling equipment providers would be included to make the number of data points and commands limited, yet realistic to make an assessment of suitability

2.     Athens Group-sponsored workshop for operators, contractors, and equipment suppliers to educate about the SECS/GEM model and to demonstrate the feasibility model

3.     Report from interviews with major equipment vendors regarding issues in applying the standard as well as commitment to participate in Phase II.

Phase II

1.     A feasibility model of a Phase I compliant system constructed of independently developed Phase I compliant equipment interfaces (i.e. software only) for key pieces of drilling equipment for 2 theoretical rigs.  The interfaces would be provided by a “coalition of the willing” of equipment developers like NOI, Varco, Maritime Hydraulics, Weatherford, and/or BJ Services.

2.     Demonstration of the integration of the models at a workshop

3.     Articles in SPE or other professional journals

Phase III

1.     A set of standards based on the learnings of Phases I and II applicable to computer controlled drilling equipment

Startup Date:  Immediately upon JIP approval

Project Duration:  Phase I: 3 months

Project Cost:

Phase I: $80,000

Phase II: dependant on the number of drilling equipment participants, roughly $200,000-$300,000

Phase III: Nominal if anything. Primarily support for standards development

Cost per participant: $20,000 for Phase I, based on 4 participants

Comments:  Other optional projects would be:

1.      development of a self configuring Zone Management System in either or both of Phase I or Phase II.  If chosen, this should be deferred until after Phase II so that all issues having to do with relevant equipment are addressed.

2.      Development of a feasibility model (software only) for a piece of test equipment designed to test a standards-compliant piece of drilling equipmnet.  This would make Factory Acceptance Tests during project development significantly more meaningful.

3.      Demonstration of integration of post-commissioning equipment into a pre-existing network system, using either the Phase I or Phase II feasibility model systems.  For example, integrate a standards-compliant Casing Running Tool into a standards-compliant Cyberbase system.

DEA-158 – Development of Self-Expanding Tubular Technology (CFEX©)

DEA Project Summary

DEA-158

“Development of Self-Expanding Tubular Technology (CFEX©)”

DEA Project Number: 158

Date Submitted:  October 7, 2004

Technical Area:  Exploration and Production

Sponsor:  Occidental Oil & Gas Company, Mr. Morris Keene, (713) 215-7118, morris_keene@oxy.com.

Title:  Development of Self-Expanding Tubular Technology (CFEX©)

Submitted By:  Confluent Filtration Systems, LLC, (281) 597-8784

Principal Investigator:  Jeff A. Spray, jaspray@earthlink.net

Business Impact: CFEX© self-expanding technology represents an early-stage, novel approach to expandables. It is estimated both to provide solutions to numerous problems plaguing the current industry, and to present innovative, major-scale applications for casing, screens and other geologic tools. Published business cases and marketing claims for conventional deformed-tubular expandables, without drill-string compatibility, range from 3% – 50% value-addition or cost-reduction to drilling and completion operations for select types of wells. Actual market applications for plastic expandables satisfy small percentages of potential needs. Many conventional expansion processes also contain fundamental, physical limitations and some expandables applications actually present negative business value. CFEX© elastic-phase technology promises improved performance in terms of expansion reliability, higher pressure-ratings, substantially higher metallurgy and other parameters, in addition to its novel compatibility with drilling operations on real-time basis. Incorporation of a self-expanding assembly as part of the BHA provides the potential to actuate solutions to downhole problems more immediately and without the needs for cement, excess trips, rig-time or the many other conventional service and materials costs still required of plastic-expandable processes. CFEX© is further proposed as solutions to expanded-material shrinkage; overlaps downhole; and poor connection performance and reliability – all towards the development of monobore/mono-diameter feasibility. Any size tubular can be constructed, including microhole diameter applicability. The technology is also applicable to high-flow sandscreen devices incorporating drill-compatibility, higher metallurgy, and self-completing principles. The non-destructive nature of the new expansion processes makes it an excellent platform for the integration of IWT fibers and circuitry. The submitting company has manufacturing expertise which estimates the costs to produce the casing technology at approximately double that of conventional tubulars.

Technical Objectives: The proposed JIP is for the purposes of assisting acceleration  and leveraging (or ‘stair-casing’) estimated $1 – 2 million annual DOE R&D grants. As a part of ongoing technology developments, this research will result in proof, construction, testing and field demonstration of a disruptive-level technology; determine its economic and manufacturing models; and, will commence universal applications and market acceptance processes for expandables.

Methodology: Methods used to realize self-expansion concepts will occur as normal product development / technology development processes. These include specifications development; CAE design: coupon construction and testing; prototype construction and testing; and subsequent beta testing programs in the field.

Deliverables: Deliverables, as results of a continuous technology development program, will consist of reports and prototypes accompanying each product-development stage. A separate, extensive report detailing manufacturing processes and economics will also be delivered at appropriate stages.

Startup Date:  Immediate.

Duration:  Ongoing programs, Phase-1 is 12 – 24 months in duration.

Project Cost:  $1 million for Phase-1.

Cost Per Participant:  $200,000 / each.

Comments: The proposal is part of ongoing development efforts, however, at early-stages. The submitting company has established strategic relationships with all necessary development expertise, including prominent companies and individuals in the fields of: manufacturing, engineering, technology development processes, and physical testing. This proposal significantly reduces participant’ investment risk by sourcing and leveraging high-probability grant funds. IP rights and related possible development of this type technology is otherwise unavailable.

Fourth Quarter

DATE: 11.29.2006

LOCATION: Halliburton / 10200 Bellaire (at Beltway 8), Houston TX 77072

DETAILS:

Contact: Glenda WylieThis e-mail address is being protected from spambots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
Phone:(281) 575-4176
Fax: (281) 575-4045

DEA Workshop 2006

DATE: 06.19.2006

LOCATION: Moody Gardens / 7 Hope Blvd., Galveston TX 77554

No Details

First Quarter

DATE: 03.23.2006

LOCATION: Baker Hughes, 2001 Rankin Road Houston TX 77073

No Details

First Quarter

Agenda

8:00 AM - Coffee (Business Cards)
8:30 AM – Introduction and Welcome – Morris Keene – OXY
8:35 AM – DEA Business:

    • Review 1Q03 Meeting Agenda – David Dowell
    • Contractors Update of Active DEA Project’s – David Dowell
    • Introduction of New DEA Logo – David Dowell
    • Update on the 2003 DEA Workshop @ Moody Gardens (only presentations required)- Mike Killalea

9:00 AM - DEA Projects and Discussion Items: DEA # 149 – ” Barite Sag Tester”, Professor Shteryo Lyomov – Sponsor – Unocal
9:45 AM – BREAK
10:00 AM – Special Announcement: ASME Emerging Technologies & AADE National Technical Conference Gary Collins – ConocoPhillips
10:15 AM - Special Presentations: The Role of the Petroleum Technology Transfer Council (PTTC) Don Duttlinger
10:45 AM - DOE Drilling Technologies Overview – Roy Long
11:30 AM – LUNCH
12:30 PM – High Speed (1 MB/sec) Data Transmission Through Drillpipe – David Hall
1:15 PM – BREAK
1:30 PM – Microwave Processing of Materials – Mahlon Dennis
2:15 PM – Wrap Up – Morris Keene
2:30 PM – ADJOURN GENERAL MEETING

Minutes

8:00 AM – Coffee (Business Cards)
8:30 AM – Introduction and Welcome – Morris Keene – OXY The introduction and welcome and safety minute was given by Vice Chairman Morris Keene.
8:35 AM – DEA Business:

    • Review 1Q03 Meeting Agenda – David Dowell
    • Contractors Update of Active DEA Project’s – David Dowell
    • Projects were updated in the usual routine.
    • Introduction of New DEA Logo – David Dowell
    • David explained that as an affiliate of the IADC, the DEA needed a new logo that matched the color schemes used by the IADC. The DEA advisory board debated the matter and finally settled on a two color logo using the red and black scheme commonly used by the IADC to print their flyers. That logo can be seen by clicking -HERE-. It will soon replace the one seen at the top of this page.
    • Update on the 2003 DEA Workshop @ Moody Gardens (only presentations required) Mike Killalea
    • Presentations are still needed for the DEA Workshop in June. It was stressed that PAPERS ARE NOT REQUIRED – ONLY PRESENTATIONS. Anyone with an idea for a presentation should contact Mike Killalea at (281) 578-7171.

9:00 AM – DEA Projects and Discussion Items: DEA # 149 – ” Barite Sag Tester”, –Professor Shteryo Lyomov – Assoc. Prof –University of Mining and Geology “St. Ivan Rilski”Sponsor – Unocal. The professor presented his proposed project on barite settling and explained how the system would work. Participants will receive an actual sag tester and the software developed in the project. For more details download the documents that follow:

  • This is a 32K MS Word file (doc)- To download, Right Click on the following link & choose “Save As”. — Proposal-in-Word-format
  • This is a 1.1MB PowerPoint File- To download, Right Click on the following link & choose “Save As”. — Sag-Presentation–.
  • This is a 115K Acrobat file (pdf)- To download, Right Click on the following link & choose “Save As”. — JCPT-paper-on-Sag-

9:45 AM – BREAK

10:00 AM – Special Announcement: ASME Emerging Technologies & AADE National Technical Conference — Gary Collins – ConocoPhillips Gary explained what the ASME Emerging Technologies forum was about. He also highlighted the upcoming AADE National Technical conference that will be here in Houston on April 1st and 2nd. There will be 3 OUTSTANDING lunch time speakers. For more details download the document that follows. This is a 57K PowerPoint file – To download, Right Click on the following link & choose “Save As”. –ASME-AADE

10:15 AM – Special Presentations: The Role of the Petroleum Technology Transfer Council (PTTC) — Don Duttlinger- PTTC Don explained the history and workings of the PTTC. This represents a good example of getting the technology where it is needed. For more information, download the file that follows. This is a 950K PowerPoint file- To download, Right Click on the following link & choose “Save As”. –PTTC-Presentation

10:45 AM – DOE Drilling Technologies Overview — Roy Long — DOE Roy presented an overview of some new DOE sponsored technologies that are coming of age. For more information, download the file that follows. This is a 1.1MB Adobe file (pdf) – To download, Right Click on the following link & choose “Save As”. –Roy-Long-Presentation

11:30 AM - LUNCH
12:30 PM High Speed (1 MB/sec) Data Transmission Through Drillpipe – — David Hall – IntelliServ David presented a talk on Novatek’s development of a high speed drillpipe data system. This is a 1MB Adobe file (pdf) – To download, Right Click on the following link & choose “Save As”. –Drillpipe Presentation

1:15 PM - BREAK
1:30 PM – Microwave Processing of Materials – Mahlon Dennis Tom Dennis presented some details on a new DOE sponsored technology for sintering tungsten carbide. For more information, download the file that follows. This is a 760KB Adobe file (pdf) – To download, Right Click on the following link & choose “Save As”. –Microwave Presentation

2:15 PM – Wrap Up – Morris Keene
2:30 PM – ADJOURN GENERAL MEETING

ATTENDEES
Hifzi Ardic Schlumberger (281) 285-4160
Chuck Asfahl Petrospec Technologies, Inc. (281) 364-6666
Bruce Boyle Schlumberger (281) 285-8717
Gary M. Briggs TIW Window Cutting Products (713) 729-2110
Paul Brown CTES (936) 521-2201
Gerry Cales Enventure Global Technology (281) 492-5000
Gary J. Collins Conoco Inc. (281) 293-6969
Dr. Mahlon Dennis Dennis Tool Company (281) 821-9495
Thomas M. Dennis Dennis Tool Company (281) 821-9495
David Dowell ChevronTexaco (281) 596-2734
Mr Don F Duttlinger PTTC 281-921-1720
Fernando J. Guzman Drill Thru Systems (281) 265-8974
David Hall Novatek 801-374-6222
Terry Hemphill Baroid Drilling Fluids (281) 871-5825
Ed Hoover Sandia National Laboratories (505) 844-7315
Jose Luis Imana Drill Thru Systems (281) 556-8344
Morris Keene Occidental OIL and GAS Corporation (713) 215-7118
Mike Killalea International Association of Drilling Contractors (281) 578-7171
Charles Knobloch Patent Attorney – Business Inventor (281) 398-8675
Bryce Levett, RE. Varco Drilling Equipment (713) 937-5784
Roy C. Long U.S. Department of Energy (918) 699-2017
Shteryo Lyomov University of Mining and Geology “St. Ivan Rilski” +359 2 625 81/463
Ken Malloy MOHR Engineering and Testing 713 466 1527
Jim Mullen Marathon Oil Company 713-296-2215
Howard Neal Schlumberger 512 331 3000
Jim Nicholson Shell E & P Technology (713) 245-7456
John D. Rogers NETL (304) 285-4880
G, ROBELLO SAMUEL Landmark Graphics Corporation 713-839-2997
G. Russell Schmidt Unocal (281) 287-7160
Brian E. Schwind PPI Technology Services (713) 464-2200
LES SINCLAIR Burlington Resources (915) 688-6855
Ed Smalley Gas Technology Institute – GTI (281) 873-5070 ext 29
K.E. (Ken) Smith Drill Thru Systems (281) 838-3092
Ron Sweatman Halliburton (281) 575-4389
Leesa Teel IADC 281-578-7171
Thomas E. Williams Maurer Technology (281) 276-6700
Keith Womer Varco Drilling Equipment (512) 340-5293
Glenda Wylie Halliburton Energy Services (281) 575-4176
Mario Zamora M-I L.L.C. 281-561-1331

Fourth Quarter

Agenda

8:00 AM Coffee (Business Cards)
8:30 AM Introduction and Welcome – David Dowell- ChevronTexaco—— Mike Utt – Unocal
8:35 AM

DEA Business:
· Review 4Q02 Meeting Agenda – Mike Utt
· Report Out on DEA/IADC Board Meeting – Mike Utt
· Contractors Update of Active DEA Project’s – David Dowell
· Election of new Vice Chairman of DEA – Mike Utt
· Meeting Locations/Dates for 2003 – Mike Utt
· Update on possible 2003 DEA Forum Topic – Mike Utt
9:45 AM BREAK
10:00 AM

Special Presentations:
Update on Sandia’s National Labs “Diagnostics-While-Drilling project (DWD)”
by John T. Finger of Sandia National Lab
10:45 AM

Report out on wrap up of DEA-130 – “Modernization of Tubular Collaspe Performance Properties”
by Tom Asbill of Stress Engineering
11:30 AM LUNCH
12:30 PM Business Theme Discussion
” The Future of Drilling R&D – Part 2″
Introduction — Mike Utt (DEA Chairman)
12:45 PM BP (Super Major) View of “The Future of Drilling R&D”
Mike Payne
1:30 PM

BREAK
1:45 PM

“Why oil and gas R&D”
David Weinberg
2:30 PM Summary Wrap-up and Q&A
Mike Utt
2:45 PM ADJOURN GENERAL MEETING

Minutes

8:00 AM

Coffee (Business Cards)
Attendees are listed below
8:30 AM

Introduction and Welcome – David Dowell- ChevronTexaco—— Mike Utt – Unocal
The introduction and welcome was given by Chairman Mike Utt and was followed by a safety minute by David Dowell, the meeting host.
8:35 AM

DEA Business:
· Review 4Q02 Meeting Agenda – Mike Utt

· Report Out on DEA/IADC Board Meeting – Mike Utt
Mike Utt explained that the DEA Advisory board had accepted the IADC’s offer to become an affiliated member of the IADC and then explained how that would effect DEA’s operations. The IADC will provide admin-support for much of DEA’s operations, which will include website maintenance and help with planning forums. The DEA will continue to operate as before with very little visible change. The IADC will also post DEA material on their website and will advertise DEA events in the “Drilling Contractor” magazine. Everyone seems to agree that this would be a mutually beneficial arrangement.

· Contractors Update of Active DEA Project’s – David Dowell
Projects were updated in the usual routine.

· Election of new Vice Chairman of DEA – Mike Utt
Mike Utt nominated Mr. Morris Keene from OXY as the new Vice Chairman and then nominations were solicited from the floor. Mr. Keene was elected without opposition. Mike Utt then asked for nominations for a board member to fill Mr. Keene’s spot on the advisory board. Mr. Mike Harris of Apache was nominated and elected.

· Meeting Locations/Dates for 2003 – Mike Utt
Meeting dates and locations were set for the 2003 calendar year. All locations are in Houston and they are:

1st Qtr Mtg ——– February 27, 2003 ———– @ Oxy
2nd Qtr Mtg ——- May 15, 2003 —————-@ Baker Hughes Inteq
3rd Qtr Mtg ——- August 21, 2003 ————–@ Conoco Phillips
4th Qtr Mtg ——– November 20, 2003———-@ BP

· Update on possible 2003 DEA Forum Topic – Mike Utt
The next DEA Forum will be conducted June 17-18, 2003 at Moody Gardens. The Topic will be
“Deepwater Drilling – Where are We Headed?” A call for abstracts has been issued and papers will be solicited.
The forum will be conducted much as the others before it with both papers and breakout sessions.
9:45 AM BREAK
10:00 AM

Special Presentations:
Two special presentations and our Business Theme Discussions followed.
The presentations can be downloaded below:

Update on Sandia’s National Labs “Diagnostics-While-Drilling project (DWD)”
by John T. Finger of Sandia National Lab
This is a 1.5MB Adobe Acrobat file (pdf) – To download Right Click on the following link & choose “Save As”. ——– DWD Presentation.
10:45 AM

Report out on wrap up of DEA-130 – “Modernization of Tubular Collapse Performance Properties”
by Tom Asbill of Stress Engineering
This is a 650K Adobe Acrobat file (pdf) – To download Right Click on the following link & choose “Save As”. ——– DEA-130 Presentation.
11:30 AM LUNCH
12:30 PM Business Theme Discussion
” The Future of Drilling R&D – Part 2″
Introduction — Mike Utt (DEA Chairman)
12:45 PM BP (Super Major) View of “The Future of Drilling R&D”
Mike Payne
This is a 3.7MB Adobe Acrobat File (pdf)- To download Right Click on the following link & choose “Save As”. ——– Payne Presentation.
1:30 PM

BREAK
1:45 PM

“Why oil and gas R&D”
David Weinberg
This is a 730K Powerpoint Presentation – To download Right Click on the following link & choose “Save As”. ——– Weinberg Presentation.
2:30 PM Summary Wrap-up and Q&A
Mike Utt
2:45 PM ADJOURN GENERAL MEETING

Richard Adams PPI Technology Services
W. Tom Asbill, P.E. Stress Engineering Services, Inc
James L. Barnes National Energy Technology Laboratory
Ron Bland Inteq Drilling Fluids
Ben Bloys ChevronTexaco Exploration and Production Technology Company
Gary M. Briggs Window Cutting Products (TWI)
J. Christopher Buckingham Southwest Research Institute
Curtis Cheatham Computalog Technology Services Group
Gary J. Collins Conoco Inc.
David Dowell ChevronTexaco
Robert A. Estes Baker Hughes/INTEQ
Johnt. Finger Sandia National Laboratories
Brian C. Gahan Gas Technology Institute
Fernando J. Guzman DRILL. THRU SYSTEMS
Mike Harris Apache Corp.
Don Heidbrier, RE. Lone Star Steel Company
Terry Hemphill Baroid Drilling Fluids
Michael J. Jellison, P.E. GrantPrideco
Morris Keene Occidental OIL and GAS Corporation
Bryce Levett, RE. Varco Drilling Equipment
Jenn-Tai Liang, Ph.D. INEEL
Ken Malloy MOHR
Jeffrey M. Noe APA (USA) Inc.
Randy A. Normann, M.S.E.E. Sandia National Laboratories
Paul E. Pastusek, P.E. Baker Hughes
Michael L. Payne, PE. BP America Inc
Donald E Duttlinger PE PTTC PetroleumTechnology Transfer Council
Wayne Pittman Maurer Technology
G. ROBELLO SAMUEL Ph. D Landmark Graphics Corporation
Brian E. Schwind, RE. PPI Technology Services
Jay P. Simpson OGS Laboratory, Inc.
Ed Smalley Gas Technology Institute
K.E. (Ken) Smith CORT
M. Andi Solihin PT Caltex Pacific Indonesia
Gene W. Sparkman ERCH
Leesa M. Teel International Association of Drilling Contractors
Michael E. Utt, P.E. Unocal Corporation
David M. Weinberg, Ph.D. INEEL
Donald J. Weintritt, P.E. Weintritt Consulting Services

Third Quarter

Agenda

8:00 AM Coffee (Business Cards)
8:30 AM Introduction and Welcome – Glenda Wylie – Halliburton —— Mike Utt – Unocal
8:35 AM DEA Business:
· Review 3Q02 Meeting Agenda – Mike Utt
· Report Out on AADE/IADC Board Meeting – Mike Utt

· Contractors Update of Active DEA Project’s – David Dowell
9:45 AM BREAK
10:00 AM DEA Projects and Discussion Items:
DEA # 149 – ” Barite Sag Tester”, Professor Shteryo Lyomov – Sponsor – Unocal
10:45 AM DI – #105 “Otis Fire Suppression System”, Robert Grace – Sponsor – ChevronTexaco
11:30 AM LUNCH
12:30 PM DEA-#150 “Diminished Drillpipe Capacity Due to Slip Crushing” Ken Malloy of Mohr Engineering and Testing Division of Stress Engineering Services – Sponsor BP
1:15 PM

Business Theme Discussion

” The Future of Drilling R&D”
Introduction — Mike Utt (DEA Chairman)
1:30 PM BREAK
1:45 PM Apache’s (Independent) View of “The Future of Drilling R&D”
Mike Harris
2:15 PM Baker’s (Service Company) View of “The Future of Drilling R&D”
Ron Bland
2:45 PM The Government View of “The Future of Drilling R&D”
John Rogers (or TBD)
3:15 PM Summary Wrap-up and Q&A
Mike Utt
3:30 PM ADJOURN GENERAL MEETING

Minutes

8:00 AM Coffee (Business Cards) ——Attendee List
8:30 AM

Introduction and Welcome – Glenda Wylie – Halliburton —— Mike Utt – Unocal
The introduction and welcome was given by Chairman Mike Utt and was followed by a safety minute by Glenda Wylie, the meeting host.
8:35 AM DEA Business:
· Review 3Q02 Meeting Agenda – Mike Utt
· Report Out on AADE/IADC Board Meeting – Mike Utt
Mike Utt updated the membership on the discussions with the AADE about the DEA and the AADE becomeing more closely linked. Since the last meeting the DEA Advisory board had opened discussions with the IADC about a possible “affiliation”. These discussions have become more promising as they have continued. An affiliation between the IADC and the DEA would allow the DEA to continue to operate as we have in the past and the IADC would handle many of the adminastrational duties currently performed by DEA volunteers. Mike Killiea of the IADC explained how he believed the allianced would function. The IADC would organize and conduct the DEA forums and act as a clearing house for DEA projects for which the confidentality had expired. This proposal seems to be a better “fit” than the earlier AADE option. Those present at the meeting believed this was a possibliity worth pursing. The DEA Chairman agreed and the advisory board will work toward finalizing the details.
· Contractors Update of Active DEA Project’s – David Dowell
David Dowell explained how the DEA website was being revised to contain a listing of all the proposed DEA projects in the order they were presented. Each proposal will then be listed in the correct “bucket” depending on it’s fate; ie Funded (Active), Seeking Funding, Completed, Withdrawn/Inactive.
9:45 AM BREAK
10:00 AM DEA Projects and Discussion Items:
DEA # 151 – ” Modernization of Connection Performance Properties”, Brian Schwind, PE PPI Technology Services – Unocal
This is a 360K Powerpoint Presentation – To download Right Click on the following link & choose “Save As”. ——– DEA-151 Presentation.
10:45 AM DI – #105 “Otis Fire Suppression System”, Robert Grace – Sponsor – ChevronTexaco
This is a 400K Powerpoint Presentation – To download Right Click on the following link & choose “Save As”. ——- DI-105 Presentation
11:30 AM LUNCH
12:30 PM DEA-#150 “Diminished Drillpipe Capacity Due to Slip Crushing” Ken Malloy of Mohr Engineering and Testing Division of Stress Engineering Services – Sponsor BP
This is a 1-MB Adobe Acrobat File- To download Right Click on the following link & choose “Save As”. ——- DEA-150 Presentation
1:15 PM

Business Theme Discussion

” The Future of Drilling R&D”
Introduction — Mike Utt (DEA Chairman)
1:30 PM BREAK
1:45 PM Apache’s (Independent) View of “The Future of Drilling R&D”
Mike Harris
This is a 400K Adobe Acrobat File – To download Right Click on the following link & choose “Save As”. ——- Mike Harris Presentation
2:15 PM Baker’s (Service Company) View of “The Future of Drilling R&D”
Peter S. Aronstam
2:45 PM The Government View of “The Future of Drilling R&D”
John Rogers
This is a 1.6-MB Adobe Acrobat File – To download Right Click on the following link & choose “Save As”. ——- John Rogers Presentation
3:15 PM Summary Wrap-up and Q&A
Mike Utt
3:30 PM ADJOURN GENERAL MEETING

First Quarter

Agenda

8:00 AM Coffee (Business Cards)
8:30 AM Introduction and Welcome – Gene Sparkman- ERCH, David Dowell -ChevronTexaco
8:35 AM DEA Business:
· Review 1Q02 Meeting Agenda – David Dowell
· Report Out on AADE Board Meeting – Mike Utt
· Report on Proposal and Methodology To Change DEA Charter – David Dowell
· Election of Officers for 2002/2003 – David Dowell
· Contractors Update of Active DEA Project’s – David Dowell
10:00 AM

DEA Projects:

DEA # 90 Phase IV – ” Drilling Plastic Shale at Great Depth; A Study to Improve Penetration Rates with Environmentally Acceptable Drilling Fluids “, Arnis Judzis, TerraTek – Sponsor – ChevronTexaco
10:45 AM DEA # 113 Phase II – “Drilling Gumbo Shale – A Study of Environmentally Acceptable Muds to eliminate shale hydration and related borehold problems” – O’Brien-Goins-Simpson & Assoc. – Sponsor – ChevronTexaco
11:30 AM LUNCH
12:30 PM DI #104 – “Modernization of Connection Performance and Reliability” – Brian Schwind of Petroleum Professional Inc – Sponsor – BP
1:15 PM DEA Technology Presentation:
“The Drilling Rig of the Future” – Barry Harding – BP
2:00 PM BREAK
2:15 PM

Other Business Items
Planning for the May 21-22 DEA Meeting/Forum – David Dowell/Mike Utt
Proposed Topic “Drilling in the Future”
Presentation Topics:
“Technology/Commercial Implementation Models”
“Wells of the Future”
“Rigs of the Future”
“The Drilling Engineer of the Future”
Who/What/When/Where & How
3:30 PM ADJOURN GENERAL MEETING

Minutes

The first quarter meeting of the Drilling Engineering Association was held on February 21, 2002 at the ERCH location in The Woodlands.

The meeting began at 8 am with coffee and registration. The introduction and welcome was given by Chairman David Dowell and was followed by a safety minute by Gene Sparkman. The meeting agenda was then presented by the David Dowell. After this, there were several DEA business items.

Mr. Mike Utt reported on his discussions with the AADE concerning the DEA and the AADE becomeing more closely linked. Mike attended an AADE board meeting and presented the idea of the DEA becoming an operating branch of the AADE. This was proposition was warmly received by the AADE. A discussion ensued with the meeting attendees which believed the idea need to be further researched and the details worked out before conmitments could be made. Mike Utt will continue to explore the issue.

Chairman David Dowell reported on the methodology that would be used to get a decision on the earlier proposed DEA charter changes. DEA Member companies representatives will be sent an e-mail containing proposed changes. This e-mail will have an “Approve” and “Reject” buttons attached. The e-mail will also indicate that anyone not voting in 30 days will be considered to have voted Approve. This will be done within the week after this meeting.

New DEA Officers for the 2002/2003 term were nominated and elected by the members. The following people were elected:
Chairman

Mike Utt
Vice Chairman

Jim Hawkins
Secretary/Treasurer

David Dowell
Board Member

Gary Collins
Board Member

Mike Payne
Board Member

Morris Keene

Pending approval of the proposed Charter changes the following people were elected as Associate Members of the Advisory board:
Board Member

John Rogers
Board Member

Glenda Wylie
Board Member

Ron Bland

The DEA project list and the status of the previously proposed JIPs were updated with input from some of the attendees.

DEA Projects: Presented

DEA # 90 Phase IV – ” Drilling Plastic Shale at Great Depth; A Study to Improve Penetration Rates with Environmentally Acceptable Drilling Fluids “, ( Power Point-Right Click and “Save Target As” to Download – 2.1MB) ( Arnis JudzisThis e-mail address is being protected from spambots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it , TerraTek – Sponsor – ChevronTexaco (Word Document Proposal- Right Click and “Save Target As” to Download – 470KB)

DEA # 113 – Phase II – “Drilling Gumbo Shale – A Study of Environmentally Acceptable Muds to Eliminate Shale Hydration and Related Borehole Problems” (Power Point-Right Click and “Save Target As” to Download – 740KB) – Jay SimponThis e-mail address is being protected from spambots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it of O’Brien-Goins-Simpson & Assoc. – Sponsor – ChevronTexaco

DI #104 – “Modernization of Connection Performance and Reliability” (Power Point-Right Click and “Save Target As” to Download – 210KB) – Brian SchwindThis e-mail address is being protected from spambots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it of Petroleum Professional Inc – Sponsor – BP

The project proposal were followed by a short presented by Barry Harding of BP on an internal study being conducted by BP. The presentation was designed to stimulate discussion and interest in the DEA forum being planned for May 21-22 at South Shore Harbor.

DEA Technology Presentation:
“The Drilling Rig of the Future” – Barry Harding – BP

Discussion then followed on the upcoming Forum in May. The tentative forum plans were presented to the membership and dicussed. Many good ideas were presented and dicussed. The DEA Advisory Board will finialize the Forum plans and notify all the membership. The tenative title of the forum will be.

* The Future of Well Contruction
o Wellbore of the Future
o Rigs of the Future

The meeting was Adjourned.

Meeting Attendees:

Sylvia Bennett ERCH
Gary M. Briggs TIW
Dennis Calloway Petrospec Technologies Inc.
Curtis Cheatham Computalog Technology
Curtis Cheatham Computalog Technology
Gary J. Collins Conoco Inc.
J. David Dowell ChevronTexaco
Robert A. Estes Inteq
Chris Greaves BP Exploration
Barry W. Harding BP America Inc.
Mike Harris Apache Corp.
James R. Hawkins ExxonMobil Development Company
Amis Judzis TerraTek
Morris Keene Occidental OIL and GAS Corp
Steve D. McCoy Phillips Petroleum Co.
John D. Rogers, Ph.D., P.E. NETL
Brian E. Schwind, P.E. PPI Technology Services
Jay P. Simpson OGS Associates
Russell Smith Knowledge Systems, Inc.
Gene W. Sparkman ERCH
Cheryl L. Stark BP America Inc.
Ron Sweatman Halliburton
Michael E. Utt, P.E. Unocal Corporation
David M. Weinberg, Ph.D. INEEL
Thomas E. Williams Maurer Technology (Noble Drilling)
Keith Womer Varco Drilling Equipment
Glenda Wylie Halliburton
David B. Young Inteq Drilling Fluids

DEA Workshop 2007

DEA Workshop 2007 – June 19 2007

AGENDA: NO DESCRIPTION

ADDRESS: Seven Hope Blvd., Galveston TX 77554

First Quarter

First Quarter – March 22, 2007

LOCATION: Baker Hughes

ADDRESS: 2001 Rankin Road, Houston TX 77073

Minutes:

First Quarter, 2007
Drilling Engineering Association Meeting
Thursday, March 22, 2007

Thanks to Baker Hughes for hosting this event!
Houston, Texas

Click here to view the attendee list


8:45 AM – Morris Keene, OXY, opened the meeting and welcomed the attendees

8:50 AM – Contractors provided updates of Active DEA Projects:

Shoulder/Thread Verifier System (DEA-160) — Raymond J Dishaw, Global Systems Inc.

A Proposal to Develop an Improved Methodology for Wellbore Stability Prediction (DEA-161) — William Standifird, Knowledge Systems Inc.

Update on 2007 DEA Workshop, 19-20 June, Galveston – leesa.teel@iadc.orgThis e-mail address is being protected from spambots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

9:30 AMMike Krajcer, Tax Projects Group, made a presentation on Research & Development Tax Credits

10:00 AMHomer Robertson, Schlumberger, gave an update on Deep Trek JIP for Advancing Deep, Hard Rock Drilling Performance Through Controlled, Full-Scale Laboratory Drilling Experiments with Aggressive Bits and Specialized Fluids (DEA-162)

10:30 AM – Break

11:00 AMJim Leslie, Advanced Composite Product Technology discussed an Update on Short-radius Composite Drill Pipe

11:30 AMDavid Burnett, Texas A&M University, gave a presentation on Low Impact Drilling Technology – Developing the Tools

Noon – Mr Keene adjourned the meeting.

MAP:

Fourth Quarter

Fourth Quarter – November 20, 2008

LOCATION: OXY / 5 Greenway Plaza, Houston, Tx 77046

Minutes:

DEA Chairman Morris Keene opened the meeting and welcomed the participants.

The first agenda item was the update on DEA projects. Ray Dishaw, Global Systems, made a final presentation on DEA 160 (Shoulder Thread Verifier System), which is now completed. Gary Collins, DEA Board member representing ConocoPhillips, one of the project participants, noted that the project is completed and that his company sees viability in the system.

Next, Jeff Lund, Terra Tek, provided an update on DEA 162 (Advancing Deep Hard Rock Drilling). The contractor is looking for seven participants, at $100,000 each.

Then Mike Killalea presented the DEA 2008 financial report. He said that DEA’s funds were transferred from Washington Mutual to Chase, even as WaMu was taken over by FDIC, and, subsequently, by Chase. Currently, DEA has $2,309 in its checking account and $21,637 in savings. The bulk of DEA’s revenue, he reported, comes from its share of income from the annual workshop, while its expenditures mainly involve web maintenance and e-broadcast costs.

Mr Killalea provided a quick update on the 2009 workshop, scheduled for 19 August, at the Omni Houston Westside Hotel.

Then the technical presentations followed, including questions and answers:

Mr Keene thanked the speakers and participants.

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.

Contact:

Contact: Morris KeeneThis e-mail address is being protected from spambots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
Phone: (713) 215-7118
Fax: (713) 215-7517

MAP:

DEA-156 – Smart Shuttle

DEA Project Summary

DEA-156
“Smart Shuttle”

DEA Project Number: 156
Date Submitted: June 08 2004
Technical Area: ExplorationProduction
Sponsor: ENI Norway , Domenico Di Renzo (domenico.direnzo@agip.it) and DEMO 2000 (program director, Morten Wienke)
Title: Smart Shuttle
Submitted by: Triangle Technology As, Fabrikkveien 9, N-4033 Stavanger Norway
Principal Investigator(s): Bengt Gunnarsson – bengt-g@triangle.no Jan Gorgas – jwgorgas@triangle.no Jim Chitwood -jec@Smart-Drilling-and-Completion.com Damir Skerl – DSkerl@Smart-Drilling-and-Completion.com Vail Banning wbv@Smart-Drilling-and-Completion.com
Business Impact: The Smart Shuttle will enable drilling long reach wells (up to 30km) and do future well services in these wells. Will significantly reduce number of platforms on offshore developments, and secure more optimal placement of wells / reservoir drainage. Will also reduce subsea tiebacs. Shuttle will significantly reduce total drilling time. Shuttle will lower total risk in drilling operations In wells service operations, the Shuttle will as a “well tractor” have significantly more pull/push forces, and run in/out of the well in speeds up to 12ft/sec.
Technical Objectives: 1 Principal Objective Overall objective is to develop a novel drilling technology that is key to some of the main challenges seen on the Norwegian and International continental shelf. Special focus will be put on. • Thru tubing drilling • Low cost exploration drilling • Long reach drilling • High speed /and high power well tractor Triangle Technology AS has formed an alliance with the Houston based company Smart Drilling and Completion (SDCI). SDCI holds several patents for the concepts related to “Smart Shuttle®” which is the core technology for the above mentioned Drilling and Completion tasks. The Smart Shuttle® is electric driven, and assisted by hydraulic manipulation. The Smart Shuttle® is based on “standard” PCP/ESP technology, and will be qualified at Rogaland Test center Qualifying the Smart Shuttle® will on short term make it available as a High speed and High power well tractor. Qualifying the Smart Shuttle® for Drilling operations will be phase 2 of the project. It should be noted that available drilling equipment like MWD/LWD, rotating steerable systems, tractor drive BHA (ref Anaconda) etc. are equipment that will be used in conjunction with the Smart Shuttle® drilling system. In short; • The Smart Shuttle® concept is an electric drilling and well service machine, avoiding pipe rotation above the shuttle. • Taking fluid return up through the composite pipe / umbilical (i.e. reverse circulation). • Using hydraulic forces to assist transport and operations (like TFL, used on Snorre) • Use industry proven drilling and well service equipment to perform tasks In addition to qualify the Smart Shuttle® at Rogaland test site, several pre-engineering and field application studies will be done as part of the project. Detailed description of the shuttle and its operation is included in appendix 10. Demonstrating the concept as a pilot will be done in several steps. First application is foreseen to be in a well service mode, running the Smart Shuttle® on a high power electric line. Operations could be scale milling, setting straddle packs, plugs and so on. One or more of these operations will be tested in phase 1 at the Rogaland test site, depending of Oil companies / sponsors preferences. Next step, the drilling mode tests will be in phase 2, for which funding will be applied for in 2006 depending upon successful testing in phase 1. Alliance partners / advisers in the project period will be Odfjell Drilling AS for drilling issues, and Maritime Well Service for applications related to high speed/high power tractor services. A complete project proposal is available on request. bengt-g@triangle.no
Methodology: The Smart Shuttle will be tested and qualified at the Rogaland test centre in Norway.
Deliverables: This JIP is only related to Phase 1, but includes developing recommendations for Phase 2 and 3. The Phase 1 work should have the following deliverables: • To engineer, build and prove the shuttle concept • To verify the shuttle concept at Rogaland test center • Perform a concept engineering study to identify important interfaces • Define different business opportunities for the Smart Shuttle® / drilling machine, including Capex/Opex for future operations • Get feedback, status and lessons learned from similar projects (ref Anaconda) • Prepare a listing of all possible project killers and a strategy to manage these potential killers. • Prepare a list of possible vendors/contractors for different type of equipment that could be applicable for these systems. • Prepare a summary report highlighting the key success factors and challenges as well as a detailed proposal for the next phases
Startup Date: August/September 2004
Project Duration: 18 month
Project Cost: 1mill usd
Cost per Participant: 150,000 usd (could be less depending of number of participants)
Comments: As earlier mentioned, ENI Norway and DEMO 2000 has agreed to sponsor the project. The project are also being considerd as a project by OG21 (www.og21.org) (Contact person Stu Keller, ExxonMobil Houston))

DI-51 – Acoustic Telemetry for MWD

DI-51     Acoustic Telemetry for MWD           Presented 11/93

DI-51 – Acoustic Telemetry for MWD

DI-51     Acoustic Telemetry for MWD

Presented 11/93

DI-50 – Proposal for a consortium on “Mapping of Stress State in the Gulf Coast”

DI-50     Proposal for a consortium on “Mapping of Stress State in the Gulf Coast”

Presented 8/93,

Looking for participants

DI-53 Drilling Plastic Shale at Great Depths – A Proposed Study to Improve Penetration Rates with Environmentally Acceptable Drilling Fluids

DI-53     Drilling Plastic Shale at Great Depths – A Proposed Study to Improve Penetration Rates with Environmentally Acceptable Drilling Fluids

David Curry of Terra Tek     

Presented 2/94.

Became DEA-90

DI-52 The MultiCon Drilling System

DI-52     The MultiCon Drilling System           Presented 11/93

DI-54 – Proposal to Develop Useful Safety Valves (DSSV’s) Specifications for Drill String

DI-54     Proposal to Develop Useful Safety Valves (DSSV’s) Specifications for Drill String     Richard Sukup of Mobil     Presented 2/94

DI-55 – Drilling Data Sharing Project

DI-55     Drilling Data Sharing Project     Mark Patteson of Arco     Presented 8/26/94

DI-56 – Introducing Top-Drive Hydraulic Drilling Rigs

DI-56     Introducing Top-Drive Hydraulic Drilling Rigs     Never Presented     Has found other funding source

DI-57 – Analysis of Well Casing Damage Induced by Reservoir Compaction and Formation Shear

DI-57     Analysis of Well Casing Damage Induced by Reservoir Compaction and Formation Shear     Mike Bruno of Terralog Technologies     Presented 11/94

DI-58 Proposal to determine the most effective way to seal cores

DI-58     Proposal to determine the most effective way to seal cores     U.of Texas     Presented 2/95

DI-59 – Composite Drill Pipe

DI-59     Composite Drill Pipe     Phillips Petroleum     Presented 2/95

DI-60 – Electro-Osmosis Prototype

DI-60     Electro-Osmosis Prototype     UC-Berkeley     Presented 2/95

DI-61 – Casing Conveyed Perforating

DI-61     Casing Conveyed Perforating     Eric Anderson of Conoco     Presented 5/95

DI-62 Drilling Engineering Data Used as Exploration Enhancement Tools

DI-62     Drilling Engineering Data Used as Exploration Enhancement Tools     Eaton Associates     Presented 8/17/1995

DI-63 Composite Drill Pipe

DI-63     Composite Drill Pipe     Phillips Petroleum     Presented 11/16/95

DI-64 – Dual Diameter Drillpipe

DI-64     Dual Diameter Drillpipe     McNeely     Presented 2//15/96

DI-65 – Cesium Formate Drilling Fluids

DI-65     Cesium Formate Drilling Fluids

Cabot

Presented 2/15/96

DI-66 – Probabilistic OCTG Design Technology

DI-66     Probabilistic OCTG Design Technology

Mike Payne of ARCO

payneml@bp.com

Presented 8/96

DI-67 – Low Cost Coiled Tubing Pumping System to De-water Gas Wells

DI-67 Low Cost Coiled Tubing Pumping System to De-water Gas Wells

Ken Neuman of CTES–krnewman@ctes.com

Presented 8/96

DI-68 – Downhole Tractor Ken Neuman of CTES

DI-68 Downhole Tractor Ken Neuman of CTES

krnewman@ctes.com

Presented 8/96

DI-69 – Deepwater Drilling Rig Allen Gault of Conoco

DI-69 – Deepwater Drilling Rig Allen Gault of Conoco

Allen.D.Gault@conoco.com

Presented 8/96

DI-70 – Drilling Gumbo Shale

DI-70     Drilling Gumbo Shale

Jay Simpson of OGS Assoc.

ogsh@aol.com

Presented 8/96

DI-71 – Extended Reach Composite Material Drill Pipe

DI-71     Extended Reach Composite Material Drill Pipe

Gary Briggs with Lincoln Composites

Presented 8/97

Download Power Point Presentation

DI-72 – Suction Installation of Structural Casing

Download Presentation Here

Gary Faul with Conoco

Presented 8/97

DI-73 – Offshore Drilling with Light-weight Fluids

CENTRO DE PESQUISAS E DESENVOLVIMENTO LEOPOLDO A. MIGUEZ DE MELLO

SUPERINTENDÊNCIA DE PESQUISA DE EXPLORAÇÃO E PRODUÇÃO

Proposal for a Joint Industry Project on

Offshore Drilling with Light-weight Fluids

PETROBRAS Research Center

Exploration & Production Division

May, 1997

SUMMARY

Foreword

1. Introduction

2. Project Objective

3. Project Modules

3.1. Reservoir Assessment

3.2. Drilling

3.3. Wellbore Stability

4. Deliverables

4.1. Reservoir Assessment and Characterization

4.2. Drilling Hydraulics

4.3. Four-phase Separator

4.4. Floating Rig Application

4.5. Wellbore Stability

5. Available Resources

5.1. Research Well Characteristics

5.2. Research Labs

6. Project Team

7. Costs and Funding

Foreword

This proposal contains some topics for the development and optimization of the drilling technology with light-weight fluids, with special attention to offshore environments with floating platforms. A first draft of this proposal was already presented to some operating companies which contributed with some valuable suggestions.

It is expected that with this plan as the basis, a steering committee could be formed for more detailed discussion of each topic, including alternatives for cooperation in the development, costs and time schedule. It is important to point out that Petrobras will start the development of some of the items of this proposition in the second semester of 1997, even before the signature of formal affiliation contracts with most of the potential participants, due to the company’s urgent need.

Particularly, this technology entices PETROBRAS’ attention since most of its reserves are located offshore at large water depths. The possibility of drilling re-entry wells, including horizontal and multi-laterals, aiming at larger production rates and improved final recovery, as well as, lower installation and drilling costs, seems very attractive, specially in low pressure and depleted reservoirs.

At this stage, though, it is noticed that some aspects still require additional development for its technical and economical implementation. Considering the general interest of the industry on this subject, PETROBRAS, through its Research and Development Center (CENPES) decided to look for partners, cooperators and affiliates for this project with the objective of sharing needed resources and accelerating the achievement of practical and economical results.

1. Introduction

The increasing application of radial drilling technology, specially in low pressure fields, associated to the use of light-weight drilling fluids (foam/aerated muds), is making evident the present technical limits and the necessary improvements for higher production rates and drilling costs reduction.

In the last few years, the industry has been addressing this subject with great interest. Technology reviews and the development of equipment, materials and computer simulators through several joint industry projects and independent research groups are under way. However, some important aspects still require more efforts in the search for appropriate solutions that could improve the possibilities of success in the application of this technique. Some of these points constitute the subject of this proposal.

First of all, a sound methodology for reservoir assessment and characterization has to be defined. Up to now, many of the horizontal wells and radials do not present as high production rates as expected. This is a critical point in the feasibility analysis of tight projects in low flow rate reservoirs.

On the drilling side, the interest is focused on definition of specific drilling/safety operational procedures; hydraulics optimization with foam/aerated fluids, including static/circulating pressure predictions, cuttings transport, down-hole motors requirements; field data analysis and comparison with available simulators; experimental work in labs, flow-loops and full-scale facilities with foam/aerated fluids; separation system at surface for underbalanced operations; and, finally, the requirements for implementation of this technology offshore, in floating rigs.

At last, wellbore stability is a concern not only while drilling but, also, during the production period under variable conditions of flow rates and pressures.

2. Project Objective

The main purpose of this project is to contribute for making the light-weight fluid drilling technology a technically and economically feasible option for application in offshore environments, specially for wells drilled from floating platforms.

3. Project Modules

Three modules are devised for this project: (1) Reservoir Assessment; (2) Drilling; (3) Wellbore Stability.

3.1. Reservoir Assessment

Petroleum reservoirs often have a gas cap and/or an aquifer. In these situations they are subjected to rapid gas and/or water movement towards the well, created by a sharp pressure gradient in the well direction. As the production begins, the interface between the fluids, that is, gas-oil contact or water-oil contact, deforms from its initial plane shape to a cone or crest. When a field is developed by vertical wells, the shape of the deformation is called a cone, but when it is developed by horizontal wells, this deformation is better described as a crest.

The literature reports analytical solutions for horizontal wells for critical rate under the steady-state condition reached by the cone with a constant potential boundary . There are also analytical solutions available for infinite-acting reservoirs and for closed-boundary reservoirs, the latter being specially useful when there are several production wells in a line, creating a no-flow boundary. In those situations, it becomes important to know the breakthrough time of the displacing phase (gas or water) and the post-breakthrough behavior for supercritical rates . Some numerical solutions for this latter situation are also available.

At the beginning of a reservoir simulation study, it is a common procedure to make an estimate of the breakthrough time and the post-breakthrough behavior. Grid sensitivity runs are also made to obtain the best grid block sizes to use, since an accurate representation of cresting behavior requires fine grid simulations, which are costly and not always practical.

The focus of the work will be the development of a Visual Basic application to calculate correlations for cresting behavior in horizontal wells available in the literature for critical rate (steady-state solutions) and breakthrough time and post-breakthrough behavior for super-critical rates (transient solutions). Also, some tools to calculate an optimum grid to start a reservoir simulation study will be developed.

The tasks of this module can be divided as follows:

Selection of the correlations available in the literature.

Development of the software based on the selected correlations.

Application of the correlations in a real field example.

3.2. Drilling

3.2.1. Drilling Hydraulics and Cuttings Transport

The use of aerated fluids and foam is basically associated to the desire and need of having a low pressure profile inside the well. Applications of this type of fluids in environments with low pressure or depleted reservoirs and in hard rock drilling bring several advantages, such as smaller formation damage, higher penetration rates and reduced loss of circulation problems, just to mention the most important ones.

However, each drilling scenario demands the maintenance of the pressure profile inside an optimum range during the operations. The achievement of this goal can be accomplished by the availability of:

(1) a reliable and simple system for designing the drilling hydraulics program, involving the prediction of the equivalent circulating density for the multiphase drilling fluid, which may contain a non-Newtonian liquid, gas, oil and solid particles and;

(2) a suitable set of operational procedures for keeping the bottom hole pressure within the desirable range during connections, tripping or any other operations where the circulation is interrupted. During these periods, the multiphase system is not in equilibrium and, thus, the pressure profile has a tendency to change gradually along the time.

The system for hydraulics design will be based on available models that, for its validation, will be compared against experimental and field data, to be gathered along the project. Field data will be collected in-situ, during pre-drilling tests or during the operations, using memory or real-time pressure and temperature sensors. Experimental data will be obtained through controlled tests in a real-scale instrumented well, in flow-loops and labs available in PETROBRAS. All the experimental facilities are briefly described in section 5.

Another aspect for considerations is the analysis of solids transport by compressible fluids, which still requires much effort. The role of liquid and gas phases on the transport is not clearly defined. Basically, it is assumed that in down-hole conditions gas volume fractions are small and transport is governed by the liquid phase. In the shallow portions of the well, gas velocities are high enough to contribute to cuttings transport. Considering these assumptions, transport in the deeper portions may require attention, specially in highly inclined wells, where a cuttings bed is generally formed by gravitational segregation.

Foam and foamed liquids, due to their pseudo-plastic behavior, are known to have a higher carrying capacity than regular fluids. This may be an effective alternative for hole cleaning improvement. However, in down hole conditions, gas fractions are often below the lower limit for foam generation, resulting in poor efficiency of foaming agents in these critical regions.

With the objective of determining designing criteria for minimal hole cleaning by different kinds of light-weight drilling fluid (foam/aerated fluids) the following steps will be taken: (1) field/experimental tests for evaluation of solids return time in vertical wells, for different fluid and gas flow rates and in the presence or not of foaming agents; (2) lab evaluation of solids transport velocity by foamed fluids, considering wall and population effects; (3) lab evaluation of a solids bed erosion by foamed fluids in horizontal and highly inclined sections in a 12 m long, 5 in OD flow loop built at PETROBRAS Research Center; and (4) results of experimental work will be incorporated to a mechanistic model for cuttings transport prediction which aims to suggest guidelines for the hydraulic design of compressible drilling fluid.

3.2.2. Foam Rheology and Formation Damage

Tubular viscometers with dedicated data acquisition system and controlled flow rates, pressures and temperatures will be used for foam rheological characterization under conditions similar to those found in field operations (shear rates between 500 and 1500 s-1). Several models will be used to fit the experimental results.

The formation damage potential of the proposed foam formulations will be evaluated in a physical formation damage simulator, linked to a data acquisition and control system. The variation of formation permeability for oil, due to foam invasion, will be measured in Berea sandstone plugs under different conditions of pressures, temperatures and flow rates.

3.2.3. Four-phase Surface Separator

Since just a few large four-phase separators are available in the market, they still present high costs, which affect considerably the feasibility analysis of many onshore projects. For offshore applications, smaller and cost effective separators need to be designed.

PETROBRAS and the University of Campinas (UNICAMP) are beginning the development of a prototype of a vertical cyclone two-phase separator that will be tested by the end of 1997 at the experimental well. This prototype will be the basis for the four-phase separator design which will be designed, built and tested in 1998.

3.2.4. Operational Procedures

The operational procedures will include, primarily, a detailed manual which will compile the most important aspects associated to this type of drilling, such as equipment, safety, drilling hydraulics and down-hole pressure control during the execution of different types of operations. It will be based on proven field experience and on experimental tests at the research facilities.

3.2.5. Application in Floating Rigs

The implementation of light-fluid drilling technology in floating rigs is dependent on reliable and economical solutions for equipment compactness, flexibility and modularity, system deployment and closed-loop fluid handling system, including the four-phase separator and production facilities.

On the other hand, the precise definition of adequate operational procedures is also crucial, specially for those related to pressure profile maintenance along the well and riser during the execution of several kinds of operations such as drilling, tripping, making connections, running casing, etc.

Thus, this project will be focused on the development of a compact four-phase separator and the definition of a modular fluid handling system which could fit in different platform lay-outs. Also, based on experimental data, computer simulations and, if possible, field data, operational procedures will be elaborated and reported in a manual.

3.3. Wellbore Stability

A software for wellbore mechanical stability will be included in this project for analysis while drilling, as well as during production, since the predictions from reservoir simulators have to be verified against the stability of the producing zones as a function of the desired production flow rates. This task will be accomplished through the conversion into Windows platform of SIGMA, a numerical simulator for stability analysis used nowadays by PETROBRAS.

SIGMA is an Interactive Finite Element Code for Elasto-Plastic Static and Visco/Elasto-Plastic analysis of two and three dimensional models. The code is able to simulate the behavior of geo-technical and structural problems where the non-linear behavior of the materials involved becomes mandatory. Considering the specific application of well stability analysis, there is a subset of the code called SINESP2D that is able to simulate the behavior of the well at both drilling and production phases. The elements are automatically excavated by the code in non-linear basis. Elements can be also introduced during the analysis to represent the effect of the casing installation. It is possible to consider discontinuities in the rock mass by the application of special interface elements with different constitutive laws. The boundary conditions of the continuum can be represented by infinite elements.

SIGMA’s main characteristics include:

Gravitational initial stress condition;

Coupled pore-elastic and pore-elasto/plastic behavior, considering steady-state flow condition of a mono-phase fluid;

Visco-elasto plastic behavior;

Automatic mesh-rezoning capability with excavation and introduction of elements during linear and non-linear analyses;

Different constitutive laws for elasto-plastic and visco/elasto-plastic analyses specially developed to handle geo-technical problems;

Pre and post-processing systems coupled with the “solver”;

Graphical interface for interactive data entry and finite element mesh generation, including all the necessary data for the analysis, solver running and post-processing system call;

The discontinuities of the rock mass can be represented by special interface/contact elements with different constitutive laws;

The boundary condition of the model can be represented by special infinite elements with different decay functions.

4. Deliverables

4.1. Reservoir Assessment and Characterization

Software for evaluation of cresting behavior in horizontal wells for critical rate (steady-state solutions) and breakthrough time and post-breakthrough behavior for super critical rates (transient solutions);

Report containing an application of the software in a real field case.

4.2. Drilling Hydraulics

Drilling operational procedures manual – vs. 1.0;

Report containing field data from six different well geometries, including comparison with available hydraulics simulators;

Integrated hydraulics software for well design and field use, including two-phase steady-state analysis, down-hole motors requirements and cuttings carrying capacity – vs. 1.0;

Report of real-scale cuttings transport tests, with tentative measurement of solids flow rates both in injection and return;

Report on foam rheology and formation damage tests, including the description of equipment, materials and procedures;

Report of cuttings transport flow-loop tests with foam, under several inclinations from vertical to horizontal;

Results of experimental tests with foam/aerated fluids in a full scale instrumented well for validation of the hydraulics software package and drilling operational procedures;

Integrated hydraulics software – vs. 2.0;

Drilling operational procedures manual – vs. 2.0.

Observations:

computer programs will include technical background and user manual

Experiments (lab, flow-loops, full-scale)

test matrix for each kind of experiment to be discussed and approved by steering committee;

tests can be followed by representatives from any participant company.

4.3. Four-phase Separator

Report with complete design of a preliminary two-phase separator

Report of experiments with two-phase separator at Petrobras research well

Report with complete design of the four-phase separator

Report of experiments with the four-phase separator at Petrobras research well

4.4. Floating Rig Application

Report with analysis of potential problems and limitations

Offshore specific drilling operational procedures, including hydraulics aspects in the riser

Itemized circulation system definition and deployment

4.5. Wellbore Stability

SIGMA, a wellbore stability simulator for drilling and production, including user’s manual

5. Available Resources

5.1. Research Well Characteristics

Image19Well 9-PE-2-TQ-BA (Figure 1), located in Taquipe Field, onshore, Brazil, is a 1300 m well with 13 3/8″ casing. Inside it, a 7″ casing plays the role of the test well. Between both casings, several side lines are run with the purpose of allowing gas injection at bottom or around 770 m and, also, for simulation of offshore operations in floating platforms at 760 m of water depth, with submarine kill and choke lines.

The well is fully instrumented, permitting real time data collection of pressures and temperatures in all surface lines and at the bottom of the well. Besides of that, it is possible to acquire bottom-hole data on fluid density, down-hole total flow rate and gas fraction through an available logging unit. Finally, pressure and temperature memory sensors can be positioned at any desired position along the well (Figure 2).

5.2. Research Labs

All the necessary facilities, such as drilling fluids and cementing labs, including flow loops for hydraulics and cuttings transport experiments, core sample analysis and rock mechanics labs, are available for this project at Petrobras’ Research Center (CENPES), in Rio de Janeiro. A brief description of each one is given ahead:

Rock Mechanics Lab: carries out geo-mechanical tests in core samples for determination of static and dynamic elastic parameters, rock resistance, pore collapse with simultaneous measurement of permeability and determination of in-situ stresses with SR3D equipment.

Rock-fluid Interaction Lab: evaluates, with the help of physical simulators, the interaction between drilling and completion fluids with the formation rocks.

Image20Sample Preparation Lab: prepares core samples for geo-mechanical tests, formation damage evaluation and acidification tests; besides of that, it develops special procedures for non-conventional tests with shales and unconsolidated sands.

Drilling Fluids Lab: performs the appraisal of new additives and systems used in the preparation of drilling fluids

Rheology Lab: provides rheological characterization, including description of viscous-elastic properties in high pressure and/or high temperature for any fluid.

Acidification Lab: determines the ideal formulations for sand acidification, as a function of formation mineralogy, permeability and temperature.

Hydraulics Conductivity Lab: evaluates physical, chemical and mechanical properties of propant agents used in hydraulic fracturing jobs and sand containment.

Cement Lab: conducts tests for determination of physical properties of cement slurries, such as thickening time, fluid loss, compressive resistance and permeability; also, it performs tests for granular distribution definition of cement and solid additives.

Physical Simulation Lab: it executes experimental jobs in scaled down models for description of transport phenomena during drilling, cementing and completion operations. The most important physical simulators in this lab are the cuttings transport flow-loop, fluidization units, bottom-hole conditions (pressure and temperature) simulator, surface hydraulic simulator, simulator for gas migration evaluation in cemented annulus, flow-loop for kicks and multiphase flow analysis and thermo-hydraulic simulator (under construction).

6. Project Team

Edson Y. Nakagawa – Coordinator

M. Sc. in Petroleum Engineering from University of Ouro Preto, Brazil, 1986, and Ph. D. in Petroleum Engineering from Louisiana State University, USA

Working for Petrobras since 1980; joined Petrobras Research Center in 1982, being, nowadays, involved in Well Engineering and Technology projects, specially those related to Petrobras’ Deep Water Program

Address:

Petrobras Research Center – CENPES/DIPLOT/SETEP

Ilha do Fundão, quadra 7

Rio de Janeiro, RJ 21949-900 – Brazil

Tel: 55-21-598-6537 Fax: 55-21-598-6795

E-mail: edson@cenpes.petrobras.com.br

Antonio Luiz Serra de Souza – Reservoir Assessment Group

E-mail: aluiz@cenpes.petrobras.com.br

M. Sc. in Mechanical Engineering from Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro (PUC), Brazil, 1988 and Ph. D. in Petroleum Engineering from Stanford University, USA, 1987.

Head of Reservoir Simulation Group at PETROBRAS Research Center, 1989 to 1983.

André Leibsohn – Cuttings Transport Group

E-mail: aleibsohn@cenpes.petrobras.com.br

B. Sc. in Chemical Engineering from Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 1985, and M. Sc. in Petroleum Engineering from State University of Campinas, Brazil, 1990.

Works for PETROBRAS Research Center, in Wellbore Technology Sector, since 1986, leading projects on cuttings transport, drilling hydraulics and rheology. Presently, coordinates a project on cuttings transport and cementing in highly inclined extended reach, multilateral and “designer wells” for deepwater environments.

Carlos A. M. Saliba – Foam Rheology and Formation Damage Group

E-mail: saliba@cenpes.petrobras.com.br

M. Sc. in Physical Chemistry from Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 1985, and Ph. D. in Physical Chemistry from University of Paris 6, France, 1996.

Works for Petrobras since 1985, leading projects on formation damage, rheology, fluid loss additives and wettability.

Álvaro Maia – Wellbore Stability Simulation Group

E-mail: amaia@cenpes.petrobras.com.br

B. Sc. (1976), M. Sc. (1978) and D. Sc. (1984) in Civil Eng. from Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Head of the Numerical Modeling and Development of Methods Group at PETROBRAS Research Center

José Carlos de Souza Cunha – Offshore Implementation Group

E-mail: cunhajc@ep.petrobras.com.br

M. Sc. in Petroleum Engineering from University of Ouro Preto, Brazil, 1988, and Ph.D. in Petroleum Engineering from Tulsa University, USA, 1995.

Coordinator of Shallow Reservoirs Located in Deep and Ultra-deep Waters Project from Petrobras´ Deep Water Program

Fernando de Almeida França – Four-phase Separator Group

E-mail: ffranca@fem. unicamp.br

B. Sc. from University of Brasilia, Brazil, M. Sc. and Ph.D. from State University of Campinas (UNICAMP), Brazil;

Professor of Department of Energy at UNICAMP

Coordinates Multiphase Phenomena Lab at Mechanical Eng. Dept. at UNICAMP involved in multiphase flow projects and instrumentation for fluids and heat experiments

7. Costs and Funding

The total estimated cost for this project, along 17 months (Aug, 1997 – Dec, 1998 – schedule in Annex A), is US$ 900,000.00 distributed as:

(US$)

Reservoir assessment: 72,000.00

Drilling: 738,000.00

Wellbore stability: 90,000.00

TOTAL: 900,000.00

PETROBRAS will provide the facilities and other resources needed for the experiments (research well and labs) and field tests. The numbers shown above include just the costs related to (1) estimated man-hours of Petrobras personnel; (2) materials and (3) sub-contractors.

It is expected that six companies would join this project. Therefore, the cost per participant would be US$ 150,000.00, to be paid according to the schedule proposed in the contract (Annex B).

DI-74 – DISPOSAL OF OILFIELD WASTE IN UNCONSOLODATED MEDIA BY SLURRY FRACTURE INJECTION

Sponsor: Arco Exploration and Production Technology

Proposing Companies:

Terralog Technologies, Inc. and TerraTek, Inc.

BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW

A variety of solid oil field wastes, including produced sand, tank bottoms, drill cuttings, NORM, and crude contaminated soils from old well cellars and tank farms can be economically disposed of in an environmentally acceptable manner through slurry fracture injection (SFI). Solids are mixed into slurry with fresh or produced water and injected at high pressure into suitable sand formations. The carrying fluid bleeds off rapidly, leaving behind a pod of solid waste entombed by the natural earth stresses.

The use of slurry fracture injection for disposal of oilfield wastes is expanding rapidly worldwide. Oilfield wastes are currently being disposed of by fracture injection in the North Sea, Southeast Asia, the Gulf of Mexico, Alaska, California, Alberta, and Saskatchewan. For example, in Western Canada alone, Terralog Technologies is currently managing oilfield waste injection projects disposing of more than a million barrels of slurry per year.

Inspite of the increasing application of this technology worldwide, the fundamental mechanisms of oily waste injection into unconsolidated media remain poorly understood. Several of the specific issues remaining to be addressed are as follows:

* Fracture propagation and containment:

- How does the fracture tip propagate in unconsolidated media? How is the fracturing process affected by the degree of formation consolidation (from unconsolidated to poorly consolidated)?

- What in-situ formation properties (e.g., permeability, stresses, etc.) promote fracture containment within the target interval?

- How does the change in the formation stresses during injection affect the fracturing process (causing multiple or horizontal fracturing)?

* Storage:

- Does multiple fracturing (i.e., increased storage capacity) occur with multiple injection cycles, interspersed with shut-in periods and fracture closure?

- How do the solids in the slurry invade the formation?

- How significant is the invasion zone to the overall formation storage capacity?

- What are the relations between invasion depth and the slurry solids content, injection rate and/or pressure?

Field data indicate that fracturing occurs in a complex, episodic manner, creating a process zone of varying orientation and extent. These phenomena have also been observed in limited laboratory experiments performed for Arco in unconsolidated sand blocks. Large-scale injection produces stress changes and dilation zones which appear to be influenced by variations in waste oil content and injection rate. These poorly understood geomechanical processes have direct bearing on the containment of waste in the target interval, on the ultimate waste storage capacity of target intervals, and on the optimum operating strategies required to ensure containment and maximize injectivity into a given formation.

PROJECT OBJECTIVES

The overall objectives of the proposed work are as follows:

1. Develop an improved understanding of the fundamental mechanisms associated with oily waste injection into high porosity, unconsolidated media.

2. Develop analytical techniques to evaluate formation injection capacity and fracture containment.

3. Provide the project sponsors with practical operating guidelines (injection pressures, rates, and material concentrations) for large-scale waste injection in unconsolidated media, supported with documented field data and laboratory observations.

TECHNICAL APPROACH

Terralog Technologies and TerraTek, Inc. propose to investigate the mechanics of oilfield waste injection in poorly consolidated media through a combined program of field data analysis, laboratory testing, and analytical/numerical modeling. The following approach would be taken:

1. Review, analyze, and document field observations (injection/falloff pressure behavior, stress changes, fracture orientation) from several large-scale waste injection projects. The field data to be evaluated may include those in Terralog’s archives and/or any other data provided by the project sponsors.

2. Investigate the mechanics of waste injection into unconsolidated media through a number of laboratory tests on well-instrumented, large-scale blocks (28″ x 28″ x 30″) of unconsolidated sand. These tests would be carried out under typical in-situ stress conditions in order to address the mechanisms of fracture propagation and containment, multiple fracturing, and solids invasion.

3. Compare field observations with laboratory data in order to verify the hypothesized fracture propagation and storage mechanisms.

4. Develop analytical models to assess leakoff, stress changes, and fracture propagation and containment for oily waste injection in unconsolidated media.

5. Develop operational guidelines for assessing the formation storage capacity, injection procedures for optimum storage, and fracture containment.

QUALIFICATIONS OF THE PROPOSING COMPANIES

Terralog Technologies, Inc. has been managing a number of waste injection projects in Western Canada and elsewhere. They have developed a great deal of expertise in designing and optimizing injection disposal projects, as well as field data interpretation. Since 1993, TerraTek, Inc. has been involved in a number of Joint Industry projects related to produced water disposal (PEA#23), and drill cuttings disposal (DEA#81 Phases I and II). TerraTek is currently carrying out a limited experimental project, funded by Arco, to address some of the issues related to slurry injection in unconsolidated sand. Both Terralog and TerraTek have experienced personnel in rock mechanics, analytical and numerical modeling of geomechanical systems, and field data interpretation.

DI-75 – Drill-In Fluids – A Study of Formation Damage Caused By Drilling at Downhole Temperatures and Pressures

By Drilling at Downhole Temperatures and Pressures”

Date Submitted: November 10, 1997

Technical Area: Production

Sponsor: NA

Title: Drill-In Fluids – A Study of Formation Damage Caused By Drilling at Downhole Temperatures and Pressures

Submitted by: O’Brien-Goins-Simpson & Assoc., Inc. 6430 Hillcroft, Suite 112 Houston, TX 77081 (713) 270-1192

Principal Investigator(s): Jay P. Simpson and Thad O. Walker/ ogsh@aol.com

Business Impact: Protection against formation damage while drilling is of extreme importance in horizontal wells because the open-hole completions provide no perforations to by-pass any near-wellbore blockage. Any mud solids invasion or external mud filter cake must be removed by well flow or by treatments to obtain good productivity. Today much time and expense are being directed toward the design of drill-in fluids with particle sizes to bridge pores at the rock surface to form an external cake and avoid solids invasion. The formulation of the drill-in fluids is based on permeability tests made with exposure of the rock under static and/or flowing conditions but do not include the actual drilling of the rock under downhole conditions of temperature and pressures. Drill-in fluid design without the complete simulation can be misleading, failing to provide the desired protection or even contributing to greater formation damage.

Technical Objectives: It is proposed to build laboratory equipment to study the complete drill-in, filtration (both dyna

DI-76 – Drillstring Failures Database and Drillstring Dynamics Software Validation

Date Submitted: 11/17/97

Technical Area: Production

Sponsor: None

Title: Drillstring Failures Database and Drillstring Dynamics Software Validation

Submitted by: INTERA Inc., 12100 Wilshire Blvd., #430, Los Angeles, CA 90025 (310) 979-4777, ext. 11 INTERA Consultants Ltd., Queen Anne House, Bashot, Surrey, GU195AT UK 011 44 1276 476666

Principal Investigator(s): Glenn Swanson, gswanson@duke-energy.com Dr. Melvyn Horgan

Business Impact: Drillstring failure can be an extremely expensive problem, especially in high drilling cost environments. Prevention of failures through application of accurate predictive drillstring dynamics software (DDS) could conceivably save hundreds of thousands of dollars in rig time alone. DDS efforts currently underway show promise, but could benefit from a JIP approach. Phase I of this project will produce a combined database of experiences from different operators. Besides providing a valuable planning tool for all future users, this database will allow calibration and evaluation of DDS tools to proceed much more efficiently. Phase II of this project will provide an independent evaluation of the predictive performances of three selected DDS systems and suggested areas for further improvement.

Technical Objectives: Completion of Phases I and II will result in improved DDS for the industry. Resulting benefits include: 1. Improved BHA selection 2. Avoidance of drillstring resonance 3. Improved and extended range of drilling parameters (RPM/WOB) 4. Provide a good monitor on the life of the drillstring components. 5. Give guidance and suggestions for improved inspection methods. 6. Provide a datum for any measures taken to reduce drillstring failures.

Methodology: Phase I: Build a combined database by merging formats/data from existing databases (Rock type, Bottom Hole Assembly, Drilling Parameters, Hole Conditions, Bit Details, Etc.) Protect confidentiality as needed Include nearby wells without drillstring failure problems for comparison Start with North Sea and Europe, then expand to worldwide participation Keep database flexible to allow additional parameters and operators in future Phase II: Select three DDS packages for evaluation Test predictive performance using database built in Phase I Protect confidentiality as needed Assemble report with findings and recommendations

Deliverables: Phase I: Drillstring Failures Database which can be used as a planning tool or to validate in-house developed software. The database will be provided on a floppy disk together with associated used documentation and reports. Phase II: Identification of weaknesses and areas for further development in three selected Drillstring Dynamics Software. A detailed report will be provided which compares the actual dynamics causing failures and predicted results.

Startup Date: Phase I: immediately, Phase II: 1/98, Phase III: 5/98

Project Duration: Phase I: 8 months, Phase II: 5 months, Phase III: 8 months

Project Cost: $353,600

Cost per Participant: Phase I (5 participants): $35,700/participant. Phases I & II: 5 participants – $70,700. 7 participants – $50,500. 10 participants – $35,400.

DI-77 – Field Testing of HydroPulse Tool for Suction Pulse Drilling and Seismic-while-Drilling

“Field Testing of HydroPulse Tool for Suction Pulse Drilling and Seismic-while-Drilling”
Date Submitted: 01-21-00, update of DI-77
Title: Field Testing of HydroPulse Tool for Suction Pulse Drilling and Seismic-while-Drilling
Submitted by: Tempress Technologies Inc 19308 – 68th Avenue South Kent, WA 98032 (253) 872-1982
Principal Investigator(s): Jack Kolle jkolle@tempresstech.com
Business Impact: Drilling costs increase exponentially with depth because rig costs increase while drilling rates slow. The HydroPulse™ tool developed by Tempress Technologies Inc. applies 700 psi suction pressure pulses to the hole bottom at a rate of 20 times per second. There are three major impacts of this tool: 1. Suction pulses increase drilling rates by 3x to 5x with the highest increased drilling rate in hard ductile shales. The tool is compact and can be used with tricone or fixed-cutter bits. The increased drilling rate will have a significant impact on the cost of deep and offshore wells without affecting drilling operations. 2. The suction pulses extend the reach of horizontal wells by pulling the bit into the formation at low thrust. 3. The tool generates an intense, broadband seismic signal that can be used for high-resolution seismic imaging of formations ahead of the bit while drilling. Applications include real time detection of shallow-water flows and over-pressurized formations. The ability to detect hazardous formations will have a significant impact on the viability of offshore oil and gas projects. The HydroPulse™ development project has been structured into three Phases at a total cost of $2.5M. The project is highly leveraged with $1.5M support from the U.S. Department of Energy including 100% of the Phase I feasibility study (complete), and 75% of the Phase II prototype tool development (50% complete). We are currently seeking $750K co-funding and in-kind support for Phase III field testing, scheduled to commence in 2001.
Technical Objectives: We are currently halfway into Phase II and are testing a full scale experimental prototype tool. The 8-3/4″prototype tool is designed for operation at 400 gpm on drilling mud. Testing is currently underway in a 100 foot pressurized flow loop designed to simulate downhole conditions. Testing to date has verified tool operation on drilling mud and pulse generation. Our Phase II objective is 100 hours continuous operation on drilling mud in the test stand. Pressure drilling tests will be completed by October, 2000 with the objective of doubling drilling rates in hard shales and limestones. The Phase III project and DEA co-funding proposed here will be contingent on meeting the Phase II objectives. The Phase III objectives are threefold: 1. Demonstrate 100 hours continuous operation downhole on drilling mud 2. Observe drilling rates and compare with offset wells 3. Observe the seismic signal transmitted from the tool to the surface
Methodology: The Phase III program will involve a series of field tests with increases in depth and complexity. Initial field tests will be carried out in a shallow test well such as the Catoosa Test site operated by GRI. These tests will be designed to demonstrate tool operation under downhole drilling conditions. It is anticipated that these tests will require design changes and multiple shallow tests are planned. A second series of tests would be carried out as part of an ongoing drilling program in a well depth of 5000 ft or greater. Wells with high-quality offset drilling data would be chosen to allow rate-of-penetration comparisons. Multiple field tests are planned with intervals for design modifications. It is anticipated that three complete tools would be build as part of the Phase III effort. We plan to obtain high resolution seismic records from all these tests for post processing. The objective is only to demonstrate seismic signal transmission from the HydroPulse™ tool to the surface and to characterize the source amplitude and frequency content. Multi-channel data-acquisition and image processing are outside the scope of the Phase III project, however these could be added later as an independent project if desired by participants. Rig costs, operating costs, engineering support and seismic processing provided by participants will be included as part of the cost-sharing for the project.
Deliverables: Participants will receive detailed reports describing the results of operating tests and comparisons of drilling rate with offset wells. The reports will detail tool operation procedures and applications. Participants will also receive raw and processed seismic data from all of the test wells. Operator participants will receive free use of the tool during testing.
Comments: This is an update of DI-77. I plan to make an update presentation at the February 17th meeting.

DI-78 – Deepwater Pore Pressure Prediction

Download Power Point Presentation

Julian Land of CSIRO/GRI

Presented 02/98

DI-79 – Software for Estimating Downhole in Offshore Drilling

Date Submitted: February 27, 1998
Technical Area: Exploration
Sponsor: ARCO
Title: Proposal to develop computer software for the purpose of estimating the expected downtime in offshore drilling operations.
Submitted by: Crown Offshore Advisors 3303 Highland Meadow Dallas, Texas 75234 Tel: (972) 247-2434 Fax: (972) 484-5359 Petrospec Computer Corporation 901 Waterfall Way, #201 Richardson, TX 75080 Tel: (972) 644-3278 Fax: (972) 644-3279
Principal Investigator(s): Emilio Corona, ecorona@airmail.net Mark Herkommer, mherk@flash.net
Business Impact: 1) To significantly lower the cost of ongoing offshore operations by quantitatively assessing the expected performance of various offshore rigs given expected weather conditions. 2) Compilation of a database of response amplitude operators (RAO) to aid the drilling engineer in rig selection and equipment specification.
Technical Objectives: 1) Develop a model for downtime prediction at selected drilling locations based on RAO, local met-ocean conditions, and the drilling curve 2) Design and implement a computer program that will perform the downtime analysis 3) Gathering RAOs for various MODU from JIP participants 4) Document model performance and refine it where necessary
Methodology: The proposed program will used a Monte Carlo simulation to estimate the degree of interaction between the rig and met-ocean behavior on each task in the drilling schedule. From this interaction the amount of downtime will be computed for each task and accumulated to produce an overall estimate of downtime for the drilling operation.
Deliverables: 1) A group of computer programs that will accept RAOs, weather data, and a drilling curve as input and produce a downtime analysis 2) A database of RAOs 3) JIP documentation; software technical and reference manuals
Startup Date: to be announced
Project Duration: 8 months
Project Cost: $200,000
Cost per Participant: $25,000/$15,000

DI-80 – Look Ahead – Pore Pressure Prediction Ahead of the Bit

Date Submitted: 10/20/98
Title: Look Ahead – Pore Pressure Prediction Ahead of the Bit
Submitted by: Gas Research Institute 8600 West Bryn Mawr Chicago, IL 60631-3562 773 399-8100
Principal Investigator(s): Mike Weiss 773 399-5484 773 864-3431 Fax mweiss@gril.org
Business Impact: The accurate prediction of pore pressure is becoming more critical as wells are being drilled deeper and in deeper water. The “operating window” narrowing between fracture gradient and pore pressure makes it increasingly difficult to plan and safely drill these wells. Accurate pore pressure prediction is paramount to safe efficient operations.
Technical Objectives: The first objective is to identify the downhole seismic source which best allows accurate measurement of pore pressure prediction ahead of the bit. Targets are a 1,000′ look ahead capability with 0.5 ppge accuracy. The second phase would be development of a pore pressure prediction ahead of the bit tool/system.
Methodology:
Deliverables: Phase I Testing and evaluation of downhole seismic sources. Phase II Pore Pressure Prediction Ahead of the Bit Tool/System.

DI-81 – Joint Industry Program for Floating Vessel Deepwater Blowout Control

Date Submitted: November 4, 1998

Title: DI-81: Joint Industry Program for Floating Vessel Deepwater Blowout Control

Submitted by: Cudd Pressure Control, Inc. 4544 Post Oak Place Drive, Suite 280 Houston, Texas 77027 Office Number: (713) 840-7636 Fax Number: (713) 877-8961

Principal Investigator(s): Neal Adams – nadams@cudd.com David Tannich – dtannich@cudd.com Les Skinner – lskinner@cudd.com

Business Impact: Deepwater exploration successes around the world have resulted in an ever-increasing number of planned deepwater drilling and development projects. Increased activity levels unfortunately also increase the probability that a major blowout will occur in this hostile and technically challenging environment. This proposed project is designed to provide methods and equipment functional requirements for handling underwater blowouts in the deepwater environment so that any technology gaps — and ideas to close them — are identified as quickly as possible.

Technical Objectives: 1. Use mathematical modeling to study proposed blowout control handling procedures in deepwater environments. 2. Analyze case histories to compare observed blowout characteristics and contrast with modeling results. 3. Develop well control procedures for 10 most likely blowout scenarios. The procedures will include vertical intervention, offset intervention and relief well drilling. 4. Develop guidelines to handle shallow water and sand flows in a deepwater environment. 5. Identify equipment development requirements where needs exceed current equipment capability and develop conceptual equipment schematics and functionality requirements.

Methodology: 1. Extend Dr. Jerome Milgram’s work on underwater plume research to 10,000-ft water depth. His initial software code, developed for Conoco’s TLP work, will be used as a conceptual guide. 2. Study blowout behavior from the source to the mudline in an effort to identify flow characteristics impacting blowouts. 3. Identify key case histories of serious shallow and deepwater well control events that provide insight into the range of issues addressed in the project. 4. Develop conceptual equipment schematics and functionality requirements in order to develop a subsea capability for capping operations. 5. Evaluate anticipated blowout scenarios and develop blowout control proposals including vertical intervention, offset intervention and relief wells. 6. Reporting

Deliverables: 1. Monthly project reports. 2. Final report. 3. Detailed scenario development for most commonly anticipated blowouts. 4. Guidelines for handling shallow water and sand flows in a deepwater environment. 5. Detailed blowout control procedures for anticipated blowout control scenarios including procedures, equipment and personnel requirements. 6. Identification of new equipment requirements, conceptual design drawings and functionality requirements. 7. Software developed as an extension of Milgram’s work in Windows format. 8. Development of new software models, if any, to study blowout flow behavior from the source to the mudline. 9. Deliverables will be made available on hard copy, disk and via E-Mail.

Comments: Startup Date: January 1999 Project Duration: 14 months (with 3-month extension possible if Principal Investigators are on blowout jobs for an extended period) Project

Cost: $590,000.00 Cost per Participant: $29,500.00 with 20 participants

DI-82 – STEERABLE DRILLING TOOL FROM THE POINT OF FIRST FIELD TRIALS THROUGH TO PRODUCTION AND COMMERCIALISATION

Date Submitted: 31st January, 1999

Technical Area: Exploration

Sponsor:

Title: STEERABLE DRILLING TOOL FROM THE POINT OF FIRST FIELD TRIALS THROUGH TO PRODUCTION AND COMMERCIALISATION

Submitted by: ROTARY STEERABLE TOOLS, 13700 VETERANS MEMORIAL DRIVE, STE 410, HOUSTON, TEXAS 77014

Principal Investigator(s): STEVE MCLOUGHLIN/ s.mcloughlin@gte.net JACK P. CHANCE/ jch2384832@aol.com

Business Impact: To date, commercial developments and applications of Rotary Steerable Tools have focussed on the advantages of rotary steerable drilling (better hole cleaning, lower hole tortuosity, ERD programs, improved drilling hydraulics, higher range of available weight on bit ) and failed to address the issue of the development of a rotary steerable tool which has the economic efficiency to be adopted and applied to all types of directional and horizontal wells, whether conventional or ERD. The current proposal concerns the development of a production tool from the existing prototypes; funding of the beta prototype and the ability of ROTARY STEERABLE TOOLS to fill the needs of operators through the provision of tools: this will require significant fleet development. However, with a length of approximately 10ft and a very low capital cost, we believe the economic advantage will encourage industry participation in our development phase.

Technical Objectives: The development of a LOW COST, easily maintained, RELIABLE, Rotary Steerable Tool, through innovative and continually improving design. We have, at the moment, constructed two 12-1/4″ section tools for testing. We are in need of funding to hire further design engineers, buy computers and software, to begin downsizing the tools for 9-7/8″, 8-1/2″ and 6″ hole sizes. [Note; the electronics package is already downsized to an OD of 1.25"]
Methodology: We will be using a combination of conventional design methods and accelerated field testing to prove out the components in our Rotary Steerable Tool design. We have identified several major parts suppliers and have already entered into dialogue with them concerning the hostility of the environment and the requirement for reliability, with a high degree of cooperation to date.

Deliverables: A low cost Rotary Steerable Tool which is equally at home on a deep offshore rig or on a land rig. At the end of the project there will be available 12 units ( 6 rig capacity )of 12-1/4″ tools, and 2 units each ( 1 rig capacity ) of 9-7/8″, 8-1/2″ and 6″ tools. The 12-1/4″ tools will be on rental and will enable the development of a fleet of the smaller tools using debt money.

Startup Date: 1994

Project Duration: All 3 phases within 1 year

Project Cost: Phase 1: Testing Prototype 1 $100,000: Phase 2: Building “improved” beta Prototype – $125,000: Phase 3A: Building a fleet of 10 production 12-1/4″ Rotary Steerable

Tools – $1,200,000: Phase 3B: Development of smaller tool sizes – $1,105,000: Infrastructure Cost $500,000. Phases 3A and 3B to run concurrently.

Cost per Participant:

Comments: ROTARY STEERABLE TOOLS is located in North West Houston, within 30 minutes drive of downtown. Plese feel free to call our workshop on (713) 896 1212 and arrange an appointment to visit us and see the two 12-1/4″ tools operating. We can also be found on the web at www.rotarysteerable.com.

DI-83 – STA-Bit, The Dynamically Stabilized PDC Drill Bit

Date Submitted: 2/26/99

Technical Area: Exploration

Sponsor: None

Title: How to Drill Tough Rock Formations With PDC Bits

Submitted by: RA-TECH 2800 Fannin Avenue Midland, Texas 79705 (915) 686-0443

Principal Investigator(s): Richard C. Raney RCRANEY@texasonline.net

Business Impact: This is a patented stabilizing system for integral assembly with PDC bits which can eliminate chatter and vibration. Goal is to vastly improve bit life, broaden applications and increase productivity. May reduce rig time on some wells by as much as 50%.

Technical Objectives: Build, test and demonstrate a production model based on final design now available. (Preliminary tests have been done.)

Methodology: build test model utilizing local contract machine shop facilities. install PDC cutting elements on bit as recommended by Sandia National Lab. Conduct preliminary lab tests at Sandia to verify correct function of assembly. Conduct actual drilling tests in the field at locations provided by participating DEA members. Note: Select locations where offset records on other PDC bits are available. Also, utilize data on rock mechanics from experiments at Sandia Labs. (The test model, as designed, can be refurbished and rerun several times.)

Deliverables: Test data, drilling data and performance data will be recorded systematically throughout the project and verified by participating DEA members. A report will be presented outlining the noted improvements in bit life, hard rock endurance, penetration rates and other pertinent results.

Startup Date: As soon as possible

Project Duration: Approximately one year

Project Cost: $40,000.00 depending on amount of reruns. Possibly less if rig time is not included.

Cost per Participant: negotiable

Comments: assisting participants can obtain exclusive use of this product for an appropriate period of time.

DI-84 – IntelliDril – Diagnostics-While-Drilling

Date Submitted: 4/14/99

Title: ADVANCED DRILLING TECHNOLOGY (ADTech) PROGRAM

Submitted by: A.J. (Chip) Mansure Sandia National Laboratories P.O. Box 5800 MS-1033 Albuquerque, NM 87185-1033 505-844-9315

Principal Investigator(s): A.J. (Chip) Mansure Sandia National Laboratories P.O. Box 5800 MS-1033 Albuquerque, NM 87185-1033 ajmansu@sandia.gov

Business Impact: A proposal to revolutionize drilling practice through Diagnostics-While-Drilling (DWD)

Technical Objectives: Sandia National Laboratories is seeking industry’s cooperation in our Diagnostics While Drilling Program. The DWD program starts with a two fold objective: (1) conduct a comparison of the effectiveness of PDC bits for drilling geothermal (hard rock) formations by gathering real-time, high-speed data using a cable to bring data back to the surface, and (2) thereby demonstrate the value of real-time diagnostic data for optimizing drilling. Our vision for the Advanced Drilling program is a cooperative effort between industry and Sandia to develop DWD. Sandia will coordinate the program and focus on software development and field tests, whereas industry would develop and provide hardware for the DWD system. A draft program plan has been submitted to DOE. The program starts with the DWD proof-of-concept testing then proceeds into the development of technologies that would be enabled by a cost-effective high-speed data link. We invite your suggestions and comments.

Methodology: The central concept of DWD is a closed feedback loop, carrying data up and control signals down, between the driller and tools at the bottom of the hole. Up-coming data will give a real-time report on drilling conditions, bit and tool performance, and imminent problems. The driller can use this information to either change surface parameters (weight-on-bit, rotary speed, mud flow rate) with immediate knowledge of their effect, or to send control signals back to active downhole components. DWD will reduce costs, even in the short-term, by improving drilling performance, increasing tool life, and avoiding trouble. Its longer-term potential includes variable-damping shock subs for smoother drilling, self-steering directional drilling, and autonomous “smart” drilling systems that analyze data and make drilling decisions downhole, without the driller’s direct control.

Deliverables: In addition to the Driller and Drill Rig/Drill Pipe, the following components make up the DWD system and hence are the deliverables: (1) DWD Tool, to acquire data from downhole sensors, condition it for transmission, and deliver it to the high-speed data link; (2) High-Speed Data Link, which carries downhole information to the surface and carries surface control signals back downhole; (3) Drilling Advisory Software, which acquires, analyzes, and displays downhole and surface data in real time to provide the driller with a complete and accurate status of drilling conditions and system performance; (4) Surface-Controllable Downhole Tools, which permit the driller to actively control downhole tools with real-time knowledge of the effect of his actions.

Comments: Considering the components listed in the previous section, development of a DWD system appears to face four major technical challenges: the high-speed data link; the drilling advisory software; and the surface-controllable downhole tools. (1) The principal technical challenge in the DWD system is the high-speed data link. To minimize downhole signal processing, the data link should have a minimum transmission rate of 100 kbits/sec, which is four orders of magnitude above the data rate of mud-pulse telemetry used in conventional MWD systems. (2) Of the critical elements, the only one for which prototypes do not currently exist is software for the driller’s console. Raw data is of little value to the driller, so a major task in this project is to work with the driller and determine the best way of processing and presenting the data. (3) With a high-speed data link to transmit control signals downhole and transmit sensor data back uphole, a wide range of downhole tools that have not been feasible to this point will become practical. (4) Development of advanced downhole sensors with high-temperature, high-shock capability may be evolutionary from existing devices, but may require significant innovation. This will become clearer after the proof-of-concept tests help to refine a list of measurements to be taken and conditions under which the sensors will have to operate.

DI-85 – Drilling Performance Measurements

Date Submitted: 5/20/99
Title: Drilling Performance Measurements
Submitted by: Leader Drilling, LLC 2828 Hayes Road, #2735 Houston, TX 77082
Principal Investigator(s): Mark Hutchinson mhutch@pdq.net
Business Impact: Reduction in NPT Increased ROP Enhanced drilling capabilities Less expensive MWD development costs Advanced academic understanding
Technical Objectives: Evaluate commercial drilling measurements and software Develop drilling measurements data quality standards Provide functional requirements requirements for service providers
Methodology: Review current data quality procedures Train drilling teams Collate field examples Drill a test well with all sensors simultaneously Develop recommendations for service providers
Deliverables: Rig training and audits Comparison of specification to performance Operating guidelines Industry Ddata quality standards Drilling research data
Comments: The scope of the project is still flexible based upon industry interest. There will be a meeting to discuss scope and contracts in July 1999. Participant cost $40k per member. Looking for 25 members to kick off the test well task.

DI-86 – Seismic while Drilling for Enhanced Look-Ahead-of-Bit Capabilities

DI-86     Seismic while Drilling for Enhanced Look-Ahead-of-Bit Capabilities – - Department of Energy / Industry Program for Drilling Optimization

Date Submitted: July 14, 1999
Technical Area: Production
Title: Seismic while Drilling for Enhanced Look-Ahead-of-Bit Capabilities – Department of Energy / INEEL / Industry Program for Drilling Optimization
Submitted by: TerraTek, Inc. Arnis Judzis, Vice President 400 Wakara Way Salt Lake City, UT 84108 (801) 584-2400
Principal Investigator(s): TerraTek, Inc. Alan Black (ablack@terratek.com) and Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory Tim Green (tsg@inel.gov)
Business Impact: This program is designed to improve the efficiency and safety of drilling operations through the development and deployment of a down hole seismic source for enhanced ‘look-ahead-of-the-bit’ capabilities while drilling. The broad based expertise of the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL), Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) and full scale testing facilities available at TerraTek, Inc. offer a unique opportunity to provide operators and drilling contractors with a means to improve well safety and economics. This program is past the conceptual design phase and is heavily leveraged through ongoing DOE / INEEL research. The successful completion of this program will provide drilling risk mitigation through the provision of a down-hole hydraulic seismic source with the capability of providing real time geologic information ahead of the bit that can be used for pore pressure prediction, casing seat depth selection, and geological prognosis. Accurate prediction of formation pressures (pore pressures) is critical to conduct safe and economic drilling operations. This information is essential for both optimizing casing and drilling fluid programs, and is vital in avoiding well control problems. Conventional pore-pressure prediction techniques at the well site typically relate measured porosity indicators (velocity, resistivity, density) and real-time drilling parameters (drill rate, bit torque, formation gas, shale density). While effective in predicting pore pressures at the depth the data is being collected and allowing for some prediction of pore pressure to be made ahead of the bit based on trend analysis, this method does not provide true “look ahead” capability. Additionally, in areas lacking sufficient well control information and in deep water where there is little margin between fracture gradients and pore pressure, a more quantitative method is required in order to meet exploration objectives in a safe and cost effective manner. Seismic while drilling techniques offer improved safety and drilling performance for areas where uncertainties exist in formation tops and prediction of over-pressured zones. Operations in deep offshore waters are an example where benefits may be derived from enhance ‘look ahead’ capabilities. Examples of potential economic benefit include elimination of casing strings, maintenance of optimum hole size to total depth, and reduction of “trouble time” related to lost circulation, stuck pipe, and managing kicks.
Technical Objectives: The project proposes a two-year program to develop a down-hole hydraulic seismic source. Operational requirements of the down-hole source will include 1) capability of being used continuously during normal drilling operations, 2) meet industry reliability requirements for down-hole tools, and 3) produce a seismic signal capable of resolving pore pressures to within 0.5 ppg 1,000 to 1,500 feet ahead of the bit.
Methodology: The work is being proposed in three Phases. The first phase will consist of the development of an appropriate protocol for scale testing the hydraulic source and numerical models for signal response and evaluation. Additionally, a prototype tool will be developed based on using the hydraulic force of the mud as a seismic source. The second phase of the project will involve the fabrication of a hardened tool and the performance of field tests. The final phase will conduct any additional field testing required for licensing of the technology for commercial development. In order to field test the system it will be necessary to have access to an industry test well and an appropriate receiver system. Specific tasks of the three phases of the project are detailed below. Phase 1 1. Develop system/protocol for testing down-hole hydraulic seismic source. 2. Develop acoustic coupling/signal models for evaluation of down-hole hydraulic seismic source. 3. Evaluate hydraulic coupling. 4. Design/construct/test bench scale hydraulic valve. Phase 2 1. Design/construct field-hardened prototype hydraulic valve. 2. Field-test prototype in onshore Gulf Coast well. Phase 3 1. Additional field tests and commercialization of the tool.
Deliverables: The primary deliverable of this project will be a prototype down-hole seismic source that can be run with the drill string for the purpose of providing look ahead pore pressure prediction while drilling. This system will enable drilling operations to be conducted in a safer manner while providing geologic information ahead of the drill bit in real time. Specific deliverables will include: · Protocol for scale testing down-hole seismic source(s). · Numerical model for evaluating down-hole seismic sources. · Prototype bench scale down-hole seismic source (hydraulic valve). · Evaluation report on bench scale tests conducted with prototype. · Field hardened down-hole seismic source (hydraulic valve). · Report on initial field evaluations of down-hole seismic source. · Report on final field tests of down-hole seismic source. · Commercial license.
Startup Date: Project was initiated May ’99 with Department of Energy funding. Anticipated start-up for JIP is November 1, 1999.
Project Duration: 2 years
Project Cost: $250,000
Cost per Participant: $50,000 (Assuming 5 participants. In kind support will be determined during scoping meetings)
Comments: The Department of Energy has provided $225K for FY 99. FY 00 funding is anticipated at the same level.

DI-87 – Survey of Alternative Environmental Detection & Cleanup Methods for Wellsite Operations

DI-87 – “Survey of Alternative Environmental Detection & Cleanup Methods for Wellsite Operations”

Date Submitted: July 16,1999
Title: Survey of Alternative Environmental Detection & Cleanup Methods for Wellsite Operations
Submitted by: Westport Technology Center 6700 Portwest Drive Houston, TX 77024 713-479-8400 www.westport1.com
Principal Investigator(s): Thomas E. Williams – 713-479-8470 williams@neosoft.com Ryen Caenn, 713-479-8413 Also support from ICF Consulting, Fairfax, VA.
Business Impact: We would like to see if there is interest by DEA members to sponsor a study, which would look outside the upstream oil & gas industry to survey for technologies appropriate to the detection and monitoring of drilling related contaminants and wastes. The study would also identify possible processes, equipment and/or methods that could be used for waste minimization and/or the removal of contaminants from drilling related discharges and cuttings. It will address the difficulties encountered in planning and implementing projects mandated by environmental rules and regulations. Eliminating or minimizing the costs associated with these mandates is essential to the timely and cost effective completion and production of oil and gas wells. The objective is to assist (primarily offshore) operators in complying with existing and pending regulatory requirements.
Technical Objectives: The project will identify and evaluate the industrial resources currently in use by non-oilfield industries for identification and cleanup of waste streams, both liquid and solid. Those that may have an application to the oilfield will be identified and investigated. The project will look at both source reduction and end of pipe Best Available Technologies (BAT).
Methodology: A team of investigators will be utilized that have a broad level of technical knowledge and background necessary to properly find and assess this information, plus have an understanding of regulations, current oilfield best practices and procedures. Industry and government surveys and literature searches will establish a database of BAT processes currently in use in various industries such as aerospace, computers, automotive, public utilities, waste water, chemical/refining, and other manufacturing systems. Detection, monitoring, mitigation and control methods practiced in these industries will be evaluated and assessed as to their applicability to oilfield operations.
Deliverables: The report will include a BAT Database: detection methods, treatment methods, and mitigation techniques. BAT Database and Recommendations for oilfeild operations.
Comments: As currently described, this will be a relatively inexpensive and short term study.

DI-88 – Insulated Drill Pipe

DI-88     Insulated Drill Pipe

Tom Champness of Drill Cool

DI-89- DOE High Power PDM

DI-89     DOE High Power PDM

John Cohen of Maurer Engineering

DI-90 – Improving Gas Well Cementing Through Cement Pulsation

DI-90     Improving Gas Well Cementing Through Cement Pulsation

Scott Quigley of CTES

squigley@ctes.com

DI-91 – “Benefits and Barriers to an Industry Wide Knowledge Sharing Process”

DI-91 – “Benefits and Barriers to an Industry Wide Knowledge Sharing Process”

Date Submitted: October 19, 1999
Title: Benefits and Barriers to an Industry Wide Knowledge Sharing Process
Submitted by: Petroweb Ltd. The Software Centre, Campus 2 Aberdeen Science & Technology Park Balgownie Drive Bridge of Don Aberdeen AB22 8GU
Principal Investigator (s): Harry van der Vossen harry@petroweb.co.uk
Business Impact: Petroweb has established a knowledge sharing service for the oil and gas industry which facilitates and enables the process of lateral learning between companies, covering the entire Well Operations process cycle. To the Operators, tangible benefits are to be derived from implementing ‘Best Practices’ that are adopted elsewhere in the industry, which can demonstrate a saving in cost, time or improvement in HSE performance. At the same time, Operators have the opportunity to avoid areas of ‘Waste’ (Failures) that have occurred in other companies, therefore achieving similar savings in cost, time and leading to HSE improvement. Ultimately, the cross-company knowledge sharing initiative provides the network members with an opportunity to become ‘better informed’ decision makers. No longer are operations planned and executed ‘how we always do it’, but based on real-time expertise and experience from our peers in the industry. The network will bring individuals from different companies and geographic locations together, based on a common problem, solutions found elsewhere etc. For obvious reasons, it is paramount this proven process is now extended beyond the North Sea and starts to link up expertise from the other major oil and gas producing areas.
Technical Objectives: The objective of this presentation is to inform the US based Operators through the DEA forum, about the achievements that have been made and the barriers that we have come across during the first 2 years of the Network. We intend to bring you the lessons learned from this knowledge sharing process up to now and show the vision of where we are aiming this network to be in the next couple of years.
Methodology: Not relevant
Deliverables: The deliverable of our service is already in place and there is no need for industry funding to set-up this process. The process is working, proven and successful in the North Sea and needs to be extended to other high cost areas which set to gain the most from ‘learning from experience’.
Comments: Petroweb wished to demonstrate what can be achieved with a properly managed service which facilitates the sharing of knowledge within our industry, and is keen to discover the response from US based operators regarding this process and gauge their willingness and readiness to join the network.

DI-92A – Riser Tensioning System

DI-92A     Riser Tensioning System

Granville Wells

281-631-0561

DI-92 – “Limit States Design of Well Casing in Massive Salt Formations”

DI-92  – “Limit States Design of Well Casing in Massive Salt Formations”

Date Submitted: January 14, 2000

Title: Limit States Design of Well Casing in Massive Salt Formations

Submitted by: C-FER Technologies Inc. 200 Karl Clark Rd. Edmonton, AB, Canada T6N1H2 (780)450-3300

Principal Investigator (s): Cam Matthews – c.matthews@cfertech.com Brian Wagg – b.wagg@cfertech.com

Business Impact: One of the current approaches to casing wells through massive salt formations is to design the well for full litho static collapse pressure. It is suspected that this is an overly conservative design approach that results in heavy wall or dual-concentric-cemented casing strings that are expensive and/or difficult to handle. The proposed work would provide operating companies with a process to optimize well casing design by avoiding overly conservative designs while ensuring the required well service life.

Technical Objectives: The basic objective is to develop a semi-empirical, strain-based, limit states design approach for well casing in salt formations that explicitly addresses the formation movements and loading scenarios occurring within the salt formation and at its geomechanical boundaries.

Methodology: The work would consist of a combination of: 1) field measurements of casing deformations based on multi-sensor caliper logs processed using C-FER’s proprietary CalTran software to characterize the mechanisms of casing deformations. 2)full scale laboratory testing to establish casing performance under the loading conditions indicated by the multi-sensor caliper logs 3) 3-D numerical simulations of casing/formation interaction addressing both pipe body and connection performance under combined loading conditions benchmarked to both laboratory results and field measurements. 4) Use the combined field, lab and simulation results to develop a semi-empirical, strain based limit states method to design well casing

Deliverables: The principal deliverable would be strain limit design equations for casing with the actual “failure”, or limiting criteria based on either material strain or on functional limits of the well casing in terms of drift diameter reduction. The resulting equations would provide a comprehensive strain-based model that would predict casing response in massive salt formations for a wide range of casing sizes, weights and grades. A secondary deliverable of this analysis would be a thorough understanding of the formation movements that occur in, and adjacent to, a massive salt formation. This knowledge could lead to new drilling or completion practices that can further reduce the cost of wells or improve well casing performance.

Comments: Major operating companies in both the North Sea and Gulf of Mexico have recently made inquiries into the development of a limit states design approach for casing in massive salt formations.

DI-93 – Flat Time reduction – Real Time Data Analysis

Bob Radtke of Technology International

radtke@kingwoodcable.com

Date Submitted: Oct 26, 1999
Title: Flat Time Reduction – Real-time Data Analysis
Submitted by: Marconi 6500 Tracor Lane Austin, TX 78725-2070
Principal Investigator (s): Glenn Corser gcorser@tracor.com
Business Impact: During the recent Flat Time Reduction forum, development of real-time systems that could detect and diagnose problems early was identified as the number one priority. This discussion will be focused on industry interest in development of flat-time reduction systems.
Technical Objectives: Identify and prioritize the development of real-time monitoring systems at the well site. Potential areas for automation include, detection of ballooning, annulus pressure estimation, stuck pipe detection, mechanical problems, hole cleaning/stability, and mud diagnostics
Methodology: Use the Marconi developed Intelligent Drilling Monitor as the platform for the development of addition “plug-in” systems to monitor drilling operations and detect and diagnose problems.
Deliverables: From the discussion we hope to determine if there is interest in the development of real-time “plug-ins” to IDM and schedule a further meeting to discuss possible candidate problems. From any project that might develop, deliverables would include “plug-in” software IDM modules for specific problems.

DI-95 – Well Planning from Seismic Data: Establishing the Geomechanical Link

Rune M. Holt of Syntec Petroleum Research

Presented on 05/00

DEA Discussion Item Summary

DI-95

“Optimized Drilling & Hole Delivery Practices in
Deepwater Exploration & Development Drilling Environments”

Date Submitted: 15th March
Title: Optimized drilling and hole delivery practices in deepwater exploration and development drilling environments.
Submitted by: Kingdom Drilling Services Ltd 8 Berryhill, Finglassie, Glenrothes, Fife, KY7 4TQ, Scotland 00 44 1592 771263
Principal Investigator (s): Peter Aird kingdom_drillig@msn.com
Business Impact: Achieving desired and consistent drilling performance and loss reduction in deepwater drilling environments.
Technical Objectives: To develop a drilling performance hypothesis to be applied in deepwater environments. To demonstrate the importance of well data review and interpretation of the facts presented. To illustrate that more specific studies are required in this subject area.
Methodology: Data review and analysis of 25 deepwater (vertical)exploration wells. Identify hole delivery loss and analyze causation. Data review and analysis of two deepwater field development. In particular with ref. to the intermediate (build to horizontal) sections. Identify hole delivery loss and analyse causation. Review of over 60 engineering papers, referencing hole cleaning, drillstring dynamic effects, wellbore stability, an top drives in high angle wellbores. To prove from data set that specific drilling engineering and operational practices are proved to deliver desired and optimum results. To demonstrate that unwarranted rotating practices (continuos rotation, backreaming) cummulate to severely impact resulting hole delivery and overall drilling performance. To identify causation effect through data modeling and simulations (e.g. Drillstring mechanics, dynamics, simulation, hydraulic

DI-96 – Drilling Salt at Depth – A Study to Improve Drillability through Salt in Deep Water Wells

Arnis Judzis of Terra Tek — Judzis@terratek.com

Presented on 05/00

DI-96 – Drilling Salt at Depth – A Study to Improve Drillability through Salt in Deep Water Wells

Arnis Judzis of Terra Tek

Judzis@terratek.com

DEA Discussion Item Summary

DI-96

“SWIFT RISER A Deepwater Composite Coiled Tubing well intervention system”

Date Submitted: 26th June
Title: SWIFT RISER A Deepwater Composite Coiled Tubing well intervention system
Submitted by: Tony Bamford, Project Manager Halliburton Manufacturing & Services Ltd Greenwells Road, East Tullos, ABERDEEN AB12 3AX SCOTLAND
Principal Investigator(s): tony.bamford@halliburton.com miles.posonby@halliburton.com hamish.baird@halliburton.com iain.linn@halliburton.com mark.hall@halliburton.com
Business Impact: Subsea well intervention and flow assurance in deepwater are big issues for many operators. This is a reliable cost effective intervention system in water depths to 3000m. For future versions it will support drilling with the Anaconda coiled tubing drilling system from a monohull vessel
Technical Objectives: The development of a prototype system to prove the concept of a close tolerance coil in coil riser system. It will also prove up the guidelineless subsea navigation & connection system for the lubricator/ BOP interface
Methodology: Complete the feasibility study where the riser is modelled together with the coiled tubing behavior to determine friction factors and the performance in compression and tension. Set up yard trials followed by “clump weight trials” from a vessel
Deliverables: Report of measured friction factors and tension and compression performance from the yard trials Report from vessel trials showing navigation and connection of the lubricator together with coiled tubing handling report.
Comments: The project has been underway since Novemeber last year. There are some preliminary results. Riser modelling results down to 3000 m is available

DI-97 – Flat Time Reduction – Approach, Methodology and Tools

Bob Radtke of Technology International

radtke@kingwoodcable.com

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, inge.carlsen@iku.sintef.no Hans Peter Jenssen, hans.jenssen@iku.sintef.no

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

DI-98 – Developing Technology

Kevin Waddell of Enventure Global Technology

kevin.waddell@EnventureGT.com

Presented on 05/00

DI-99 – SWIFT RISER A Deepwater Composite Coiled Tubing well intervention system

Richard Haut of Halliburton Energy Services

Presented on 11/00

Date Submitted: 26th June

Title: SWIFT RISER A Deepwater Composite Coiled Tubing well intervention system

Submitted by: Tony Bamford, Project Manager Halliburton Manufacturing & Services Ltd Greenwells Road, East Tullos, ABERDEEN AB12 3AX SCOTLAND

Principal Investigator(s): tony.bamford@halliburton.com miles.posonby@halliburton.com hamish.baird@halliburton.com iain.linn@halliburton.com mark.hall@halliburton.com

Business Impact: Subsea well intervention and flow assurance in deepwater are big issues for many operators. This is a reliable cost effective intervention system in water depths to 3000m. For future versions it will support drilling with the Anaconda coiled tubing drilling system from a monohull vessel

Technical Objectives: The development of a prototype system to prove the concept of a close tolerance coil in coil riser system. It will also prove up the guidelineless subsea navigation & connection system for the lubricator/ BOP interface

Methodology: Complete the feasibility study where the riser is modelled together with the coiled tubing behavior to determine friction factors and the performance in compression and tension. Set up yard trials followed by “clump weight trials” from a vessel

Deliverables: Report of measured friction factors and tension and compression performance from the yard trials Report from vessel trials showing navigation and connection of the lubricator together with coiled tubing handling report.

Comments: The project has been underway since Novemeber last year. There are some preliminary results. Riser modelling results down to 3000 m is available

DI-100 – Pulsing of Casing Annulus

Ken Neuman of CTES–krnewman@ctes.com

Presented on 05/01

DI-101 – Deep Water Blow Out Intervention

Curtis Weddle of Cherokee Engineering

Presented on 05/01

DI-102 – STUDY TO DETERMINE THE SAFE APPLICATION OF UNDERBALANCED DRILLING IN THE GULF OF MEXICO

Tom Williams of Maurer Engineering

t.williams@maurertechnology.com

Presented on 08/01

DEA-155 – A Probabilistic Approach to Risk Assessment of Managed Pressure Drilling Offshore

Project Summary

DEA-155 – “A Probabilistic Approach to Risk Assessment of Managed Pressure Drilling Offshore”

Date Submitted:  2-19-04

Technical Area:  ExplorationProduction

Sponsor:  ConocoPhillips

Title: A Probabilistic Approach to Risk Assessment of Managed Pressure Drilling Offshore (Follow link to original PowerPoint presentation)

Submitted by:

Mohr Engineering,

Stress Engineering Services,

Mohr Engineering Division,

13602 Westland East Blvd.,

Houston, TX  77041-1205  USA,

(281) 469-2177 – Office,

(281) 469-2217 – Fax

http://www.mohreng.com/

http://www.stress.com/

Principal Investigator(s):  Ken Malloy, ken.malloy@mohreng.com, (281) 723-2414 – Cellular

Click here to download the JIP letter of intent in PDF format (72 kb)

Business Impact:

Statistical studies developed by Dodson from the offshore drilling database maintained by the MMS demonstrate consistent problematic areas for concern. Over 650 gas wells were studied from the period of 1993 to 2002. All of these wells were drilled in a conventional manner – that is overbalanced. On these subject wells, stuck pipe, kicks, and lost circulation accounted for 1/3 of all the downtime during drilling operations.

About 24% of all drilling days are spent fighting hole problems, these hole problems negatively influence ROP by 30% and impact the cost per foot by an additional 23%, increase the days to TD by 26%. The trouble costs attributed to hole problems is staggering. The common denominator is that all of these wells are drilled in an overbalanced, open system environment, sometimes far in excess of what is required to maintain hole stability and well control.

We would like to encourage the DEA to undertake a risk analysis to help determine if advances in current drilling technology can help mitigate a significant amount of this trouble time. We have basically been drilling wells in an overbalanced environment in an open vessel since the days of Spindletop.

Managed Pressure Drilling is not a new concept but it is a slight departure from what we have historically been taught in well control school. MPD is drilling overbalance while maintaining near constant bottom hole pressure using a combination of mud density, equivalent circulating density and casing back pressure. To accomplish this task, pressure balance is maintained in a closed system.

In the days of Spindletop, we did not have the sophisticated tools that we have today. They did not have the elaborate choke manifold systems we have today, they did not have microprocessor control, they did not know how to use equivalent circulating density to their advantage, and they certainly did not have rotating control devices to drill in a closed loop system. These tools alone do not laydown a massive footprint, nor do they demand an exorbitant capital outlay. But they offer fine micro-flux control.

Various studies have concluded that we cannot continue to drill in the conventional, overbalanced, open-system environment and produce wells in reservoirs where the BHP cannot productively recover from the insult of massive infiltration due to overly high overbalanced mud columns.

Managed Pressure Drilling is a step change in drilling operations. But to get there we must undertake a risk analysis study comparing conventional overbalance drilling in an open system with managed pressure drilling that is modestly overbalanced but controlled in a closed system. We need to assure ourselves and the regulatory bodies that the managed pressure drilling technologies have sufficiently advanced to ensure safe, productive, and efficient drilling operations.

An effective probabilistic risk analysis study requires the knowledgeable body of experts to qualitatively assess and define the risks. Later after the risks are defined, the knowledgeable body convenes again to determine qualitative risk, where Risk = Probability x Severity. The risks are then ranked and compared.

The Managed Pressure Drilling Subcommittee of the IADC Underbalanced Operations Committee is an existing internationally knowledgeable body of experts that are capable of differentiating the risks between conventional overbalance drilling in an open system with managed pressure drilling that is modestly overbalanced but controlled in a closed system.

In a recent Managed Pressure Drilling Forum, this IADC subcommittee has agreed to be the custodian of the common body of knowledge available to the industry on the subject of MPD. As already mentioned, it is an international body where everyone is welcome to participate whether one promotes MPD or not. From personal experience, I can tell you that the discussions are quite lively. There is no fear that the fox is guarding the hen house.

As soon as funding is appropriated every effort will be made to fast-track the project. This MPD subcommittee meets every quarter. Its next meeting is in Netherlands in mid-March. Although the fuse is short, should funding be appropriated the subcommittee could be prepped for the Qualitative Assessment (Phase I) for its May meeting in Houston. Carry over work will proceed over subsequent quarterly meetings. Polling for Quantitative Assessment (Phase II) would follow close on the heels of Phase I. Once the objectives are realized, a report can be written and discussed in the March, 2006 MPD subcommittee meeting. With timely funding, the results could be presented at the annual DEA summer meeting in June, 2006.

DI-103 – Possible JIP for Titanium Drillpipe

Pat Boster of RTI Energy System and Brett Chandler of GrandPrideCO

Presented on 08/01

DEA-151 – “The Modernization of Connection Performance Properties”

Active Project Summary
Originally Presented as DI-104

DEA-151
The Modernization of Connection Performance Properties
*****************************************************************
DEA-151 Status as of November 2003

Development:
1. Contract Review, legal review, contract approval- £15,000 in 2003 or 2004
2. Database structure under review and approval by participants
3. Tubing & Casing connections List drafted: review by participants
4. Coordinating with Landmark Graphics (Cesar Congora) & Schlumberger (Kris Givens)
· Landmark Graphics to present capabilities next meeting, seek industry consensus

Actions:
1. Auto data store for current qualification testing
2. Streamline heritage qualification testing (back-data) loading
3. Capture top priority HPHT, deepwater, critical connection applications connection data
4. Witness, validate, and enter currently active qualification testing

For more information  -  For more info (This is a 440 KB file)

SUBJECT: 16 JULY 2003 DEA-151 KICK-OFF MEETING
QUALCONN INTEGRATED CONNECTION PERFORMANCE DATABASE

We are pleased to announce the start of the QUALCONN joint industry project. I would like to take this opportunity to thank participating companies, and invite interested parties to attend our kick-off meeting at the BP Westlake 1 facility in Houston. Meeting specifics are given below:

16 July 2003, 8:30 AM-1:00 PM
Sponsor: Mike Payne
Senior Advisor, E&P Technology Group
Westlake 1, Room 21.117 (281) 366-7117
501 Westlake Park Blvd
Video Conference Contact: Jeannette Lyles 281-366-2646 lilesjs@bp.com
ISDN: 281-649-0969
Agenda
1) Welcome & Introduction Mike Payne 8:30
2) Need for Performance Data and QUALCONN Mike Payne 9:00
3) ISO/ API performance Standards Carey Murphey 9:30
4) QUALCONN overview and features Brian Schwind 10:00
5) Operator Priorities: Data (HPHT, Deepwater, CRA) Mike Payne 10:30
6) Coffee Break Break 11:00
7) Operator Priorities: Software / Platforms Ron Livesay 11:15
8) Action Items, Schedule, Participants Brian Schwind 11:45
9) Lunch Break 12:15

The prospectus has been updated to include the current schedule, and to expand the scope to include Oracle/SAP functionality. As defined, QUALCONN will be updated as qualification test data is completed. This data will be independently validated, then loaded to the database directly from the test report with the touch of a button. QUALCONN involves a one-time fee. BP has offered to maintain the database within their quality system.
I would like to ask that DEA participants finalize sponsorship. As a participant and voting member, you direct the project to meet your performance objectives in the form of the easy to use program and the $50MM set of performance data. We look forward to working with operators and manufacturers to further ensure well integrity through proven reliability practices. Feel free to contact either John McDowell in Aberdeen (44-1651-872-409) or Brian Schwind in Houston (713-464-2200). We look forward to seeing you 16 July.

Date of Update: 20 November

DEA Project Number: 151 Picture (Metafile)
Project Title: The Modernization of Connection Performance Properties

Startup Date: project: 1Q 2003, promotion June 2002
Scope of Work:  Relational Database with Search Engine and Custom Output

Contractor: Brian Schwind, PE

Director,  Advanced Technologies

PPI Advanced Technology Services

800 Gessner, Suite 900

Houston, Texas  77024

Cell: 832-563-0862  Direct Line: 713-463-2304

Email Contact:
schwind@petropro.com

World Wide Web Site: www.ppitech.net

Current Status:  Finalizing Contacts/ Participation

Projected Completion Date: July 2003
Total Project Cost: $250000
Participants: approx 10

Cost per Participant: $22000
Additional Comments:

An open letter to Operators:

I would like to take this opportunity to provide a list of reasons to join the JIP.  I am hopeful that this list provides a useful summary, but I feel that a follow-up discussion may be a good idea to flesh out various items.

I have attached a PowerPoint file presenting the benefits of QUALCONN, the tentative name given to the ISO 13679 connection qualification database.  At the highest level, the benefit of the JIP is that it allows the industry to “do it once, do it right, and to do it industry wide”.   The efficiency that this affords provides payoff to operators and suppliers in terms of Cost, Schedule, and Performance.

Cost- Let the Industry Work for You

·       Minimize the labor intensive aspect of database management

·       A modest one time entry fee, continuous feed of ISO 13679 data from suppliers

·       ISO 13679 tests entered from test reports with a touch of a button

·       Minimum Cost Software- common vehicle for data management

·

·       Move from a fragmented multi-system user community to an effective single system

·       Reduced cost & labor requirement for Suppliers, improved cost & service for users

·       Include your suppliers and global partners in a coordinated reliability testing methodology
Schedule- a single vehicle for data management: reduced cycle time

·       Perform the exercise once for the entire industry

·       ISO 13679 tests entered from test reports with a press of a button

·       Load directly into WellCat, StressCheck, and TDAS

·       Do not solicit and hunt for data- available at your fingertips

·       Serves a supplier need, delivers data to you ASAP!

·       Act as a catalyst for adoption of 13679: shorten the time required for acceptance

Performance- The ISO 13679 data you value with industry leverage

·       Maximum data entry; probably the only way to capture $50 Million in test data

·       Operator directed- You get the product and capabilities you need

·       Controlled database document free from security and liability concerns

·       Provides the objective, highest quality performance basis for connection selection

·       Continuous feed of user directed ISO 13679 data from suppliers: HPHT, Deepwater, etc.

·       Performance-based Design; Qualified Manufacturing & Makeup Specification,

·       Capabilities including normalization, product line, etc directed via ISO 13679

·       Provides a common dialog between all users and operators- meet your needs

·       Testing provides better performance product to you: encourages ISO 13679 testing

·       Better performing product: Proper application, proper quality system

In conclusion, the JIP brings the resources of the 6 major threaders as well as the global user community to your fingertips.  This equates to over $50 MM in modern qualification testing over the past 15 years, and over $7MM annually.   Integration into tubing and casing design programs will be managed from this effort as well.   Thank you for your consideration!

Best Regards,

Brian

DI-106 – Opportunities of Applying the Smart Metal ” Terfenol-D” in the Oil Field”

Tim Drake of Etrema Products tim.drake@etrema-usa.com

Website: www.etrema-usa.com
Phone Number: 816-246-0566

Drilling Engineer Association Meeting
Presented August 21, 2003
Given by: Tim Drake

ETREMA Products, Inc.
o Subsidiary of Edge Technologies, Inc.
o Privately Held Small Business Located in Iowa State Research Park, Ames, Iowa
o Founded in 1987 as a High Tech Transfer Company
o Key Technology is TERFENOL-D, a Magnetostrictive Alloy

History of TERFENOL-D
o Discovered by the Naval Ordnance Laboratory in 1979 to enable more powerful sonar drivers
o Technology was transferred to Ames Laboratory and Iowa State University for further material characterization
o In 1987 technology transferred to ETREMA
o Commercialization began in 1995

Applications Wheel
Magnetostriction
Etrema Products Market Segments

Material Shapes
TERFENOL-D Properties
Effect of Prestress
Flexible Operating Temperature Range
Magnetostriction
Magnetostrictive Life
o Unlike PZT materials TERFENOL-D cannot be over-strained.
- A TERFENOL- D driven projector has operated more than 1012 cycles without failure or reduction in performance.
o Domain alignment is tied to crystal structure.
- Material will not ‘de-pole’ like PZT ceramics due to cyclic operation or variable loading.
o While TERFENOL-D does not produce strain above its Curie temperature , strain performance fully recovers upon cooling below the Curie temperature of 380º C.
Magnetic Circuit
DESIGN OF THE MAGNETIC CIRCUIT IS KEY TO OPTIMUM PERFORMANCE
A GOOD MAGNETIC CIRCUIT PROVIDES:
- Maximum magnetic flux in the TERFENOL-D, at minimum current
- Uniform flux density under any operating condition
MAGNETIC CIRCUIT DESIGN REQUIRES:
- Knowledge of TERFENOL-D characteristics and actuator design
- Experience
- Finite Element (FEA) Capability
Engineering Capabilities
TERFENOL-D Attributes
o High reliability
o Fast response time
o High energy density
o High energy conversion
o Broadband frequency range
o Wide temperature range

Combined Technologies
Table Top Demo

” PowerWave™
” Downhole Acoustic Stimulation
” Acoustic sources for MWD applications
” Ultrasonic transducers for in hole inspections
” Seismic devices for the borehole
” Leading Edge Measurement System (LEMS)
” Affordable multiphase measurement
” Telemetry applications as transmitter
Potential Projects of Interest to DEA Members
” VibraCharge-harnessing vibration from the drilling process to generate power.
” Non-intrusive identification of properties of drilling fluids and other fluids-Multiphase Flow Measurement
” Non-intrusive pressure sensing
” Near wellbore cleaning-including drilling fines
” Unsticking stuck tubulars for removal or advancement
” Increasing throughput and/or decreasing blinding of shaker screening systems
” Sensors-pressure & strain measurements
” Other applications open for discussion

VibraCharge
o Conversion of Vibratory energy into Electrical Power using Terfenol-D
o Utilizes the reverse magnetostriction effect of Terfenol-D.
o External vibration causes the material’s magnetic alignment to change creating a magnetic field.
o The field can be received by an inductance coil, which converts the field into an alternating electrical charge.
o This alternating electrical charge is rectified and filtered into a usable direct current.
o The electrical power developed from this device would be capable of recharging a battery pack or capacitor bank.

VibraCharge
VibraCharge
VibraCharge
o From the Coil to the Battery Pack

- A simple rectifier circuit will filter the Alternating Current field into Direct Current.

VibraCharge
VibraCharge
o Where can this technology be used in the industry?
- MWD / LWD: behind the bit, supplying power to downhole battery packs.
- Production: downhole, supplying power to capacitor or battery banks.
- Located at subsea well head, using flow of sea water.
- Remote surface applications?

VibraCharge
o Where are we today?
- Still in the early stage.
- We have a working “demonstration” unit.
- We are looking for a partnership to further development of the concept.

VibraCharge Program Estimate
o Phase I-Concept Development-FND
- Lead-Time 3 Weeks
- Est. Cost $25k Go/No go
o Phase II-POC Design & Mfg
- Lead-Time 21 Weeks
- Est. Cost $180k Go/No go
o Phase III-POC Testing & Verification
- Lead-Time 3 Weeks
- Est. Cost $45k Go/No go
o Phase IV-Detail Design, Procurement, Manufacture, Assemble and Test
- Lead-Time 12 Weeks
- Est. Cost $200k Go/No go
Non-Intrusive Identification/Measurement
· We have taken unique approach to identification and measurement

· Looked outside the oil industry for existing technologies that could be adapted to oil & gas.
· Using existing PATENTED technologies:
· Licensed U.S. Department of Defense technologies
Non-Intrusive Identification/Measurement
Non-Intrusive Identification/Measurement
Non-Intrusive Identification/Measurement
o Where are we today?
- Working to develop inexpensive MPFM-Need partner(s)
- Expect to have a working “demonstration” unit soon

- Seeking partners to explore other possibilities shown on previous slide

Non-Intrusive Pressure Sensing Concept Advantages
o No protrusions through casing/tubular

o Proven technology with high reliability (no moving parts).

o Accurate/repeatable pressure measurement.

o Rugged transducer design capable of down hole environment.

o All sensing and electrical drive equipment at the surface.

o Ability to measure multiple pressures via single electric line.

o In the case of subsea wellheads no sensors or sensing cables down hole
NIPS Electro-Acoustic Transducer Design
NIPS Electro-Acoustic Transducer Design
NIPS Program Cost Estimate-Subsea Wellhead
o Phase I-Theoretical Design & Modeling
- Lead-Time 11 Weeks
- Est. Cost $40k Go/No go
o Phase II-Detail Design
- Lead-Time 8 Weeks
- Est. Cost $75k Go/No go
o Phase III-Parts Procurement, Component Assembly, and Test
- Lead-Time 10 Weeks
- Est. Cost $95k Go/No go

NIPS Program Cost Estimate-Subsea Wellhead
o Phase IV-System Assembly & Test
- Lead-Time 6 Weeks
- Est. Cost $35k
Near Well-Bore Cleaning
o Application may be sonic or ultrasonic
- Recent SPE paper discusses cleaning (SPE # 82198)
o Device can be focused; axial, radial or both
o We have the ability to design and manufacture downhole technology-sonic & ultrasonic
o Need interested partner(s)
Unsticking of Tubulars
o In concept stage
o Possible to build a device that is lowered down drillstring and clamps to the pipe in the area of the stuck tubular
o Device is actuated, reduces friction and tubular can be moved
o Need partner(s) interested in moving concept forward
Shaker Screening Systems
o Demonstrated proof-of-concept
o Possible to enhance current equipment and deliver improvements
o Need partner(s) interested in moving concept forward
o See video’s
Shaker Screening Systems
Shaker Screening Systems
Sensor Opportunities
o High-Temperature Capabilities
o Higher Sensitivity
o Durability/More Robust
o Simpler 3-D Sensor Capabilities
o No Degradation in Sensitivity
o Cost Competitive

Partnerships
o Etrema is open to many different types of partnerships/arrangements
- Engineering service contracts including development & R&D
- Joint development projects
- Joint venture/subsidiary formation
- Joint industry projects
- Open to other suggestions

Partnership for a Solution
o Identify project requirements
o Clarify problem statement
o Identify common ground
o Conceptualize potential solutions
o Outline the steps toward a solution
o Another look at common ground

Drilling Engineer Association Meeting
Presented August 21, 2003
Given by: Tim Drake
ETREMA Products, Inc.
o Subsidiary of Edge Technologies, Inc.
o Privately Held Small Business Located in Iowa State Research Park, Ames, Iowa
o Founded in 1987 as a High Tech Transfer Company
o Key Technology is TERFENOL-D, a Magnetostrictive Alloy

History of TERFENOL-D
o Discovered by the Naval Ordnance Laboratory in 1979 to enable more powerful sonar drivers
o Technology was transferred to Ames Laboratory and Iowa State University for further material characterization
o In 1987 technology transferred to ETREMA
o Commercialization began in 1995

Applications Wheel
Magnetostriction
Etrema Products Market Segments
Material Shapes
TERFENOL-D Properties
Effect of Prestress
Flexible Operating Temperature Range
Magnetostriction
Magnetostrictive Life
o Unlike PZT materials TERFENOL-D cannot be over-strained.
- A TERFENOL- D driven projector has operated more than 1012 cycles without failure or reduction in performance.
o Domain alignment is tied to crystal structure.
- Material will not ‘de-pole’ like PZT ceramics due to cyclic operation or variable loading.
o While TERFENOL-D does not produce strain above its Curie temperature , strain performance fully recovers upon cooling below the Curie temperature of 380º C.
Magnetic Circuit
DESIGN OF THE MAGNETIC CIRCUIT IS KEY TO OPTIMUM PERFORMANCE
A GOOD MAGNETIC CIRCUIT PROVIDES:
- Maximum magnetic flux in the TERFENOL-D, at minimum current
- Uniform flux density under any operating condition
MAGNETIC CIRCUIT DESIGN REQUIRES:
- Knowledge of TERFENOL-D characteristics and actuator design
- Experience
- Finite Element (FEA) Capability
Engineering Capabilities
TERFENOL-D Attributes
o High reliability
o Fast response time
o High energy density
o High energy conversion
o Broadband frequency range
o Wide temperature range

Combined Technologies
Table Top Demo

” PowerWave™
” Downhole Acoustic Stimulation
” Acoustic sources for MWD applications
” Ultrasonic transducers for in hole inspections
” Seismic devices for the borehole
” Leading Edge Measurement System (LEMS)
” Affordable multiphase measurement
” Telemetry applications as transmitter
Potential Projects of Interest to DEA Members
” VibraCharge-harnessing vibration from the drilling process to generate power.
” Non-intrusive identification of properties of drilling fluids and other fluids-Multiphase Flow Measurement
” Non-intrusive pressure sensing
” Near wellbore cleaning-including drilling fines
” Unsticking stuck tubulars for removal or advancement
” Increasing throughput and/or decreasing blinding of shaker screening systems
” Sensors-pressure & strain measurements
” Other applications open for discussion
VibraCharge
o Conversion of Vibratory energy into Electrical Power using Terfenol-D
o Utilizes the reverse magnetostriction effect of Terfenol-D.
o External vibration causes the material’s magnetic alignment to change creating a magnetic field.
o The field can be received by an inductance coil, which converts the field into an alternating electrical charge.
o This alternating electrical charge is rectified and filtered into a usable direct current.
o The electrical power developed from this device would be capable of recharging a battery pack or capacitor bank.

VibraCharge
VibraCharge
VibraCharge
o From the Coil to the Battery Pack

- A simple rectifier circuit will filter the Alternating Current field into Direct Current.

VibraCharge
VibraCharge
o Where can this technology be used in the industry?
- MWD / LWD: behind the bit, supplying power to downhole battery packs.
- Production: downhole, supplying power to capacitor or battery banks.
- Located at subsea well head, using flow of sea water.
- Remote surface applications?

VibraCharge
o Where are we today?
- Still in the early stage.
- We have a working “demonstration” unit.
- We are looking for a partnership to further development of the concept.
VibraCharge Program Estimate
o Phase I-Concept Development-FND
- Lead-Time 3 Weeks
- Est. Cost $25k Go/No go
o Phase II-POC Design & Mfg
- Lead-Time 21 Weeks
- Est. Cost $180k Go/No go
o Phase III-POC Testing & Verification
- Lead-Time 3 Weeks
- Est. Cost $45k Go/No go
o Phase IV-Detail Design, Procurement, Manufacture, Assemble and Test
- Lead-Time 12 Weeks
- Est. Cost $200k Go/No go
Non-Intrusive Identification/Measurement
· We have taken unique approach to identification and measurement

· Looked outside the oil industry for existing technologies that could be adapted to oil & gas.
· Using existing PATENTED technologies:
· Licensed U.S. Department of Defense technologies
Non-Intrusive Identification/Measurement
Non-Intrusive Identification/Measurement
Non-Intrusive Identification/Measurement
o Where are we today?
- Working to develop inexpensive MPFM-Need partner(s)
- Expect to have a working “demonstration” unit soon

- Seeking partners to explore other possibilities shown on previous slide
Non-Intrusive Pressure Sensing Concept Advantages
o No protrusions through casing/tubular

o Proven technology with high reliability (no moving parts).

o Accurate/repeatable pressure measurement.

o Rugged transducer design capable of down hole environment.

o All sensing and electrical drive equipment at the surface.

o Ability to measure multiple pressures via single electric line.

o In the case of subsea wellheads no sensors or sensing cables down hole
NIPS Electro-Acoustic Transducer Design
NIPS Electro-Acoustic Transducer Design
NIPS Program Cost Estimate-Subsea Wellhead
o Phase I-Theoretical Design & Modeling
- Lead-Time 11 Weeks
- Est. Cost $40k Go/No go
o Phase II-Detail Design
- Lead-Time 8 Weeks
- Est. Cost $75k Go/No go
o Phase III-Parts Procurement, Component Assembly, and Test
- Lead-Time 10 Weeks
- Est. Cost $95k Go/No go

NIPS Program Cost Estimate-Subsea Wellhead
o Phase IV-System Assembly & Test
- Lead-Time 6 Weeks
- Est. Cost $35k
Near Well-Bore Cleaning
o Application may be sonic or ultrasonic
- Recent SPE paper discusses cleaning (SPE # 82198)
o Device can be focused; axial, radial or both
o We have the ability to design and manufacture downhole technology-sonic & ultrasonic
o Need interested partner(s)
Unsticking of Tubulars
o In concept stage
o Possible to build a device that is lowered down drillstring and clamps to the pipe in the area of the stuck tubular
o Device is actuated, reduces friction and tubular can be moved
o Need partner(s) interested in moving concept forward
Shaker Screening Systems
o Demonstrated proof-of-concept
o Possible to enhance current equipment and deliver improvements
o Need partner(s) interested in moving concept forward
o See video’s
Shaker Screening Systems
Shaker Screening Systems
Sensor Opportunities
o High-Temperature Capabilities
o Higher Sensitivity
o Durability/More Robust
o Simpler 3-D Sensor Capabilities
o No Degradation in Sensitivity
o Cost Competitive

Partnerships
o Etrema is open to many different types of partnerships/arrangements
- Engineering service contracts including development & R&D
- Joint development projects
- Joint venture/subsidiary formation
- Joint industry projects
- Open to other suggestions

Partnership for a Solution
o Identify project requirements
o Clarify problem statement
o Identify common ground
o Conceptualize potential solutions
o Outline the steps toward a solution
o Another look at common ground

DI-107 – Possible Impact of “POSGRIP™ technology” in the Oil Field

Ben van Bilderbeek – Plexus International (713) 686-5267

bvb@posgrip.com
www.posgrip.com

Presented 8/21/03

DI-108 – HeviPac Weight Transfer Assembly

Bruce Taylor of STRATALOC.Technology, Inc.
281-288-1770
btaylor@strataloc.com

Presented 11/20/03

DI-109 – WellBore stability and data acquisition in fractured formations

Date Submitted: 2-19-04

Title: Wellbore Stability and data Acquisition in Fractured Formations  pdf

Submitted by: SINTEF Petroleum Research, discussed the proposed project.2

Principal Investigator(s): Johan Tronvoll

Business Impact: Lack of reliable data on the reservoir rocks is a major problem for reservoir management. The problem is increasing, as there is a trend in some companies towards cutting costs by skipping coring, while an increasing number of advanced simulation tools on the other hand require more data. We here propose to utilize information about reservoir properties obtained as accompanying data during regular drilling operations. No special equipment is required except for commercially available flow meters. Such in situ measurements also allow for determination of properties that are not available from core measurements.

DI-110 – Deepwater Improved Coring Efficiency with Real-time Data Collection

Tom Fate, ChevronTexaco

Presented 2/19/04

DI-111 – Drilling and Completion Gaps for HP HT Wells in Deep Water

Tom Williams, Triton Engineering Services, 281 276 6673

Presented 11/18/04

DI-112 – Proposal to the National Science Foundation for an Engineering Research Center for Extreme Environment Electronics (CE3)

The Engineering Research  Center for Extreme Environment Electronics (CE3)

A Proposal

R, Wayne Johnson

334-844-1880

johnson@eng.auburn.edu

The vision of CE3 is to “develop robust sensing, computing and actuation systems to revolutionize energy exploration and production, transportation and scientific discovery.” Electronics have dramatically changed the way we live our lives, conduct business, communicate, and educate. Visions of the future foretell of ubiquitous computing and sensing. However, the environments in which electronics can reliably operate are at present limited. For example, in consumer applications, typical operating temperatures range from -40oC to +85oC and the ‘wider’ military standard is still just -55oC to +125oC. Using electronics in high radiation, corrosive chemical or high vibration environments also places severe constraints on system complexity and reduces overall reliability. CE3 will extend the boundaries of electronics, enabling electronics to be used reliably over long periods of time in extreme environments. Target system applications include oil and gas exploration and production, transportation (automotive, air craft, etc.) and scientific discovery (space exploration, volcano and earthquake research, etc.)

The member universities are: Auburn University – Lead; Arizona State University, Purdue University, University of Maryland and Vanderbilt University – Core Partners; and Georgia Institute of Technology, Prairie View A&M, University of Arkansas and University of Tennessee – Affiliate Partners. These universities are leaders in extreme environment electronics research and development, addressing the entire research spectrum from systems engineering to devices, packaging and design down to basic physics and materials science.

Funding: If selected as an Engineering Research Center by the National Science Foundation, NSF will provide $3M in year 1, $3.25M in year 2, $3.5M in year 3 and $4M in years 4 and 5. The Center can be renewed at comparable funding levels for 5 additional years. Industrial participation is fundamental to the Center. CE3 will have industrial and governmental fee-based memberships. These members will guide the research activities of the Center and share in the technologies developed. The NSF funding provides significant leverage for the industrial monies. Collaboration between different industry segments with similar requirements provides further leveraging. The membership fee structure and common membership agreement terms will be developed in collaboration with the prospective Center members.

The research structure of CE3 is shown in the following Strategic Framework. Working with industry, system requirements are determined and fed down through the Enabling Technologies and Fundamental Knowledge Levels resulting in solutions and technology deliverables that can be demonstrated in the three Test Beds and transfer to the Industrial Affiliates (members).

DI-113 – Environmentally Friendly Drilling Systems

DEA Discussion Item Summary

DI-113

Date Submitted: July 14, 2005
Title: Environmentally Friendly Drilling Systems
Submitted by: Noble Corporation/Maurer Tehnology Inc. 13135 South Dairy Ashford, Suite 800 Sugar Land, TX 77478 281 276 6713 and GPRI, Texas A&M College Station, TX 979 845 2274
Principal Investigator(s): Mr. Thomas E. Williams twilliams@noblecorp.com and Mr. Dave Burnett, Director of Technology GPRI d-burnett@spindletop.tamu.edu
Business Impact: Provide industry with a system that will allow access to environmentally sensitive areas, some of which are currently off-limits or not economic to drill or produce with existing technologies and methods.
Technical Objectives: To incorporate current and emerging technologies into a clean drilling system with no or very limited environmental impact on land, water, and air; Identify low impact transportation technologies to and from well sites; To test and demonstrate a viable drilling system that could be used for the exploration and exploitation of natural gas primarily in the lower 48 states; and
Methodology: To create a joint venture of industry, academic and government partners to assess methods to mitigate individual costs and develop an industry acceptance of an entire viable system to accomplish this task.
Deliverables: Engineering, testing and field demonstration. a JIP proposal is being developed and will be provided.
Comments: Previously Noble and Anadarko Petroleum Company cooperated with the Department of Energy on an Alaska North Slope project to drill in the Arctic with a pad free, road free technology. Details are contained in a paper by Anadarko (SPE 87140). A modular elevated platform was deployed on the tundra in the winter, then used to drill shallow wells for hydrate core collection. Access to the tundra site was through the use of Rolligon vehicles.

DI-114 – Development of an Advanced High Temperature High Pressure Downhole Power Supply

DEA Discussion Item Summary

DI-114

Date Submitted: 7/12/2005

Title: Development of an Advanced High Temperature High Pressure Downhole Power Supply

Submitted by: Dexter Magnetic Technologies 1050 Morse Ave. Elk Grove Village, IL 60007 (847) 956-1140

Principal Investigator(s): Tim Price (Dexter Magnetic Technologies) tprice@dextermag.com John Cohen (Noble Downhole Technology) jcohen@noblecorp.com

Business Impact: The Advanced High Temperature Turbine Generator (HTTG) will have a significant impact on the cost of recovering gas from deep, hot wells. Current state-of-the-art Lithium-ion batteries (LIB’s) are not suitable for hotter environments. The most practical, if not only solution to power intelligent downhole tools in HTHP environments is a HTHP Turbine Generator. In addition, even if batteries were developed for elevated temperatures, they will still be very expensive and not reusable. The proposed HTTG will provide reduced dollar-per-amp-hour costs, an important benefit for reducing drilling costs and making deep, hot reservoirs commercially viable. Much effort and funding is being spent throughout the industry developing HTHP electronics and HTHP BHA’s. Without a suitable HTHP power supply, it will be impossible to use other intelligent drilling tools and technologies currently being developed for HPHT wells. This would negatively impact the economic development of future deep gas reservoirs in the USA.

Technical Objectives: The objective of this project is to develop a downhole high-temperature turbine generator (HTTG) capable of operating at high pressures (>20,000 psi) and high temperatures (≥250°C), to power equipment such as rotary steerable tools, MWD tools, LWD tools, and other components both currently commercial and those under development. Developing the HTTG presents two challenging and mutually exclusive tasks; consequently, the development phase (Phase II) is proposed as two parts—Phases IIA and IIB—with significant schedule overlap to increase the efficiency of the development effort. In Phase IIA, an electrical generator will be constructed to operate reliably in the deep downhole environment. The generator turbine blades will convert a small amount of the hydraulic energy in the mud stream to rotary energy, which is then converted to electrical power. In Phase IIB, electronics will be developed to rectify and regulate the power produced by the generator. Special electronics and mechanical components such as pressure housings and connectors will be developed to provide clean, regulated electrical power to third-party users. The rectifier/regulator will be designed to operate in the same high-pressure high-temperature environments as the generator. In Phase III, these developments will be combined as a complete HTTG tool. Field demonstrations will then be conducted and the system commercialized.

Methodology: This project to develop a HTTG for harsh environments will build on the success of DMT’s existing turbine generator (UnderCurrent™) that is currently built for conventional temperatures and pressures. This tool uses customized turbine blades and a magnetic coupling to turn a generator that is housed in a pressure barrel. Development of the HTTG will start with development of specifications for each of the two major components to meet the project requirements. Then the existing components will be characterized on a part-by-part basis to determine which areas must be upgraded to meet the new HPHT specifications. This process will be very detailed and will identify both parts and failure modes. An efficient design and testing program will be undertaken to upgrade parts and subsystems until a working prototype HTTG is developed and tested. Finally, the HTTG will undergo field demonstration for various applications and be commercialized.

Deliverables: Deliverables will be a working and field tested Turbine Generator system to provide regulated power for HTHP application. The units will be manufactured and commercially marketed by Dexter Magnetic Technologies. Participants in the project will be offered first deliveries and preferential pricing. After initial deliveries are offered to project participants, the product will be made available industry wide.

Comments: Note: Lab flow loop testing at 20,000 psi and 250 deg. C is not currently available. Therefore, prototype units will be outfitted with a load cell and data acquisition capability so they can be run in actual HTHP drilling environments, as a non-intrusive component.

DEA-42 – Improved Casing and Riser Wear Technology

DEA-42     Improved Casing and Riser Wear Technology     Maurer Engineering

DEA-44 – Extended-Reach and Horizontal Well Technology

DEA-44     Extended-Reach and Horizontal Well Technology     Maurer Engineering

DEA-49 – WellSite Advisor Well Control Program Well Control Program

DEA-49     WellSite Advisor Well Control Program Well Control Program     Martin Milner of BAE System (Formerly Tracor), 512 929 2443,  Martin.Milner@baesystems.com

DEA-50 – Multi-Sensor PackagePhase I & II

DEA-50     Multi-Sensor PackagePhase I & II –     H.O. Mohr

DEA-51 – Subsea Blowout Control Phase III

DEA-51     Subsea Blowout Control Phase III     Subsea Well Control

DEA-54 – Program for Determination of Drill Pipe Fatigue and Inspection Intervals

DEA-54     Program for Determination of Drill Pipe Fatigue and Inspection Intervals     Enertech

DEA-57 – Spurt Loss Under Simulated Downhole Drilling Conditions

DEA-57     Spurt Loss Under Simulated Downhole Drilling Conditions     TerraTek

DEA-59 – Develop a Computer System for the Prediction of Pore Pressures and Fracture Gradients from Well Logs ware, complete end ’93

DEA-59     Develop a Computer System for the Prediction of Pore Pressures and Fracture Gradients from Well Logs ware, complete end ’93     Knowledge Systems

DEA-60 – Utilization of Baroid MUDMAN to Develop Drilling Rig Site Diagnosis and Management System

DEA-60     Utilization of Baroid MUDMAN to Develop Drilling Rig Site Diagnosis and Management System     Knowledge Systems

DEA-61 – Testing of Non-Lead/Zinc Thread Compounds Stress Engineering

DEA-61     Testing of Non-Lead/Zinc Thread Compounds     Stress Engineering

DEA-63 – Floating Vessel Blowout Control Fire Fighters

DEA-63     Floating Vessel Blowout Control Fire Fighters Neal Adams Fire Fighters

DEA-67

DEA PROJECT STATUS
Status report of an active DEA Project

DEA Project Number: 67
Project Title: Project to Develop and Evaluate Coiled-Tubing and Slim-Hole Technology
Contractor: Maurer Engineering Inc.; 2916 West T.C. Jester; Houston, TX 77018; 713/683-8227 ext.238
Email: mei@maurereng.com
World Wide Web Site: http://www.maurereng.com
Startup Date: January 1, 1999
Scope of Work: The objectives of this DEA-67 Phase III project are to pool the technical and financial resources of operators, service companies, manufacturers, and government agencies to review and report on all aspects of CT drilling, completion, production, and workover technology; update and maintain existing software; and develop new programs to overcome field application problems.
Current Status: Phase III is now completed as of December 31. DEA-67 has sponsored and delivered to Participants a broad range of CT engineering and software tools throughout three successful phases. The final deliverables for Phase III will be sent out soon. These include engineering reports and upgraded versions of project software. Two reports, “Coiled-Tubing Technology (1999-2000)” and “Slim-Hole Technology (1999-2000),” are being published. These reports present an organized summary of all the latest advances in CT and slim-hole tools, equipment, techniques, and applications. Upgraded software in the final deliverables includes CEMENT version 3, WELLCON version 3, and CTPRO version 1.1. CEMENT 3, the Wellbore Cementing Model, is very user-friendly and based on MEI’s latest platform. It includes a new input/output interface, an improved database of casing and tubulars, the ability to export directly to MS Office applications as well as a variety of other convenient features. WELLCON 3 has been completely upgraded with a new input/output interface. A sensitivity analysis window allows quick comparison of the relative differences between the four two-phase flow models. An automated output graph window has been added that dynamically illustrates the well-control process. The newest version of CTPRO has a completely upgraded interface, improved units selection, and MS Office compatibility.
Projected Completion Date: December 31, 2000
Project Cost: $3.7 million
Participants: Sponsored by Chevron; 16 Participants in Phase III
Cost per Participant: $35,000 for renewals/$50,000 for new Participants
Comments: Please contact MEI for more information.

DEA-67 – Slim-Hole Drilling and Coiled Tubing (also presented in Europe as DEA(E)-35]

DEA-67 – Slim-Hole Drilling and Coiled Tubing (also presented in Europe as DEA(E)-35]     Maurer Engineering maurer@maureng.com

DEA-68 – Titanium Drillpipe for Extended Reach Drilling

DEA-68     Titanium Drillpipe for Extended Reach Drilling     Titanium Technologies

DEA-70 Reduction of Bit Balling by Electro-Osmosis

DEA-70     Reduction of Bit Balling by Electro-Osmosis     Univ. of California at Berkeley

none

DEA-71 Phase II Proposal Summary

DEA-71 Phase II Proposal Summary

ACTIVE PROJECT STATUS
Status report of active DEA Projects

DEA Project Number: 71 Phase II
Project Title: Deep Water Drilling Research Projects
Contractor: Technology International, Inc. 2103 River Falls Drive Kingwood, TX 77339-3154
Email: radtke@kingwoodcable.com
World Wide Web Site:
Startup Date: August, 1998
Scope of Work: > Regularily updated information on worldwide industry research and development programs on deepwater drilling and other technologies available on a web site. > Will add to the number of projects already listed on the DEA and DEA(E)web sites. > Avoidance of redundant research efforts around the world. > Identification of drilling-related research and development gaps which need to be addressed. > Enhanced capability to participate in joint industry projects on drilling research efforts. > Listings which will help leverage oil and service company research dollars. > Ability to identify or solicite interest in needed drilling research and development efforts. > Visibility of DEA projects which allow for response by a non-DEA member to participate.
Current Status: The drilling research bulletin board continues to have numerous world-wide inquiries. However, the number of questions and answers is low. One reason is that when a question is posted, it goes unanswered and the interest declines. We need to add value to the project with a active panel of drilling experts willing to answer about 10 questions per month. We will ask for volunteers at the November DEA meeting.
Projected Completion Date: January 1, 2000 – renewable yearly
Project Cost: $200,000.00
Participants: Chevron, Mobil, and Gas Research Institute
Cost per Participant: $5000 – $15,000, depending on size of organization

DEA-71 – Drilling Research & Resource Assessment, also DEA(E)- 48(DRARAP)

DEA-71     Drilling Research & Resource Assessment, also DEA(E)- 48(DRARAP)     TRACOR

DEA-74 – Drilling Research & Resource Assessment, also DEA(E)- 48(DRARAP)

DEA-71     Drilling Research & Resource Assessment, also DEA(E)- 48(DRARAP)     TRACOR

DEA-74 – Drill Stem Design Inspection Standard ER Section/Failure Diagnosis. PC Software–reduce DS failures/hole cleaning

DEA-74 – Drill Stem Design Inspection Standard ER Section/Failure Diagnosis. PC Software–reduce DS failures/hole cleaning     T.H. Hill

DEA-75 – Lubricity & Sticking Properties of WBM

DEA-75     Lubricity & Sticking Properties of WBM     Shell Bellaire

DEA-77 – Radio Frequency Heating to Clean Oily Drill Cuttings

DEA-77     Radio Frequency Heating to Clean Oily Drill Cuttings     Petroleum Enviromental

DEA-78 – Cable-suspended Dwnhole Electro coring Electro-hole opening

DEA-78     Cable-suspended Dwnhole Electro coring Electro-hole opening     J.L. Ruhle & Associates

none

DEA-79 – Well Planning System Software Development

DEA-79     Well Planning System Software Development     Antelope Engineering

DEA-80 – The Use of Quantitative Risk Analysis (QRA) in Casing/Tubing Design (presented Europe DEA(E)64

DEA-80     The Use of Quantitative Risk Analysis (QRA) in Casing/Tubing Design (presented Europe DEA(E)64     Enertech Engineering

DEA-81 – Engineering Design of Cuttings Disposal by Reinjection into a Hydraulic Fracture

DEA-81     Engineering Design of Cuttings Disposal by Reinjection into a Hydraulic Fracture     TerraTek

DEA-82 – Well Control Equipment Information Base

DEA-82     Well Control Equipment Information Base     West Houston Inc.

none

DEA-85 – Catalog of Drilling and Completion Software

DEA-85     Catalog of Drilling and Completion Software     Exploservices

DEA-87 – Performance Studies of Mud Converted to Cement (S-Mix)

DEA-87     Performance Studies of Mud Converted to Cement (S-Mix)     Westport Technology

none

DEA-90 – Phase III “Drilling Plastic Shale at Great Depth – A Study to Improve Penetration Rates with Environmentally Acceptable Drilling Fluids”

Active Project Summary

DEA-90 Phase III   “Drilling Plastic Shale at Great Depth – A Study to Improve Penetration Rates with Environmentally Acceptable Drilling Fluids”

DEA Project Number: DEA-90 Phase III

Project Title: Drilling Plastic Shale at Great Depth-A Study to Improve Penetration Rates with Environmentally Acceptable Drilling Fluids

Contractor: TerraTek, Inc. 400 Wakara Way Salt Lake City, UT 84108 (801) 584-2400 Att; Alan Black

Email: ablack@terratek.com

World Wide Web Site: www.terratek.com

Startup Date: Phase III – March ’99

Scope of Work: The objectives of DEA 90 Phase III are to extend field application in the following areas; 1. Determine the effectiveness of ROP enhancers in higher density fluids, including the effects of concentration and time. 2. Determine the effectiveness of ROP enhancers in different drilling fluids. 3. Determine the application of advanced PDC bits, drilling fluids, drilling fluid additives and drilling practices to improve ROP and avoid other related problems.

Current Status: ExxonMobil joined the program since the last update – History; A kick-off (planning) meeting was held end March, 1999. A first series of drilling tests were successfully conducted with ROP enhancers and results reviewed with the participants at an August, 1999 meeting hosted by Shell in Houston. Additional tests were conducted in November and a progress meeting was held with the 5 participants on March 14, 2000 at BP Amoco’s facilities in Houston. The two companies joined the program early ‘00 (MI, Texaco) based on the successful ROP demonstrations in shale with additives. The program continued its testing program during 4Q ’00 and both the Baroid and MI additives were evaluated during drilling of shale at simulated depth conditions. One additional company ExxonMobil joined this program early ‘01, thus two additional drilling tests were planned at a progress meeting convened on February 7, 2001 at MI Drilling Fluids. We anticipated holding a progress review meeting by or on 20th September 2001 after drilling the ExxonMobil recommended tests, however these tests are now scheduled to be conducted around September 20, 2001. Additionally another operator (international) is in the process of joining DEA 90. This program has been very successful in identifying drilling performance problems in shale and the effects with certain additives.

Projected Completion Date: 4Q ’01

Project Cost: $180,000 with 6 sponsors

Participants: Shell, BP Amoco, Baroid, MI Fluids, Texaco, ExxonMobil, 7th in progress

Cost per Participant: $30,000

Comments: The program is still open for additional participants. Preliminary Phase 4 program requirements were discussed at the beginning of 2001 and that discussion will continue at the next Advisory Meeting.

DEA-90 – Drilling Plastic Shale at Great Depth-A Study to Improve Penetration Rates with Environmentally Acceptable Drilling Fluids

DEA-90     Drilling Plastic Shale at Great Depth-A Study to Improve Penetration Rates with Environmentally Acceptable Drilling Fluids     TerraTek judzis@terratek.com

ACTIVE PROJECT STATUS
The following is the status of active DEA Projects

DEA Project Number: 90
Project Title: Drilling Plastic Shale at Great Depth – A Study to Improve Penetration Rates with Environmentally Acceptable Drilling Fluids
Contractor: TerraTek, Inc. – 400 Wakara Way, Salt Lake City, Utah 84108 – (801)584-2441
Email: ablack@terratek.com
World Wide Web Site: http://www.terratek.com
Startup Date: January, 1995
Scope of Work: The DEA 90 project investigation has sought solutions to the field problem of slow penetration rates experienced with PDC bits while drilling plastic shales at great depths with water based drilling fluids. The field problem has been replicated in the laboratory by performing full-scale drilling tests with 6 1/2″ PDC bits in various shales at high borehole pressure (7500 psi). A total of 50 drilling tests have been conducted to date involving a number of drill bits, drilling fluids, and shale types. An understanding and application of critical drill bit design features and drilling fluid characteristics for a variety of shales relative to improved penetration rates has been achieved.
Current Status: Completed Phase 1. Phase 2 active and nearly complete. Phase 3 suggested by participants.
Projected Completion Date: March, 1998
Project Cost: Phase 1 $333,000 – Phase 2 $315,000
Participants: BP, Chevron, Dowell, Exxon, Hughes Christensen, Hycalog, Security DBS, Shell, Smith Giodiamond, Statoil
Cost per Participant: Phase 2 $30,000/original participant – Phase 1 and 2 $45,000/new participant
Comments: Seeking additional participation.

DEA-91 – Comparison of API and GOST Standards

DEA-91     Comparison of API and GOST Standards     Jay Simpson of O’Brien-Goins-Simpson and Assoc.– ogsh@aol.com

none

DEA-97 – Coiled Tubing Weld Fatigue

DEA-97     Coiled Tubing Weld Fatigue     CTES, L.C.

DEA-99 – Analysis of Casing Damage Induced by Reservoir Compaction

DEA-99     Analysis of Casing Damage Induced by Reservoir Compaction     Terralog

DEA-100 – Drill String Safety Valve

DEA-100     Drill String Safety Valve     Mobil

ACTIVE PROJECT STATUS
Status report of active DEA Projects

DEA Project Number: DEA-100

Project Title: New Generation Drill String Safety Valve

Contractor: Mobil E&P Technical Center P.O. Box 650232, Dallas, TX 75265 Contact: Brian Tarr 214-951-2945

Email: batarr@dal.mobil.com

Startup Date: Sept. 1995

Scope of Work: Identify and test 3 new generation kelly valves. Testing program to be conducted according to revised spec. being developed by API (to replace Spec. 7, Section 2). Valves for testing supplied by Hi-Kalibre (Edmonton, Canada), ITAG (Celle, Germany) and M & M International (New Iberia, LA). Testing conducted at Clausthal Technical University, Germany.

Current Status: Completed testing of third manufacturers valve design in Jan. This essentially completes the testing project. Test results from Hi-Kalibre, ITAG and M & M International will be presented at IADC/SPE Drilling Conf. March 1998 and in final GRI report. The industry now has at least one design that fully meets all the proposed new API spec. for Class 2 valves suitable for stripping into a well.

Projected Completion Date: March 1998

Project Cost: $130,000

Participants: Mobil, GRI, Tesco, Hi-Kalibre, ITAG, M & M International

Cost per Participant: Varies

Comments: Effort to create revised API standard for kelly valves and stabbing valves ongoing. Task group to submit revised spec. to sub-committee by the end of 1997.

Phase II

Active Project Summary

DEA-101 Phase II
“Underbalanced Drilling and Completion Technology”

DEA Project Number: 101
Project Title: Underbalanced Drilling and Completion Technology
Contractor: Maurer Technology Inc.; 2916 West T.C. Jester; Houston, TX 77018; 713/683-8227 ext.238
Email: mti@maurertechnology.com
World Wide Web Site: http://www.maurertechnology.com
Startup Date: September 1, 1999
Scope of Work: Underbalanced drilling and completion technology has undergone a tremendous growth in the 1990s, spurred by successes in the Austin Chalk. Operators have increased drilling rates, reduced formation damage and improved productivity. Worldwide application of underbalanced techniques has increased dramatically. The DEA-101 project was undertaken to help Participants accelerate the implementation of underbalanced drilling through effective technology transfer, develop world-class software tools for advanced underbalanced operations design and assemble a detailed drilling manual for planning, drilling, and troubleshooting wells.
Current Status: A major set of project deliverables was sent to Participants on CD in April. MUDLITE version 3 was released. The transformation of the program platform to a 32-bit interface will enhance its responsiveness and enable the capabilities of MUDLITE to be expanded. A special utility Index is introduced to help users determine the liquid/gas injection rate. Four new correlations have been added to MUDLITE 3 for modeling two-phase flow. An important new feature is the ability to estimate fluid influx rates based on productivity index (PI). Additional features are being added as the project ends and Final Deliverables are being prepared. In addition to the comprehensive on-line help system, special Engineering Help has also been added for descriptions of hydraulics parameters and models, suggested values, etc. UBCOST Underbalanced Drilling Cost Comparison Model and NITRO Nitrogen Cost Analysis Model have both been completely upgraded. Version 2 of these programs includes a new input/output interface, the ability to export directly to MS Office applications, as well as other convenient features.
Projected Completion Date: August 31, 2001
Project Cost: $1.6 million
Participants: Chevron, Marathon and Texaco are sponsoring Phase II; 14 companies currently participate, with other companies considering joining as the project ends.
Cost per Participant: $40,000 for renewals/$60,000 for new Participants
Comments: Please contact MTI for more information and a complete DEA-101 proposal. Detailed information is available on MTI’s website.

DEA-101 – Underbalanced Drilling and Completion Technology

DEA-101     Underbalanced Drilling and Completion Technology     Maurer Engineering maurer@maureng.com

DEA-105 – Coiled Tubing Depth Measurement

DEA-105     Coiled Tubing Depth Measurement     CTES, L.C.

DEA-108 – Non-rotating Drill Pipe Casing Protectors

DEA-108     Non-rotating Drill Pipe Casing Protectors     Partex

none

DEA-111 – Assesment of the Data Acqusition Capabilities of Major World Tubular Mills and Processors

DEA-111     Assesment of the Data Acqusition Capabilities of Major World Tubular Mills and Processors     Oil Technology Services, Inc.

ACTIVE PROJECT STATUS
Status report of active DEA Projects

DEA Project Number: DEA-111
Project Title: Assesment of the Data Acquisition Capabilities of Major World Tubular Mills and Processors
Contractor: Oil Technology Services, Inc. 3726 Dacoma Houston, Texas 77092 713-6889494
Email: mrbill@ots-hou.com
World Wide Web Site: www.ots-hou.com
Startup Date:
Scope of Work:
Current Status: Participants met on 26 January, 1998 in Austin, Tx. Tabulated study results, based on returned questionnaires of 22 worldwide mills, were presented to the seven (7)DEA 111 participants. Phase I of this project is 80% complete. Unfinished business: Final letters have been sent to six (6) non-participating mills requesting their presence in the study. The DEA Project No. 111 Participants have formally approved a report format for distribution of the study results to the participating mills – mailing date is 1 April 1998.
Projected Completion Date: 1 April 98
Project Cost: $81,200
Participants: Arco, Shell, BP, Chevron, Mobil, BG plc, Amoco,
Cost per Participant: $11,600

DEA-113 – Drilling Gumbo Shale – A Study of Environmentally Acceptable Muds to eliminate shale hydration and related borehold problems

DEA-113     Drilling Gumbo Shale – A Study of Environmentally Acceptable Muds to eliminate shale hydration and related borehold problems     OGS Associates ogsh@aol.com

ACTIVE PROJECT STATUS
Status report of an active DEA Project

DEA Project Number: DEA-113
Project Title: Environmentally Suitable Fluids for Drilling Gumbo Shale
Contractor: OGS Laboratory, Inc. 15730 Park Row, Suite 500 Houston, Texas 77084 Phone: 281-599-1300 Fax: 281-599-1326
Email: harryd@ogslab.com
World Wide Web Site: http://www.ogslab.com
Startup Date: August, 1997
Scope of Work: The use of water-base fluids for drilling the young shales in the Gulf of Mexico has created problems which have gone unresolved for decades. These shales are termed gumbo because of the bit-balling, balling of bottom-hole assemblies, plugging of flowlines and blinding of shale shaker screens that can be observed, often leading rigsite personnel to believe that a wet, soft shale formation is being drilled. A recent core of the notorious gumbo shale in West Delta Block 109, cut using a synthetic-base mud at a depth of 4,100 ft, has shown how erroneous that conception is. The Pleistocene shale has a moisture content of only 12% and a penetrometer hardness of 99. (This can be compared to older Oligocene shale from 5,800 ft in the North Sea Central Graben which had a moisture of 15% and a penetrometer hardness of only 50.) Obviously gumbo problems result from hydration of the shale when drilled with a water-base mud. The weakening of the shale then results in high torque, drag, fill, stuck pipe and poor cementing. These problems can be avoided by use of a hydrocarbon-base mud (diesel, mineral oil, synthetic) but discharge of cuttings from such muds is prohibited within the three-mile limit and there is concern about extension of such prohibitions to other Gulf of Mexico operations. Over the years many types of water-base muds have been used with very little success in combating gumbo shale problems. The lack of success can be attributed in part to misleading results of laboratory studies exposing unconfined, unstressed specimens of weathered shale to the muds being studied. A major artifact is air in the shale pore spaces creating capillary forces that are not present when drilling water-saturated shale at depth. Now, for the first time, preserved shale core and the necessary laboratory equipment and procedures are available to determine whether or not a water-base mud will actually prevent hydration and weakening of a typical Gulf of Mexico gumbo shale. The OGS Downhole Simulation Cell (DSC) equipment developed under DEA-22 has been modified in the Gas Research Institute (GRI) project “Effects of Drilling Fluid/Shale Interactions on Borehole Stability” to permit measurement of water transport from drilling fluid into shale or from shale to drilling fluid, and to determine the resulting effect on the strength of the shale. Only solids-free drilling fluids have been tested in the GRI research. This proposed DEA-#113 project will study complete drilling muds having rheology, gel strength, and filtration control suitable for typical Gulf of Mexico drilling operations. A shale specimen will be restored to the in situ temperature, vertical stress, horizontal stress and pore pressure estimated for the shale as cored. The shale will then be drilled with the mud to be studied. Each DSC test will measure the rate of water transport into or out of the shale. At the end of the exposure period the borehole pressure will be reduced incrementally to observe for borehole failure and obtain a measure of effect of the mud on the relative stability of the shale. Upon removal from the DSC the shale specimen will be photographed and examined as to moisture, penetrometer hardness, borehole condition and type of failure, if any. Module 1 of the proposed project will include tests of certain muds to permit correlation with field performance. A DSC test will be made of a synthetic-base mud representative of that used to obtain the core and now being used successfully for drilling. Another reference system will be a potassium hydroxide/lime mud representative of water-base systems previously used when experiencing gumbo problems. Each sponsoring company will have the option of selecting a mud system to be tested as part of Module 1. It is anticipated that these selections will include many of the newer water-base muds (such as polyglycol, terpene, formate, silicate and methyl glucoside systems) that have been proposed for combating shale problems in the Gulf of Mexico. Module 2 will be based on the results of Module 1. Mud systems found to prevent water entry and weakening of the shale will be tested further to investigate operating limits and optimize cost/performance. The test selection will be made by a group composed of a representative of each Sponsor. The deliverables will give a performance comparison of the candidate mud systems under the best simulation of downhole conditions available to the Industry. Guidelines will also be provided for formulation and maintenance of successful systems to obtain optimum cost/performance.  For additional information, please contact either Jay P. Simpson, O’Brien-Goins-Simpson & Associates, Inc., Telephone 713-2760-1192 Fax 713-270-4105 or Harry L. Dearing, OGS Laboratory Telephone 713-266-3173 Fax 713-266-6491.
Current Status: The final report for Phase I of DEA-113 has been sent to the Participants’ Representatives. The packet included a bound copy of the DEA-113 report as well as well as a bound copy of the related Gas Research Institute report. A final review meeting for Phase I of DEA 113 has been scheduled for Tuesday August 21 at 9AM at the Houston Engineering and Scientific Society (HESS), 5430 Westheimer, Houston, TX. The meeting will provide a summary review of the test results and a discussion of additional studies that could be conducted in a Phase 2 extension of DEA-113.
Projected Completion Date: August 2001
Project Cost: $455,000
Participants: Amoco Production Company, Arco E&P Technology, Baker Hughes Inteq, Baroid Drilling Fluids, Chevron Petroleum Technology, Exxon Production Research Company, Gas Reserch Institute, M-I Drilling Fluids, L.L.C., Mobil E&P Technology, Schlumberger Technology Corporation, Shell E&P Technology, Texaco E&P Technology, Unocal Technical & Operations Support, Newpark Drilling Fluids, PQ Corporation.
Cost per Participant: $35,000
Comments: Additional sponsors could result in extension of the scope of the work and the time for completion.

DEA-119 – A Proposal to Develop an Improved Methodology for Pre-Drill Pore Pressure and Fracture Gradient Prediction for Deep Water Wells

DEA-119     A Proposal to Develop an Improved Methodology for Pre-Drill Pore Pressure and Fracture Gradient Prediction for Deep Water Wells     Knowledge Systems Inc. webster@knowsys.com

DEA PROJECT STATUS
Status report of a DEA Project

DEA Project Number: 119
Project Title: A Project to Develop Improved Methodology for Pre-Drill Pore Pressure Prediction in Deepwater Wells
Contractor: Knowledge Systems, Inc. 11104 West Airport Blvd. #215 Stafford, Texas 77477 (281) 879-1400
Email: sales@knowsys.com
World Wide Web Site: www.knowsys.com
Startup Date: January 1999
Scope of Work: The DEA 119 Project to Develop an Improved Methodology for Pre-Drill Pore Pressure and Fracture Gradient Prediction for Deep Water Wells began in early 1999 and the first phase was completed in April 2001. The project centered around the collection of data for more than 100 wells in the deep water Gulf of Mexico and the utilization of that data to develop and test new and improved models and methods. There have been a number of significant tasks completed in the course of the project.
Current Status: Phase One ended April 27, 2001. Phase II proposal is being finalized. Phase II is scheduled to begin August 2001.

******************************************************************

New Proposal Summary

DEA-119
“Develop an Improved Methodology for Pre-Drill Pore Pressure Prediction for Deep Water Wells”

Date Submitted: January 23, 1998

Technical Area: Exploration

Sponsor: To be Determined

Title: Develop an Improved Methodology for Pre-Drill Pore Pressure Prediction for Deep Water Wells

Submitted by: Knowledge Systems, Inc. PO Box 1279 Stafford, Texas 77497-1279 Phone 281-879-1400; FAX 281-879-1499; Email: sales@knowsys.com

Principal Investigator(s): James W. Bridges, bridges@knowsys.com Steve Hobart, hobart@knowsys.com Don Beaumont, beaumont@knowsys.com

Business Impact:
Improve accuracy of pore pressure prediction for:

* more efficient well planning
* improved drilling efficiency and safety
* reduce casing related costs
* reduced dependence on contingency casing designs
* optimize hole sizes for maximum production

Technical Objectives:

1. Analyze a number of deep water wells with all available data to include pre drill seismic, log data, mud logging data, etc. to determine actual PP vs predicted PP.
2. Develop an improved methodology for PP prediction for deep water wells.
3. Document methodology in a Recommended Practice Manual
4. Provide a Training Course for Participant Personnel

Methodology:

1. Current industry practice will be reviewed and documented.
2. Each participant will contribute data for 1 to 4 wells under a secrecy agreement that data will not be disclosed to other participants without written permission and will be used only for general PP conclusions.
3. Each well will be analyzed in detail with all available data to determine actual PP and PP mechanism. Various PP models will be utilized in the analysis to determine relative effectiveness.
4. Results will be tabulated and summarized.
5. Recommended practice will be produced.
6. Results will be presented to participants in a series of one day workshops.
7. A training course curriculum will be developed and an initial training course will be held at one site for each participant company

Deliverables:

1. Detailed report of generalized results from analysis.
2. Manual of Recommended Practice
3. Training Course Curriculum
4. Training Course for Participant’s Staff at one location. Additional locations at cost.

Startup Date: May 1, 1998

Project Duration: Six to Twelve Months depending on no. of participants and wells

Project Cost: $140,000 (4 participants min) to $700,000. (20 participants)

Cost per Participant: $35,000.00

Comments: Knowledge Systems has performed pre -drill prediction as well as while drilling analysis for a number of deep water wells in the GOM, West Africa and North Sea.

DEA-120 – Underbalanced Completions Manual (UBC)

DEA-120     Underbalanced Completions Manual (UBC)     Gas Research Institute

DEA PROJECT STATUS
Status report of a DEA Project

DEA Project Number: 120
Project Title: Underbalanced Completions Project
Contractor: Gas Research Institute 8600 West Bryn Mawr Chicago, IL 60631-3562
Email: mwweiss@gri.org
World Wide Web Site: www.gri.org
Startup Date: 8/1/98
Scope of Work: This will be a compilation and description of underbalanced completions techniques currently available. In addition to a description of underbalanced completions operations, guidelines and background information will be provided to allow an operator to identify, evaluate and select and plan underbalanced completion and intervention candidates. Case histories will supplement this. This material, including the guidelines will be presented in a Manual and a short course.
Current Status: Preparation of all of the planned chapters in the Manual is in progress, with funding from Halliburton and GRI. The first two chapters are 95% complete, the third and fourth chapters are 80% complete and the other chapters are approximately 25% completed. Signa Engineering has recently become involved, along with TerraTek, to write chapters on relevant operational issues. Participants are still being sought, as is input from industry.
Projected Completion Date: 7/1/00
Project Cost: $585,000
Participants: Halliburton (beyond GRI funding)
Cost per Participant: $38,000
Comments: GRI continues to solicit participation. GRI further solicits contributions of technical information for the Manual. Participation and providing technical information provides an ideal opportunity for ensuring incorporation of newer technology and products in a comprehensive package that will be accessed by a large industrial and academic audience.

**************************************************************************

New Proposal Summary

DEA-120
“Underbalanced Completions Manual (UBC)”

Date Submitted: 28 January 1998

Technical Area: Production

Sponsor: ARCO

Title: Underbalanced Completions Manual (UBC)

Submitted by: Gas Research Institute 8600 West Bryn Mawr Chicago, IL 60631-3562 773 399-8100

Principal Investigator(s): Mike Weiss mweiss@gri.org

Business Impact:

* The project’s final product will be a comprehensive summary of the underbalanced completion options currently available. It will provide participants with a description of the various underbalanced completion techniques, how to evaluate candidates, design and plan an underbalanced completion.
* This manual and short course will summarize the concepts, practices, opportunities and limitations for completing a well underbalanced. The project’s aim will be to increase industry’s awareness of UBC’s opportunities.
* Underbalanced drilling is growing in usage due to its potential for improved production and the possibility of lower drilling costs. Underbalanced drilling’s popularity is evinced by the success of GRI’s Underbalanced Drilling Manual (UBD) and Maurer Engineering’s DEA-101.

Technical Objectives:

* To describe current underbalanced completion options, practices, opportunities and limitations. This information will be presented in a format, such that, drilling and production engineers can evaluate and select candidates for underbalanced completion and then design and plan those operations.
* A short course will be developed based upon the UBC Manual and held at 4 different domestic sites.
* Numerous case histories will be incorporated into manual and short course to emphasize practical aspects of various underbalanced completions techniques.

Methodology:

* Table of contents for proposed UBC has been developed and comments from numerous individuals within industry have been solicited and incorporated.
* Lead author, John McLennan with TerraTek, and other authors will survey literature for current practices and begin documentation.
* Other authors include: Richard Wyman TerraTek, Ralph Veatch Software Enterprises, William Allen TerraTek, Stephen Wilson BP Exploration’s Production Operations Branch, Dan Betczewski Bissett Resource Consultants and Tod Wilson Bissett Resource Consultants.
* First draft will be send to participants for review, comments will be edited and incorporated into final manual.
* Short course development will begin after completion of first draft.
* Final manual completed and short courses begun.
* UBC and short course notes transcribed onto CDROM.

Deliverables:

* An Underbalanced Completions Manual that’ll describe the various underbalanced completions techniques: how to evaluate, select, design and plan.
* Four 2 day short courses.
* A CDROM containing the UBC Manual, short course and notes (presentation slides).

Startup Date: May, 1998

Project Duration: 24 months

Project Cost: $585,000

Cost per Participant: $38,000

Comments: The UBC Manual will be a follow-up to the Underbalanced Drilling Manual which was written by TerraTek, funded by GRI. Where the UBD Manual ends, the UBC will begin; how to complete a well that’s been drilled underbalanced.

DEA-130 – Modernization of Tubular Collapse Performance Properties

DEA-130     Modernization of Tubular Collapse Performance Properties     Tom Asbill of Stress Engineering – tom.asbill@stress.com

DEA Project Summary

DEA-130
“Modernization of Tubular Collapse Performance Properties”

Startup Date: October 1999
Scope of Work: Collapse testing and data reduction of tubing and casing

Contractor: Stress Engineering, 13800 Westfair, Houston TX 77041, 281-955-2900

Email Contact: tom.asbill@stress.com
World Wide Web Site: http://www.stress.com/

Current Status: Complete

Projected Completion Date: October 2002
Total Project Cost: $420,000
Participants: 25 total

Cost per Participant: $22,500 operators and $7,500 pipe manufacturers

__________________________________________________________________________

Date of Update: 8/12/02
DEA Project Number: 130
Project Title: Modernization of Tubular Collaspe Performance Properties
Contractor: Stress Engineering 13800 Westfair Houston TX 77401 281-955-2900
Email: tom.asbill@stress.com
World Wide Web Site: www.stress.com
Startup Date: Summer 2000
Scope of Work: Detailed selection, measuring and collapse testing of OCTG pipe.
Current Status: All testing is complete. Final report is being prepared and should be issued in September 2002.
Projected Completion Date: September 2002
Project Cost: 420,000
Participants: Total of 22 participants.
Cost per Participant: 22,500 for users and agencies, 7,500 for manufacturers.
Comments:

***************************************************************************************

DEA Project Number: 130
Project Title: MODERNIZATION OF TUBULAR COLALPSE PERFORMANCE PROPERTIES
Contractor: STRESS ENGINEERING SERVICES 13800 WESTFAIR EAST DR. HOUSTON TX 77041 281-955-2900
Email: tom.asbill@stress.com
World Wide Web Site: www.stresseng.com
Startup Date: 1/15/00
Scope of Work: To provide collapse test data for today’s OCTG pipe and mill production information.
Current Status: Presentations by the participating pipe manufacturers is complete. Mill visits to select test samples is underway. Pipe collapse testing starts in November.
Projected Completion Date: Approx. 4/1/01
Project Cost: $420,000
Participants: API, BP, Burlington Resources, Chevron, HSE, MMS, Pemex, REW-DEA, Shell E&P, Texaco, Totalfina, Uocal, plus 11 pipe manufacturers
Cost per Participant: $22,500/OpCo & $7,500 per manufacturer

************************************************************************

New Proposal Summary

DEA-130
“Modernization of Tubular Collapse Performance Properties”

Date Submitted: February 9, 1999
Technical Area: ExplorationProduction
Sponsor: ARCO Technology and Operations Services
Title: Modernization of Tubular Collapse Performance Properties
Submitted by: Mike Payne ARCO 2300 West Plano Parkway Plano, Texas 75075 972-509-6495 972-509-3280 (Fax)
Principal Investigator(s): Tom Asbill Stress Engineering Services wta@hou.stress.com
Business Impact: Improving the accuracy of casing collapse performance properties provides a mechanism for substantially reducing tubular costs. Margins of actual collapse performance vs. API ratings have been found to be as high as 30-40%. Casing cost reductions on the order of 10-20% are thus easily achievable with more accurate performance properties.
Technical Objectives: Provide physical test data on industry-wide sampling of API and proprietary casing grades. Review mill production techniques for both API and proprietary grades of casing. Data will be analyzed so that participating operators can immediately reduce tubular costs. Database will also be provided to API and ISO for future standardization activity.
Methodology: Casing samples will be selected at random from selected mills world-wide as ranked by the project steering committee. Mill reviews will be conducted to document processing basis for standard and HC casing products. Physical collapse testing will be conducted on all samples. Data will be statistically analyzed using industry accepted methodologies.
Deliverables: Mill reviews for selected mills. Collapse data analysis for each mill and for the entire population. Detailed project report covering all work items. Manufacturers will receive report on their products only to ensure no proprietary information is revealed. Anonymous collapse database to be provided to API and ISO work groups.
Startup Date: June 1, 1999
Project Duration: 12 months
Project Cost: $225,000 for Base Program
Cost per Participant: $22,500 with minimum of 10 participants

DEA-132 – Use of Converted Shear Wave Data to Identify Shallow Water Hazards Prior To Drilling

DEA-132 Use of Converted Shear Wave Data to Identify Shallow Water Hazards Prior To Drilling     Gene Sparkman of ERCH — sparkman@erch.org

Project Summary

DEA-132
“Use of Converted Shear Wave Data to Identify
Shallow Water Hazards Prior To Drilling ”
************************************************

DEA Project Number: DEA-132
Project Title: Feasibility of Pre-drill Detection of Sands Likely to Exhibit Shallow Water Flows Using Multi-component Seismic Data
Contractor: John P. Castagna, University of Oklahoma / John Castagna castagna@ou.edu / Allen J. Bertagne, PGS Reservoir (U. S.), Inc. / allenj@hstn.res.pgs.com
Startup Date: September 1, 1999
Scope of Work: The occurrence of shallow water flows has been identified by the Drilling Engineering Association as one of the top five challenges being faced in deepwater drilling. A method for pre-drill delineation of sands that are close to failure, and thus likely to exhibit shallow water flows would be most advantageous in selecting optimal drilling locations and in developing cost-effective well plans.
Current Status: Three companies have joined the project and work including reprocessing the shear wave seismic data has been started. One participant is proposing to shoot a high resolution seismic survey to tie the ocean bottom cable (OBC) data lines included in the study.  Conoco is doing a concurrent study on two of the SWF sites and will make the results available to all participants.
Completion Date: January 2001
Participants: BPAmoco, Chevron, Conoco
Cost per Participant: $55,000 (Phase I)
Comments: Still seeking additional participants.

*******************************************************************************************

New Proposal Summary

DEA-132
“Feasibility of Pre-drill Detection of Sands Likely to Exhibit Shallow Water Flows
Using Multi-component Seismic Data: Proposal for a Joint Industry Project”

Date Submitted: August 2, 1999
Technical Area: Production
Sponsor: Chevron
Title: Feasibility of Pre-drill Detection of Sands Likely to Exhibit Shallow Water Flows Using Multi-component Seismic Data: Proposal for a Joint Industry Project
Submitted by: Gene Sparkman/Energy Research Clearing House/4800 Research Forest Drive, The Woodlands, TX 77381/281-363-7936 sparkman@erch.org
Principal Investigator (s): John P. Castagna, University of Oklahoma / John Castagna castagna@ou.edu / Allen J. Bertagne, PGS Reservoir (U. S.), Inc. / allenj@hstn.res.pgs.com
Business Impact: The occurrence of shallow water flows has been identified by the Drilling Engineering Association as one of the top five challenges being faced in deepwater drilling. A method for pre-drill delineation of sands that are close to failure, and thus likely to exhibit shallow water flows would be most advantageous in selecting optimal drilling locations and in developing cost-effective well plans.
Technical Objectives: It is highly likely that shallow water flow prone sands can be delineated by their anomalously high Vp/Vs ratio. We have available a high quality, deepwater multi-component seismic data set, valued at over $1,000,000, in the vicinity of known shallow water flow occurrences that PGS Reservoir, Inc. is willing to make available for the purposes of this study. We expect to be able to extract Vp/Vs profiles from these data and hope to show that these can be used to delineate sands that have a high probability to experience shallow water flows.
Methodology: 1. Investigate five locations of known shallow water flows within seismic OBC control and select two with adequate well information and multi-component seismic data quality. 2. Extract quantitative Vp/Vs profiles from the data and correlate to well information and known occurrences of shallow water flows. 3. Place the observed Vp/Vs ratios into a stratigraphic framework and geologic context. 4. Ascertain if anomalously high Vp/Vs ratios can be used to delineate sands likely to exhibit shallow water flows.
Deliverables: 1. Final report detailing integration or rock properties, Vp/Vs ratios, and other attributes extracted from the data set. Specific analysis will be emphasized toward identifying the Shallow Water Flow hazard areas. 2. Illustrations of P-wave and S-wave data will be included in the report. 3. Progress Forums will be held to discuss the data integration and results with participants. Note: Participants may license the associated digital seismic data from PGS Reservoir (U.S.), Inc. for an additional fee.
Startup Date: September 1, 1999
Project Duration: Six Months
Cost per Participant: $55,000

DEA-133 – Shallow Water Flow Database

DEA-133     Shallow Water Flow Database     Gene Sparkman of ERCH — sparkman@erch.org

New Proposal Summary

DEA-133
“Shallow Water Flow Database”

Date Submitted: 8/12/02
DEA Project Number: DEA-133
Project Title: Shallow Water Flow Database
Contractor: Energy Research Clearing House Attn: Gene Sparkman P.O. Box 9484 The Woodlands, TX 77387
Email: sparkman@erch.org
World Wide Web Site: www.erch.org
Startup Date:

Scope of Work: The Energy Research Clearing House (ERCH) with support from DeepStar has developed a “Web Enabled” shallow water flows database that incorporates the 1995 DeepStar CD-ROM database with the goal of expanding it to include all SWF occurrences in the Gulf of Mexico. This database fills a need that was a top prioritized technology gap identified in both the ERCH-DEA-AADE-MMS sponsored shallow water flows workshop in 1998 and the Pennwell sponsored workshop in 1999. The project will collect, organize, combine and enhance all SWF databases in the GOM, update data with new wells, make the data widely accessible through the Internet, be current by adding future wells, and expand to a global database. We are recently incorporated Nile Delta data into the database. This project is unique in that it was a Joint Industry Project (JIP) with DeepStar Phase V Participants participating as a group subscriber for the initial development. The initial phase developed the initial software and converted the wells from the 1995 DeepStar CD-ROM to a web accessible database. Enhancements also include adding continuous log viewing and video capabilities. Technical Information Architects (TIA) is the sub-contractor for this project. The MMS is also participating in this project by supplying data that is available for public release. This database is now available online to subscribers and for in-house demonstration purposes.

Current Status: Data including the Deepstar CD-ROM data has been uploaded into the SWF Database is online with additional well information added. Phase I is complete and support for Phase II is currently underway. The work for Phase II includes adding new wells, updating the data sheets and database components, reviewing the categorization of SWF severity, and expanding the database with wells outside of the Gulf of Mexico. The Nile Delta mapping grid has been added to the database.

Projected Completion Date: Available for annual Subscriptions
Project Cost:
Participants: Phase II, BP, BHP, MMS, Halliburton, Western Geco
Cost per Participant: $12,000 (ERCH Members $10,000)
Comments:
===========================================================================>

Date Submitted: September 15, 1999
Technical Area: Exploration & Production
Sponsor: Texaco
Title: Shallow Water Flow Database
Submitted by: Energy Research Clearing House 4800 Research Forest Drive The Woodlands, TX 77381 281-363-7927 www.erch.org
Principal Investigator(s): Roger Entralgo – roger@erch.org
Business Impact: The Drilling Engineering Association (DEA), Minerals Management Service (MMS), American Association of Drilling Engineers (AADE) and Energy Research Clearing House (ERCH) held the Shallow Water Forum in June 1998. This meeting was to identify major gaps in shallow water identification technology. A report at this meeting described an analysis of 123 Gulf of Mexico wells having shallow water flows since the phenomenon first occurred in 1985. The analysis reported that $30,600,000 had been spent preventing SWF’s and $137,000,000 had been spent remediating SWF’s. A major identified gap was an up-to-date database of shallow water flow occurrences. There are approximately 150 wells in the Gulf of Mexico that represent SWF occurrences. Individual companies have been maintaining updates by incorporating their own wells. It is important that an updated database be maintained to facilitate proper planning for future wells. This database must be complete, widely accessible and user friendly.
Technical Objectives: ·Collect, Organize, Combine, and Enhance all existing SWF databases in the Gulf of Mexico ·Update data with wells not included in existing data-base through contact with operators ·Design database to be widely accessible through the Internet ·Database will interact with existing Microsoft applications ·Continue maintenance of future wells through contact with operators ·Expand to a Global Database
Methodology: ·The database will be driven by an ARC View base map with links to defined categories. ·The information will have inter-active links to reference pre-defined categories. ·Full search capabilities of all categories will allow for easy retrieval of desired charts and information. The existing and new data will be compiled into the following categories in up-dated database management software: ·Base Map ·Protraction ·Lease ·Block ·Well ·Platform ·Operator ·Cement Record ·Data Sheet ·Daily Drill Report ·Leak-off Test ·Mud Record ·Check shot ·Logs ·Hazard Plot ·Summary ·Hazard Survey
Deliverables: ·Up-to-date Shallow Water Flows Occurrence database ·CD-ROM and Secure Internet Access ·Future Gulf of Mexico Wells added to the Database from operator contacts ·Expansion to a global database
Startup Date: October 1, 1999
Project Duration: One Year Intervals
Project Cost: Based on the scope of work
Cost per Participant: $12,000 per participant for first year ($10,000 for ERCH members)
Comments: Database Management Software: GeoSCOPE is a map-based data management system tailored to the needs of the E&P project team. It can be rapidly deployed to bring together all types of geotechnical documentation, enabling efficient use of professionals in the early phase of prospect evaluation. Key Features: ·Easy to use map-based interface to centralized archive. ·Powerful spatial, catalog and full text searching. ·Secure (SSL) Internet access to online documents. ·Users can refine and add to the archive from their workstations. ·Full administration tools, including ESRI ArcView, for system maintenance. ·Electronic archive reduces storage and reproduction costs. ·Extensible PC based solution built on Intranet technology. ·Documents are stored in industry standard formats. ·Data sets can be published to CD for easy distribution.

*******************************************************

New Proposal Summary

DEA-133
“Shallow Water Flow Database”

Date Submitted: September 15, 1999
Technical Area: Exploration & Production
Sponsor: Texaco
Title: Shallow Water Flow Database
Submitted by: Energy Research Clearing House 4800 Research Forest Drive The Woodlands, TX 77381 281-363-7927 www.erch.org
Principal Investigator(s): Roger Entralgo – roger@erch.org
Business Impact: The Drilling Engineering Association (DEA), Minerals Management Service (MMS), American Association of Drilling Engineers (AADE) and Energy Research Clearing House (ERCH) held the Shallow Water Forum in June 1998. This meeting was to identify major gaps in shallow water identification technology. A report at this meeting described an analysis of 123 Gulf of Mexico wells having shallow water flows since the phenomenon first occurred in 1985. The analysis reported that $30,600,000 had been spent preventing SWF’s and $137,000,000 had been spent remediating SWF’s. A major identified gap was an up-to-date database of shallow water flow occurrences. There are approximately 150 wells in the Gulf of Mexico that represent SWF occurrences. Individual companies have been maintaining updates by incorporating their own wells. It is important that an updated database be maintained to facilitate proper planning for future wells. This database must be complete, widely accessible and user friendly.
Technical Objectives: ·Collect, Organize, Combine, and Enhance all existing SWF databases in the Gulf of Mexico ·Update data with wells not included in existing data-base through contact with operators ·Design database to be widely accessible through the Internet ·Database will interact with existing Microsoft applications ·Continue maintenance of future wells through contact with operators ·Expand to a Global Database
Methodology: ·The database will be driven by an ARC View base map with links to defined categories. ·The information will have inter-active links to reference pre-defined categories. ·Full search capabilities of all categories will allow for easy retrieval of desired charts and information. The existing and new data will be compiled into the following categories in up-dated database management software: ·Base Map ·Protraction ·Lease ·Block ·Well ·Platform ·Operator ·Cement Record ·Data Sheet ·Daily Drill Report ·Leak-off Test ·Mud Record ·Check shot ·Logs ·Hazard Plot ·Summary ·Hazard Survey
Deliverables: ·Up-to-date Shallow Water Flows Occurrence database ·CD-ROM and Secure Internet Access ·Future Gulf of Mexico Wells added to the Database from operator contacts ·Expansion to a global database
Startup Date: October 1, 1999
Project Duration: One Year Intervals
Project Cost: Based on the scope of work
Cost per Participant: $12,000 per participant for first year ($10,000 for ERCH members)
Comments: Database Management Software: GeoSCOPE is a map-based data management system tailored to the needs of the E&P project team. It can be rapidly deployed to bring together all types of geotechnical documentation, enabling efficient use of professionals in the early phase of prospect evaluation. Key Features: ·Easy to use map-based interface to centralized archive. ·Powerful spatial, catalog and full text searching. ·Secure (SSL) Internet access to online documents. ·Users can refine and add to the archive from their workstations. ·Full administration tools, including ESRI ArcView, for system maintenance. ·Electronic archive reduces storage and reproduction costs. ·Extensible PC based solution built on Intranet technology. ·Documents are stored in industry standard formats. ·Data sets can be published to CD for easy distribution.

DEA-137 – Deepwater Riser Wear Technology

Deepwater Riser Wear Technology John Cohen at 713-683-8227 x 215 jhc@maurertechnology.com

DEA Project Summary DEA-137 “Minimizing Wear in Deepwater Risers, Flex Joints, and BOPs”

This project was conducted to develop a wear model that accurately predicts wear in deepwater risers, flex joints, and BOPs; perform riser-wear laboratory tests; stimulate the development of wear-resistant components, linings, coatings, and improved tool-joint hardmetals; observe wear in titanium, composite and aluminum risers; and develop strategies for reducing wear problems in the offshore environment. The project began in February 2001 and was completed in October 2002. A description can be found at www.maurertechnology.com and go to the JIP page.

Point of contact is John Cohen at 713-683-8227 x 215 jhc@maurertechnology.com
__________________________________________________________________

Update: 8/12/02
DEA Project Number: 137
Project Title: Minimizing Wear in Deepwater Risers, Flex Joints, and BOPs
Contractor: Tom Prosser MAURER TECHNOLOGY INC. 2916 West T.C. Jester Houston, TX 77018-7098 (713) 683-8227 ext. 260
Email: prosser@maurertechnology.com
World Wide Web Site: www.maurertechnology.com
Startup Date: January 2001
Scope of Work: Evaluate wear properties of risers. Analyze factors that affect riser system wear. Investigate riser lining and coating wear resistance. Document riser, BOP, and flex-joint field wear problems. Evaluate improved BOP and flex-joint wear properties and alternatives. Develop and test DRILLRISER riser wear model. Determine drillstring lateral loads in BOPs and flex-joints. Stimulate development of riser wear inspection tools. Investigate improved tool-joint hardmetals. Write reports.
Current Status: Held 6 quarterly meetings, the latest being July 18. The content of this meeting involved the following: SALTECH, a Canadian company, reviewed recent test results of their urethane material which showed excellent wear and related characteristics as a lining and coating product with the group. Additional tests are planned due to the great interest. West Engineering Services was engaged by DEA-137 Participants to study wear related problems observed during inspections in the Gulf of Mexico since the year 2000. This report covered over 90 inspections that yielded 7 wear events and recommended actions to avoid future wear problems. This verified the observations and recommendations generated by the DEA-137 project. Dr. Russell Hall, Consultant, discussed the direct causes of wear in the offshore riser system, where it will occur, how to recognize it, and what action is necessary to minimize or eliminate it in risers, flex-joints and associated components. Lee Chu, Programming Manager of MTI, gave an update on the completion of the DRILLRISER program. Due to lack of funds, our final meeting is scheduled to take place on October 17, 2002.
Projected Completion Date: October 31, 2002
Project Cost: $600,000 ($370,000 currently available funds)
Participants: Arnco Technology, BP International, ChevronTexaco, Dominion Expl. & Prod. Inc., ICO Tubular Services, Amorphous Technologies Intl., Minerals Management Service, Petrobras, Shell Intl. Expl. & Prod., Transocean, US Dept. of Energy-NETL
Cost per Participant: $35,000 for DEA-42 Participants and $40,000 for others

*****************************************************************************************************************

Update: 8/14/01

DEA Project Number: 137
Project Title: Minimizing Wear in Deepwater Risers, Flex Joints, and BOPs
Contractor: Maurer Technology Inc.; 2916 West T.C. Jester; Houston, TX 77018; 713/683-8227 ext.238
Email: mti@maurertechnology.com
World Wide Web Site: http://www.maurertechnology.com
Startup Date: February 1, 2001
Scope of Work: Severe wear problems in risers, flex joints and BOPs are anticipated to increase in greater water depths due to higher rig tension loads, increased riser deflections, and other factors which lead to difficulty in station-keeping of the drilling vessel over the well. Offshore operators and contractors have already encountered unexpected riser and system component failures resulting in costs ranging in excess of $3 million per well and near loss of the well. This project should significantly reduce the cost and risk of deepwater drilling by stimulating development of wear-resistant risers; improved flex joints, BOPs, and wear surface materials; and an accurate riser wear computer model. Working with an exchange of information derived from Participants, riser-system component manufacturers, contractors, operators and suppliers of materials, the tasks to be achieved include: evaluation of the wear properties of risers; analyses of factors that affect riser-system wear; investigation of the wear resistance of various linings and coatings; documentation of riser flex joint and BOP field wear problems; evaluation of improved BOP and flex joint wear properties and alternatives; development of the DRILLRISER riser-wear model; determination of drill-string lateral loads in BOPs and flex joints; stimulation of riser-wear inspection tool development; and investigation of improved tool-joint hardmetals.
Current Status: A quarterly project review meeting took place in the offices of BP on May 15. Approximately 25 Participants and guests attended. The meeting included brief updates from “E Committee” members on performance of their respective tasks. A review of meetings in Brazil on deepwater drilling and the initial wear test results on Kawasaki and Mannesmann riser materials were also presented. Kawasaki introduced the idea of alternative steels which might better perform in deepwater drilling risers. Dr. Russell Hall of MTI presented an analysis of the influence of contact pressure exerted between a rotating drill string in either riser or casing. He also introduced for consideration a standardized system for rating wear performance of various hardbanding materials. The Nautronix organization introduced their Riser Profiling System and explained the type of data it can gather and stream to the surface for processing with a program, such as our proposed DRILLRISER. Following lunch, the meeting was concluded with brief technical discussions and a proposal to meet next in August. The planned date has now been rescheduled for September 20, and MTI will announce the location.
Projected Completion Date: January 31, 2003
Project Cost: $600,000
Participants: There are currently 10 Participants
Cost per Participant: $40,000 ($35,000 for Participants in DEA-42 Phase V)
Comments: Significant interest has been generated by the initial findings of this project within the offshore industry. Please contact MTI for more information and a complete proposal.

*************************************************************************************

New Proposal Summary (Revised)

DEA-137
“Minimizing Wear in Deepwater Risers, Flex Joints, and BOPs”
Technical Area: Deepwater Drilling

Sponsor: BP

Title: Minimizing Wear in Deepwater Risers, Flex Joints and BOPs

Project Objective: To minimize or avoid the economic and environmental impact of drilling riser, flex joint and BOP damage or failures which are caused by wear.

Benefits To The Industry: Severe wear problems in risers, flex joints and BOPs are anticipated to increase in greater water depths due to higher rig tension loads, increased riser deflections, and other factors which lead to difficulty in station keeping of the drilling vessel over the well. Offshore operators and contractors have already encountered unexpected riser and system component failures resulting in costs ranging in excess of $3 million per well and near loss of the well.

This project should significantly reduce the cost and risk of deepwater drilling by stimulating development of wear-resistant, and possibly lined, risers; improved flex joints, BOPs, and wear surface materials; and an accurate riser wear computer model.

Technical Tasks: Working with an exchange of information derived from Participants, riser system component manufacturers, contractors, operators and suppliers of materials, the tasks to be achieved include: evaluations of the wear properties of risers; analyses of factors that affect riser system wear; investigation of the wear resistance of various linings and coatings; documentation of riser flex joint and BOP field wear problems; evaluation of improved BOP and Flex Joint wear properties and alternatives; development of DRILLRISER riser wear model; determination of drill string lateral, loads in BOPs and Flex Joints; stimulation of riser wear inspection tool development; and investigation of improved tool joint hardmetals.

Deliverables: Technical and quarterly reports; DRILLRISER riser wear model; software User’s Manual.

Start-up Date: Anticipated October 19, 2000, but funding may delay to December 15, 2000

Project Duration: 24 Months

Project Cost: $600,000

Cost Per Participant: $40,000/ $35,000 for former DEA 42 Phase V members

Financial Terms Available: Payment can be made on a monthly, quarterly, semi-annual, annual, or a total one-time payment basis. To accommodate inclusion in your company budget for the years 2000 through 2002, an agreed Letter of Intent to participate will be accepted.

Questions? Please contact:  Tom Prosser: e-mail, prosser@maurereng.com, or Telephone: 713-683-8227, ext. 260

DEA-139 “Advanced Wellbore Stability Model (WELLSTAB-PLUS)”

Advanced Wellbore Stability Model (Wellstab-Plus) Bill Maurer Maurer Engineering — maurer@maurertechnology.com

Date Submitted: January 24, 2000
Technical Area: Exploration
Sponsor: Marathon
Title: Advanced Wellbore Stability Model (WELLSTAB-PLUS)
Submitted by: Maurer Engineering Inc.-2916 West T.C. Jester; Houston, TX 77018-713-683-8227
Principal Investigator (s): Dr. William C. Maurer- maurer@maurereng.com
Business Impact: Several companies state that borehole stability problems currently cost the drilling industry in excess of $500 million per year. A means of implementing the state of the art knowledge in a consistent and systematic manner can reduce these cost by ten to hundreds of millions of dollars to Participants over the next few years.
Technical Objectives: The objectives of this project are 1)develop a wellbore stability model that handles chemical as well as mechanical considerations in stability problems, 2)equip the operating engineer with a tool that allows analysis of a particular operation in light of hundreds of man-years of cumulative, but difficult to assimilate knowledge about the subject in a quick and easy to use methodology, and 3)provide a consistent baseline from which to evaluate drilling operations worldwide.
Methodology: The WELLSTAB-PLUS model will use algorithms and concepts developed by world-renound experts to accurately calculate wellbore stability in shale and other rocks. A goal of this project is to add expert systems and help screens to the existing WELLSTAB model so that this model can be used by drilling engineers to solve field wellbore problems in all areas of the world.
Deliverables: The deliverables from this project will include the user-friendly WELLSTAB-PLUS computer model, technical reports summarizing all work done on the project, and workshops where project Participants can exchange technical information on the latest wellbore stability developments and field applications.
Startup Date: May 1, 2000
Project Duration: 24 months
Project Cost: $500,000
Cost per Participant: $25,000 for DEA 44V members and $35,000 for all other participants.,
Comments: A major goal of this project is to have a large number of service companies and operators participate in field verification of WELLSTAB-PLUS. This will be the first time such a large-scale effort for field verification of a model is undertaken and should lead to significantly improved models.

DEA-146 – JIP to Develop Hollow Sphere Dual-Gradient Drilling System

DEA Project Summary

DEA-146 – “JIP to Develop Hollow Sphere Dual-Gradient Drilling System”

DEA Project Number: DEA- 146 ———–DE-AC26-02NT41641

Project Title: JIP to Develop Hollow Sphere Dual Gradient Drilling System

Startup Date: November 2001

Scope of Work: Study the feasibility of a hollow sphere dual-gradient drilling system

Contractor:
MAURER TECHNOLOGY INC./2916 West T.C. Jester, Houston, TX 77018-7098
(713) 683-8227 ext. 208

Email Contact: maurer@maurertechnology.com

World Wide Web Site: www.maurertechnology.com

Current Status: Completed

Projected Completion Date: November 1, 2002

Total Project Cost: $1.6 million

Participants: 8


DEA Project Number: 146

Project Title: JIP to Develop Hollow Sphere Dual-Gradient Drilling System

Contractor: William C. Maurer, Ph.D. Maurer Technology Inc. 2916 West T.C. Jester Houston, TX 77018-7098 (713) 683-8227 ext. 208

Email: maurer@maurertechnology.com

World Wide Web Site: www.maurertechnology.com

Startup Date: October 1, 2001

Scope of Work: Phase I is to determine the feasibility of developing a dual-gradient drilling (DGD) system that utilizes lightweight hollow spheres instead of seafloor pumps to reduce the density of the mud in risers.

Current Status: This $1.8 million DEA-146 Phase I project was initiated on October 1, 2001, with nine Participants ($200,000 each) and will end on October 1, 2002. This Phase I project has made excellent progress on the possible use of lightweight hollow spheres instead of seafloor pumps to reduce the density of mud in risers. This includes the development of large lightweight particles that can be easily screened out of the drilling mud, methods of pumping and handling these spheres, and on handling kicks with this DGD system. Phase II plans are being formulated to test the system on a shallow land well and then on an offshore well, possibly on a Petrobras rig in Brazil. The work to date shows that this low cost DGD system may be applicable in water depths greater than 2,000 ft due to its simplicity and low cost.

Projected Completion Date: October 1, 2002

Project Cost: $1.8 million

Participants: 3M, Balmoral Group, Int’l, Halliburton, ExxonMobil, National Oilwell, Noble Corporation, Petrobras, Shell, Varco

Cost per Participant: $200,000 each

Comments:

DEA-154 – DGS Technology Dual Gradient Services

Project Summary

DEA-154 “DGS Technology”

Date Submitted: 10/23/03

Technical Area: ExplorationProduction

Sponsor: Unocal

Title: Dual Gradient Drilling

Submitted by: Dual Gradient Services LLC / 713-964-7735/ 2800 Post Oak Blvd / Suite 5220 / Houston / TX / 77056 713-964-7735 / ldb@dgservices.net

Principal Investigator(s): Luc de Boer – ldb@dgservices.net / Curtis Huff – curtis.huff@freebirdpartners.com

Business Impact:

DGS has developed a new process that can be utilized on existing deepwater drilling ships and rigs to reduce the effect hydrostatic pressure in deepwater wells. The DGS system does not require complex subsea pumping systems or major modifications to drilling procedures and rigs. Initial analysis indicates around 20 deepwater rigs could be used for the system without any material or costly modifications. The process involves the injection into the annulus of a light-weight fluid at or below the seabed in a manner that is designed to reduce the weight of the fluid in the riser to 9-9.5ppg. DGS is currently conducting a series of tests on the separation process used in the system to identify and design the most appropriate drilling fluids and equipment to be used for the separation process. The system is particularly suited for wells in water depths of 5,000 feet or deeper and has significant benefits for wells in water depths over 3,000ft. Estimated cost savings using the DGS system up to $12 million a well depending on depth. Benefits include: ? Reduced Number of Casing Strings (Average 3 in 6,000ft WD) ? Slimmer Well Profile (Less Steel and Cement) ? Reduced Rig Time ? Reduced Mud Loss While Drilling and Running Casing

Technical Objectives:

1. Identify exploration and development projects within the industry where implementing the DGS technology can add significant benefits
2. Identify specific drilling units that can incorporate the DGS technology with minor modifications and define the modifications, if any, that need to be done and the costs associated with the modifications. The assistance of the DEA is not being requested for the technical aspects of the system or the design or manufacture of the system, all of which are currently being funded privately.

Methodology: From participants collect and study specific field data:
1. On pore pressure and fracture gradient profiles,
2. Well design and final well cost, and 3. Non-productive times while drilling and testing. DGS will also be asking each participant to provide a technical liaison to assist in the well design and to coordinate within their organization information that may be desired.

Deliverables: Identify and design up to ten prospect (exploration and development) wells of the various participants that could be drilled using dual gradient drilling and the DGS system. For each well, The well design would include: 1. Casing Seats and Casing Design 2. Time Line 3. Well cost with and without the DGS system

Startup Date: Jan 15 2004

Project Duration: six month

Project Cost: $250,000.- 300,000

Cost per Participant: 5-6 participants / $50,000 each

Comments:

DEA-150 – Diminished Drillpipe Capacity Due to Slip Crushing

DEA-150 – “Diminished Drillpipe Capacity Due to Slip Crushing ”

Date of Update: August 8, 2003

BP, Varco, Global Santa Fe, Grant Prideco, and Access Tools are definite participants. Candidates who have demonstrated some interest include: Chevron-Texaco, Conoco-Phillips, and Weatherford. The JIP proposal and presentation can be found at www.mohreng.com/Pages/jip.html .

Thank you for the continued interest.

Date of Update: November 19, 2002

DEA Project Number: DEA 150
Project Title: Diminished Drillpipe Capacity Due to Slip Crushing

Startup Date: To be determined

Scope of Work:
To determine the extent of damage on drill pipe used as
landing strings for loads exceeding 1MM pounds.
Is the damage significant? If significant, how can
the risks of creating or using damaged drillpipe be mitigated.

Contractor: Mohr Engineering and Testing

Email Contact: ken.malloy@mohreng.com
World Wide Web Site: www.mohreng.com

Current Status: Acquiring participants

Projected Completion Date:

Total Project Cost: $150,000 Phase 1
Participants: BP, Grant Prideco (materials), Global Santa Fe (materials),
Access (materials), Varco (materials)

Cost per Participant: $30,000
Additional Comments: Seeking 4 additional operators to support this Phase.

Hess Corporation

Unocal Corporation

The Williams Companies

Total Fina Elf

Company

Total Fina Elf
2 place de la Coupole
La Défense 6
92400 Courbevoie
France
Tél : (33) 1 47 44 45 46
Fax : (33) 1 47 44 78 78

http://www.totalfinaelf.com

Representative

BERNARD AVIGNON
Elf Aquitaine Production
CSTJF
Avenue Larribau
64018-PAU-Cedex FRANCE
Tele: 011 33 5 59 83 6613
Fax: 011 33 5 59 83 4840


Alternative

JEAN PIERRE HUREL
Elf Exploration, Inc.
1000 Louisiana Street
Suite 3800
Houston, TX 77002-5091
Tele: (713) 739-2280
Fax: (713) 739-2109

Shell E & P Technology

Company

Shell E & P Technology
Applications & Research
(SEPTAR) – Wells Cluster
Bellaire Technology Center -
BTC 140, 3737 Bellaire Blvd.,
Houston, TX 77025 U.S.A.

Representative

JIM NICHOLSON
Shell E & P Technology
Applications & Research
(SEPTAR) – Wells Cluster
Bellaire Technology Center -
BTC 140, 3737 Bellaire Blvd.,
Houston, TX 77025 U.S.A.
Tele: (713) 245-7456
Fax: (713) 245-7071

Alternative

BRIAN TARR
Shell Deepwater Systems
Well Delivery Unit
WCK 1211, 200 North Dairy Ashford,
Houston, TX 77079-1197 U.S.A.
Tele: (281) 544-5275
Fax: (281) 544-2474

Shell Canada Limited

Company

Shell Canada Limited
400 – 4th Avenue S.W.
P. O. Box 100, Station M
Calgary, Alberta
CANADA T2P 2H5

Representative

RUSS NELSON
Advisor Drilling and Production
Shell Canada Limited
P. O. Box 100, Station M
Calgary, Alberta
CANADA T2P 2H5
Tele: (403) 691-3030
Fax: (403) 269-7948


Alternative

C. A. (KIP) PRATT
Drilling Engineer Advisor
Shell Canada Limited
P. O. Box 100, Station M
Calgary, Alberta
CANADA T2P 2H5
Tele: (403) 691-3143
Fax: (403) 269-7948

Saudi Aramco

Company

Saudi Aramco
Room-230 Bldg-3193
Dhahran-31311
Saudi Arabia

Representative

Iqbal Ahmed
Box:2008
Dhahran-31311 Saudi Arabia
Tel: 00966-3-8628099
Fax: 8628184


Alternative

Naji Al-Umair
Box: 2002
Dhahran-31311 Saudi Arabia
Tel: 00966-3-8628098
Fax: 8628297

Petro-Canada Resources

Company

Petro-Canada Resources
P. O. Box 2844
Calgary, Alberta T2P 3E3

Representative

JACK KERCHER
Petro-Canada Oil & Gas
P.O. Box 2844
Calgary, Alberta T2P 3E3
Tele: (403) 296-6818
Fax: (403) 206-3740

PETROBRAS

Company

PETROBRAS´ Research Center
Ilha do Fundão, quadra 7
Rio de Janeiro, RJ 21949-900 Brasil

Representative

EDSON Y. NAKAGAWA
PETROBRAS´ Research Center
Ilha do Fundão, quadra 7
Rio de Janeiro, RJ 21949-900 Brasil
Tele: 55-21-598-6537
Fax: 55-21-598-6795

Alternative

HELIO SANTOS
PETROBRAS´ Research Center
Ilha do Fundão, quadra 7
Rio de Janeiro, RJ 21949-900 Brasil
Tele: 55-21-598-6575
Fax: 55-21-598-6795

Pemex

Company

Pemex
UNIDAD DE PERFORACION Y MANTENIMIENTO DE POZOS.
Blvd. Adolfo Ruiz Cortines No. 1202
Fraccionamiento Oropeza
Edificio Piramide 8º Piso
Villahermosa, Tabasco C.P. 86030
Mexico
Web: http://www.perf.pemex.com

Representative

M.I. CARLOS RASSO ZAMORA
Blvd. Adolfo Ruiz Cortines No. 1202
Fraccionamiento Oropeza
Edificio Piramide 8º Piso
Villahermosa, Tabasco C.P. 86030
Mexico
Tele: (93) 16-56-65 or (93) 16-56-66
Fax: (93) 10-18-14

Alternative

M.I. CARLOS ISLAS SILVA
Blvd. Adolfo Ruiz Cortines No. 1202
Fraccionamiento Oropeza
Edificio Piramide 8º Piso
Villahermosa, Tabasco C.P. 86030
Mexico
Tele: (93) 16-56-68 or (93) 10-17-24
Fax: (93) 10-17-24

Occidental OIL and GAS Corporation

Company

Occidental OIL and GAS Corporation
5 Greenway Plaza, Suite 2400
Houston, TX 77046

http://www.oxy.com


Petrorama Trading L.L.C.

OMV Aktiengesellschaft

Company

OMV Aktiengesellschaft
Exploration & Produktion
Gerasdorfer Str. 151
Postfach 200
1210 Wein
AUSTRIA

Representative

ALBERT RIEDER
OMV-Aktiengesellschaft
Gerasdorfer Str. 151
A-1210 Vienna
AUSTRIA
Tele: 43+(0)222-40440+3020
Fax: 43+(0)222-40440+9495

Nexen Inc.

Company

Nexen Inc.
801-7th Avenue S.W.
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
T2P 3P7
Phone (403) 699-4000

Marathon Oil Company

Company

Marathon Oil Company
P. O. Box 3128
Houston, TX 77253

Representative

Joseph DiSantis
Technology Developer
Marathon Oil Company
P. O. Box 3128
Houston, TX 77253-3128
Office Phone – 713-296-3987
Fax Number – 713-499-6737
Cell Phone – 713-248-6774

Kerr-McGee Oil & Gas Corp

Company

Kerr-McGee Oil & Gas Corp
16666 Northchase Dr
Houston, TX 77060

Representative

JESSE ALLEN
Kerr-McGee Oil & Gas Corp
16666 Northchase Dr
Houston, TX 77060
Office Phone – 281-673-6025


Alternative

JOHN MEEK
Kerr-McGee Oil & Gas Corp
16666 Northchase Dr
Houston, TX 77060
Office Phone – 281-673-6157

Japan National Oil Corp.

Company

Japan National Oil Corp.
2-2 Hamada 1-Chome
Chiba-City, Chiba-Prefecture
260 Japan

Representative

TETSUO YONEZAWA
DIRECTOR, Research Divison for Petroleum Engineering
Technology Research Center
2-2, Hamada 1-Chome, Chiba-Shi
Chiba-Ken, Japan 2610025
Tele: +81-43-276-9296
Fax: +81-43-276-4063

ExxonMobil

Company

ExxonMobil
P.O. Box 2189
Houston, TX 77252-2189

http://www.exxonmobil.com


Representative

Greg M. Browning
ExxonMobil
16945 Northchase Drive,
Houston, TX 77060-2108
Tele: (281) 654-4521
Fax: (281) 654-4565

EnCana Corporation


Company

EnCana Corporation
1800, 855 – 2nd Street SW
PO Box 2850
Calgary, Alberta T2P 2S5
Phone: 403-645-2000
Fax: 403-645-3400

http://www.encana.com

Devon Energy

Company

Devon Energy
Devon Energy Corp.
1200 Smith Street, Suite 3300
Houston, TX 77002

Representative

Devon Energy
1200 Smith Street, Suite 3300
Houston, TX 77002
Tele: 713-286-5964
Fax: 713-286-5786

ConocoPhillips, Inc.

Company

ConocoPhillips, Inc.
P. O. Box 2197
Houston, TX 77252-2197

Representative

GARY J. COLLINS
ConocoPhillips
600 N. Dairy Ashford (77079-1175)
P.O. Box 2197
Houston, TX. 77250-2197
Office: 281-293-6969
Fax: 281-293-3424

Alternative

BRETT BORLAND
ConocoPhillips
600 N. Dairy Ashford (77079-1175)
P.O. Box 2197
Houston, TX. 77250-2197
Office: 281-293-4846
Fax: 281-293-3424

Chevron

Company

Chevron
1500 Louisiana Street
Houston, TX 77002

Representative

DAVID DOWELL
Drilling Engr.
Drilling Engineering Services
1500 Louisiana Street
Houston, TX 77002
(832) 854-3261

BP

Company

BP
501 Westlake Park Blvd

Houston, Texas 77079

BHP Billiton

Company

BHP Billiton
1360 Post Oak Blvd., Suite 150
Houston, TX 77056-3020

http://www.bhpbilliton.com


Representative

JAMIE PARK
Drilling Engineering Supervisor
BHP Billiton
1360 Post Oak Boulevard Suite 150
Houston TX 77056 3020 USA
Tel : 713 961 8227
Fax : 713 961 8465

Apache Corp.

Company

Apache Corp.
One Post Oak Central
2000 Post Oak Boulevard
Houston, TX 713-296-6000

http://www.apachecorp.com


Representative

MIKE HARRIS
Director World Wide Drilling
2000 Post OAK Boulevard, Suite 100
Houston, TX 77056-4400
Tele: (713) 296-6000
Fax: (713) 296-7288

AGIP Petroleum


Company

AGIP Petroleum
2950 North Loop West
Suite 300
Houston, TX 77092

Representative

GILDO POSSAMAI
AGIP Petroleum
2950 North Loop West
Suite 300
Houston, TX 77092
Tele: (713) 680-4401
Fax: 713-680-4410

Alternative

BOB CASTO
AGIP Petroleum
2950 North Loop West
Suite 300
Houston, TX 77092
Tele: (713) 680-4445
Fax: 713-680-4410

Fourth Quarter Meeting

November 19th, 2009

LOCATION: Baker Hughes 2001 Rankin Road, Houston

MINUTES:

9:00 am   Ron Bland, Baker Hughes gave the Welcome & Introduction.

9:05 am   Mike Killalea, IADC, gave the DEA Financial Report.

9:10 am   The following presentations were made:

10:30 am   Break

10:40 am   The following presentations were made:

11:50 am Ron Bland gave DEA Updates.

Noon       Adjournment & Lunch

World Oil


Company

World Oil
Engineering Editor
4545 Post Oak Blvd.
Houston, TX 77252-260

Westport Technology

Company

Westport Technology
6700 Portwest Drive
Houston, TX 77024
Web site: http://www.westport1.com

Representative

THOMAS E. WILLIAMS
Westport Technology
6700 Portwest Drive
Houston, TX 77024
Tel: +1 713 479 8400
Fax: +1 713 864 9357

WEST Engineering Services

Company

WEST Engineering Services
907 Bains St.
Brookshire, TX 77423
www.westengineer.com

Representative

RALEIGH S. WILLIAMSON
907 Bains St. Brookshire, TX 77423
ph: 281-934-1500 ext. 109
fax:281-934-1600

Warrior Technology Services INC.

Company

Warrior Technology Services INC.
P.O. Box 680644
Houston, Texas 77268

Representative

J. VICTOR GUERRERO
Warrior Technology Services INC.
P.O. Box 680644
Houston, Texas 77268
Tel: 281-444-5340

Varco Drilling Equipment

Company

Varco Drilling Equipment
12950 West Little York
Houston, TX 77041
Web Site: http://www.varco.com

Representative

HUGH L. ELKINS
Varco VDE
12950 West Little York
Houston, TX, 77041
(713) 937-5588
Fax: (713) 937-5614

United States Department of Interior Minerals Management Service

Company

United States Department of Interior
Minerals Management Service
Mail Stop 4700
381 Elden Street
Hearndon, VA 22070
Web Site: http://www.mms.gov

Representative

WILLIAM HAUSER
United States Department of Interior
Minerals Management Service
Mail Stop 4020
381 Elden Street
Hearndon, VA 20170
Tele: 703-787-1613
Fax: 703-787-1093

Alternative

ROBERT (BOB) W. SMITH
United States Department of Interior
Minerals Management Service
Mail Stop 4021
381 Elden Street
Hearndon, VA 22070
Tele: 703-787-1580
Fax: 703-787-1093

TIW Corporation

Company

TIW Corporation
P. O. Box 35729
Houston, Texas 77235-5729
12300 South Main Street
Houston, Texas 77035

Representative

GARY M. BRIGGS
TIW Corporation
P. O. Box 35729
Houston, Texas 77235-5729
Tele: 713-729-2110
Fax: 713-728-4767

Alternative

RONALD G. WARREN
TIW Corporation
P. O. Box 35729
Houston, Texas 77235-5729
Tele: 713-729-2110
Fax: 713-728-4767

Texas Engineering Experiment Station

Company

Texas Engineering Experiment Station
The Texas A&M University System
College Station, TX 77843-3124

http://tees.tamu.edu

Representative

DAVID BURNETT
Director of Technology
Global Petroleum Research Institute (GPRI)
3116 TAMU
College Station, TX 77843-3116
Tele: (979) 845-2274
Fax: (979) 862-1272

TerraTek

Company

TerraTek
University Research Park
400 Wakara Way
Salt Lake City, Utah 84108

Representative

ARNIS JUDZIS
TerraTek
University Research Park
400 Wakara Way
Salt Lake City, Utah 84108
Tele: (801) 584-2483
Fax: (801) 584-2406

Alternative

ALAN BLACK
TerraTek
University Research Park
400 Wakara Way
Salt Lake City, Utah 84108
Tele: (801) 584-2441
Fax: (801) 584-2406

Terralog Technologies

Company

Terralog Technologies
332 East Foothills Blvd. Suite D
Arcadia, CA 91006

Representative

MIKE BRUNO
Terralog Technologies
332 East Foothills Blvd. Suite B
Arcadia, CA 91006
Tele: (626) 305-8460
Fax: (626) 305-8462

Tempress Technologies, Inc.


Company

Tempress Technologies, Inc.
18858 – 72nd Avenue South
Kent, WA 98032
Website: http://www.tempresstech.com/

Representative

JACK KOLLE
Tempress Technologies, Inc.
18858 – 72nd Avenue South
Kent, WA 98032
Tele: (425) 251-8120
Fax: (425) 251-8123

Technology International, Inc.


Company

Technology International, Inc.
2103 River Falls Drive
Kingwood, Texas 77339-3154

Representative

ROBERT RADTKE
Technology International, Inc.
2103 River Falls Drive
Kingwood, Texas 77339-3154
Tele: (281) 359-8520
Fax: (281) 359-8527


Alternative

RICHARD RIEDEL
Technology International, Inc.
2103 River Falls Drive
Kingwood, Texas 77339-3154
Tele: (281) 359-8520
Fax: (281) 359-8527

Stress Engineering Services, Inc

Company

Stress Engineering Services, Inc
13800 Westfair East Drive
Houston, TX 77041-1101
Web-site: http://www.stresseng.com

Representative

TERRY LECHINGER
Stress Engineering Services, Inc
13800 Westfair East Drive
Houston, TX 77041-1101
Tele: (281) 955-2900
Fax: (281) 955-2638

Alternative

JOE R. FOWLER
Stress Engineering Services, Inc
13800 Westfair East Drive
Houston, TX 77041-1101
Tele: (281) 955-2900
Fax: (281) 955-2638

Sperry-Sun Drilling Services

Company

Sperry-Sun Drilling Services
3000 North Sam Houston Pkwy East
P.O. Box 60070
Houston, TX 77205

Representative

RAY C. SMITH
Sperry-Sun Drilling Services
1400 – 5th Street
Nisku, Alberta T9E 7R6
Canada
Tele: (403) 955 – 7606
Fax: (403) 955 – 2332


Alternative

BEN SMITH
Sperry-Sun Drilling Services
3000 N. Sam Houston Pkwy E.
Houston, TX USA 77032
Tele: (281) 871 – 5038
Fax: (403) 955–2332

Smith International, Inc.

Company

Smith International, Inc.
16740 Hardy Street
P.O. Box 60068
Houston, TX 77205
Web site: http://www.smith-intl.com

Representative

EARL SPRINGER
Smith International, Inc.
16740 Hardy Street
P.O. Box 60068
Houston, TX 77032
Tele: (281) 233-5260
Fax: (281) 233-5199

Schlumberger Anadrill

Company

Schlumberger Anadrill
200 Gillingham Lane
Sugar Land, Texas 77478

Representative

DAVID B. WHITE
Schlumberger Anadrill
200 Gillingham Lane
Sugar Land, Texas 77478
Tele: (281) 285-8000
Fax. (281) 285-8399

Alternative

DEREK NORMORE
Schlumberger Anadrill
200 Gillingham Lane
Sugar Land, Texas 77478
Tele: (281) 285-8000
Fax. (281) 285-8399

Sandia National Laboratories

Company

Sandia National Laboratories
Org. 6116 / MS-0750
Albuquerque, NM 87185-0750

Representative

DAVID J. BORNS
Sandia National Laboratories
Org. 6116 / MS-0750
Albuquerque, NM 87185-0750
Tele: (505) 844-7333
Fax: (505) 844-7354

Alternative

CRAIG E. TYNER
Department 6211, MS-1033
Sandia National Laboratories
P.O. Box 5800
Albuquerque, NM 87185
Tele: (505) 844-3340
Fax: (505) 844-3952

Rocky Mountain Oilfield Testing Center

Company

Rocky Mountain Oilfield Testing Center
907 North Poplar, Suite 150
Casper, WY 82601
Web Site http://www.rmotc.doe.gov

Representative

CONNIE WALLACE
Rocky Mountain Oilfield Testing Center
907 North Poplar, Suite 150
Casper, WY 82601
+1 307-233-4800
Fax +1 307-233-4851


Alternative

FRANK INGHAM
Rocky Mountain Oilfield Testing Center
907 N. Poplar, Suite 150
Casper, WY 82601
+1 307-233-4800
Fax +1 307-233-4851

Resources Engineering Systems Inc.

Company

Resources Engineering Systems Inc.
1900 West Loop South, # 300
Houston, TX 77027-3163

Representative

EVIN McDONAGH
Resources Engineering Systems Inc.
600 Travis, Suite 6500
Houston, TX 77022
Tele: (713) 236-4777
Fax: (713) 228-3919

Alternative

DR. MIKE CLEARY
Resources Engineering Systems Inc.
600 Travis, Suite 6500
Houston, TX 77022
Tele: (713) 236-4777
Fax: (713) 228-3919

Prodril Services

Company

Prodril Services
3101 Big Horn Ave.
Cody, WY 82414

http://www.pdrl.com


Representative

HARRY (Hal) B. CURLETT
President/CEO
3101 Big Horn Ave
Cody, Wyoming 82414
Tel: 307 527-4477
Fax: 307 527-4476


Alternative

BILL LANGDON
Managing Director
Suite 226
Dallas, Texas 75240-4664
Tel:(972) 490-3092
Fax: (972) 490-4827

Postle Industries, Inc.


Company

Postle Industries, Inc.
PO Box 42037
Cleveland, OH 44142

http://www.postle.com


Representative

GENE COUNTS
3033 Laselva Apt B-117
San Mateo, CA
Tel: 650-571-7128
Fax: 650-573-8012

Petrospec Technologies

Company

Petrospec Technologies
409 N Loop 336 W.
Suite 4
Conroe, TX 77301-1238
Web-site: http://www.petrospec-technologies.com

Representative

MARK HERKOMMER
Petrospec Technologies
409 N Loop 336 W.
Suite 4
Conroe, TX 77301-1238
Tele: toll free 866.432.2779
Fax: 936-767-8250

Petroleum Technology Transfer Council


Company

Petroleum Technology Transfer Council
16010 Barkers Point Lane S-220
Houston, Texas 77079

Representative

DON DUTTLINGER
Petroleum Technology Transfer Council
16010 Barkers Point Lane S-220
Houston, Texas 77079
Tel: 281-921-1720
Fax: 281-921-1723


Alternative

LANCE COLE
Petroleum Technology Transfer Council
623 Arrowhead Street
P. O. Box 246
Sand Springs, OK 74063
Tel: (918) 241-5801
Fax: (918) 241-5728

OK Leasing Latin America Energy, LLC


Company

OK Leasing Latin America Energy, LLC
6030 Winsome Ln, Ste 113
Houston, TX 77057

Representative

Sebastian Monsalve
General Manager
6030 Winsome Ln, Ste 113
Houston, TX 77057

OGS Laboratory, Inc.

Company

OGS Laboratory, Inc.
15730 Park Row, Suite 500
Houston, TX 77084

Representative

JAY P. SIMPSON
OGS Laboratory, Inc.
15730 Park Row, Suite 500
Houston, TX 77084
Tele: (281) 599-1300
Fax: (281) 599-1326


Alternative

HARRY L. DEARING
OGS Laboratory, Inc.
15730 Park Row, Ste 500
Houston, TX 77084
Tele: (282) 599-1300
Fax: (281) 599-1326

OFFSHORE SERVICES INC.

Company

OFFSHORE SERVICES INC.
PO Box 53508
Lafayette, La 70505

Representative

Michael Hearn
1300 W. Sam Houston Pkwy South Suite 130
Houston, TX 77042
Office: 713-973-0388
Mobile: 713-805-3199
Fax: 713-973-1961


Alternative

Kirby Arceneaux
P.O. Box 53508
Lafayette, LA 70505
Office: 800-489-6202
Fax: 337-837-3627

Ocean Drilling Program

Company

Ocean Drilling Program
Texas A & M University Research Park
1000 Discovery Drive
College Station, TX 77845-9547

Representative

BRIAN JONASSON
Ocean Drilling Program
Texas A & M University Research Park
1000 Discovery Drive
College Station, TX 77845-9547
Tele: (409) 845-2024
Fax: (409) 845-2308

Noble Technology Services Division

Company

Noble Technology Services Division
Noble Corporation
13135 South Dairy Ashford, Suite 800
Sugar Land, TX 77478

Representative

TOM WILLIAM
Noble Technology Services Division
Noble Corporation
13135 South Dairy Ashford, Suite 800
Sugar Land, TX 77478
Tele: (281) 276-6713
Fax: (713) 201-3866

DEA-147 – “STABView” – A Borehole Stability, Lost Circulation, and Sand Production Risk Analysis Software

Patrick McLellan / mclellan@advgeotech.co

Update on: 12 August 2002

DEA Project Number: 147

Project Title: STABView Borehole Stability, Lost Circulation and Sand Production Software

Contractor: Advanced Geotechnology Inc. Manager – Pat McLellan 1540, 521 – 3rd Ave SW Calgary, Alberta CANADA T2P 3T3

Email: mclellan@advgeotech.com

World Wide Web Site: www.advgeotech.com

Startup Date: March 2001

Scope of Work: (1) Develop version 2.0 of AGI’s STABView software for well planning and design. New features to be added for multi-zone analyses, interactivity with multiphase flow modeling software, new thermal models for drilling through permafrost and gas hydrates, elastic and plastic borehole deformations, offset well calibration, non-linear rock properties and improved mud-shale interaction (2) Compile a collection of relevant case histories and STABView back analyses (3) Provide technology transfer through datbases, software and hands-on training and (4) evaluate the feasibility of a real-time module for wellbore stability monitoring and forecasting.

Current Status: DEA-147 has been completed and all the project deliverables have been sent to the participants. A third phase to this project, focused on real-time stability monitoring and forecasting, is currently in planning and will be launched in late 2002.

Projected Completion Date: June 30, 2002

Project Cost: $215,000 USD

Participants: ChevronTexaco, Petrobras, Nexen Energy, Weatherford, Baker Oil Tools, Geological Survey of Canada, University of Alberta,

Cost per Participant: $20,000 USD

Comments: This project was also sponsored through the Completion Engineering Association as CEA 127.


Date Submitted: May 9, 2001

Technical Area: Exploration

Sponsor: Chevron Petroleum Technology/Dr. Russ Ewy/925-842-6135/rewu@chevron.com

Title: STABView Borehole Stability, Lost Circulation and Sand Production Risk Analysis Software

Submitted by: Advanced Geotechnology Inc. 1540, 521 – 3rd Ave S.W. Calgary, Alberta, CANADA T2P 3T3

Principal Investigator(s): Patrick McLellan mclellan@advgeotech.com

Business Impact: Wellbore instability and lost circulation while drilling, stuck pipe and tools, unplanned wellbore fracturing, hole collapse during workovers or production, overly conservative completion designs and severe formation damage cost the industry billions of dollars yearly around the globe. This project will provide operators and service companies with a proven software tool, training and a knowledge base to (1) reduce flat-time, (2) reduce service and materials costs, (3) improve well productivity through the selection of optimal well completions that minimize formation damage, and (4)improve safety.

Technical Objectives:  (1)Develop Version 2.0 of AGI’s STABView software for the analysis of all types of borehole instability, lost circulation, sand production and near-wellbore fracturing phenomena. New technical features to be added include: the ability to analyze the entire wellbore through multiple strata possessing varying stresses, pressures and rock properties; compatibility with multi-phase flow software for underbalanced drilling operations; new thermal models for drilling through permafrost and gas hydrates; effects of weak bedding planes and natural fractures; borehole deformations in soft rocks and salt; offset well calibration capabilities; casing point selection; non-linear rock mechanical properties, in-situ stress prediction tools; and an improved mud-shale interaction model. (2) Compile a collection of relevant case histories and STABView back-analyses using data from participants and published literature. (3) Provide technology transfer to participants through databases and a hands-on training session. (4) Test the feasibility of a real-time module for wellbore stability and lost circulation monitoring.
Methodology: The current version of STABView performs 3D elastic and 2D elasto-plastic calculations for a variety of borehole instabilities at a given cross-section along a well’s trajectory. The new version of the software will permit the user to analyze borehole collapse, borehole deformations, fracturing, and sand production risks over multiple zones simultaneously with many more technical options. Participants will have the opportunity to test early versions of the new software and contribute to the algorithms being developed and validated for the project. Feedback from participants including case histories and back analyses will ensure that practical engineering approaches using readily available datasets are incorporated into the software.

Deliverables: (1) Single user license to the current single-zone version of STABView. (2) Single-user license to the beta and final versions of the new multiple-zone release of STABView 2.0. (3) One year of software support and maintenance. (3) One post-mortem wellbore stability or sand production analysis on a well of your choice. (5) Collection of case histories and STABView back-analyses (6) Training courses/workshops with other STABView users. (7) Project and software documentation including a detailed manual and reports.

Startup Date: March 2001

Project Duration: 12 months

Project Cost: $180,000

Cost per Participant: $20,000 (less if current licensee)

Comments: As of April 30, 2001 this JIP had the following committed participants: Chevron Petroleum Technology; Nexen Energy; Baker Oilfield Operations – Baker Oil Tools; Geological Survey of Canada – Gas Hydrate Project; and the University of Alberta. The project workscope and completion date will be adjusted depending upon the final number of participants.

DEA-090 Phase IV – Drilling Plastic Shale at Great Depth; A Study to Improve Penetration Rates with Environmentally Acceptable Drilling Fluids

“Drilling Plastic Shale at Great Depths-A Study to Improve Penetration Rates with Environmentally Acceptable Drilling Fluids”

After successfully completing Phase 3, we are actively seeking a minimum of 3 participants prior to starting Phase 4. Busy year end activities have necessitated a re-scheduling of DEA 90 Phase 4 organization meeting to beginning 2003. The objectives and goals are as previously presented to the DEA. Phase 3 had 6 participants. Phase 4 will cost $35,000 per sponsor.

Drilling Engineering Association Project Number:  DEA 90 Phase 4

Drilling Engineering Association Sponsor:  ChevronTexaco Ben Bloys (281) 230-2968

Project Manager:  Alan Black, 801-584-2441 (phone), 801-584-2406 (fax), ablack@terratek.com, TerraTek, Inc., 400 Wakara Way, Salt Lake City, Utah 84108

Project Scope and Objectives:

The objective of this project is to solve the expensive field problem of low penetration rates experienced while drilling with PDC (polycrystalline diamond compact) bits in plastic shales at great depths (high borehole pressures) with water-based fluids.

PDC bits have proven very successful in improving penetration rate in many formations.  The application of PDC bits drilling soft, highly plastic shales at vertical depths greater than 10,000 psi and borehole pressures of 7,000 psi or more with water-based fluids often yielded penetration rates as low at 5 ft/hr.  At the same conditions, roller-cone bits drill at 15 ft/hr.  When drilling the same shale formation at the high  borehole pressure conditions with PDC bits and oil-based fluid, penetration rates of 50-75 ft/hr or greater are possible.

In DEA 90 Phase 1 and 2, the field observations mentioned above were first replicated in full-scale laboratory drilling conditions in Pierre 1 shale at 7500 psi borehole pressure with PDC and roller-cone bits and with water-based and oil-based fluids.  Following verification that field observations could be duplicated in the laboratory, a series of high pressure drilling tests were conducted with different drilling fluids, fluid additives and new PDC bit designs over a range of drilling conditions (WOB and RPM) to determine the mechanism causing the low penetration rates and to evaluate ways to improve penetration rates.  In addition, a study of the effect of shale properties on penetration rate was carried out in various shales and a correlation determined.  Several proper drilling practices have also been determined.  The total number of high pressure drilling tests conducted in DEA 90 Phase 1 (22) and Phase 2 (27) include the testing of eleven different water-based fluids, six different drilling fluid additives (ROP enhancers), one baseline PDC bit and three new PDC bit designs.  The baseline water-based fluid is a 12 ppg NaCl/PHPA with 45 ppb rev dust (simulated drill solids).  All other drilling fluids have also been 12 ppg with the same simulated drill solids.

Phase 3 is investigating effects of drilling fluid density on ROP for different fluids and fluids additives, the percentage of ROP enhancers required to maintain improved ROP and other factors such as the effectiveness of ROP enhancers over time to achieve sustainable ROP’s. 12 high pressure drilling tests have been conducted in DEA 90 Phase 3 and two more are expected for PEMEX by April 2002. A kick-off (planning) meeting was held end March, 1999. A first series of drilling tests were successfully conducted with ROP enhancers and results reviewed with the participants at an August, 1999 meeting hosted by Shell in Houston. Additional tests were conducted in November and a progress meeting was held with the participants on March 14, 2000 at BP Amoco’s facilities in Houston. Then two companies joined the program early ‘00 (MI, then Texaco) based on the successful ROP demonstrations in shale with additives. The program continued its testing program during 4Q ’00 and both the Baroid and MI additives were evaluated during drilling of shale at simulated depth conditions. ExxonMobil joined this program early ’01 (tests completed successfully) and finally PEMEX joined late 2001, thus two additional tests with a 14 ppg silicate mud are planned before commencing Phase 4.

Phase 4 plans to take developments and lessons learned from the first 3 phases to test additional high performance PDC bit designs and optimize the performance in drilling plastic shale with additional ROP enhancers (developed by the fluid companies) in weighted muds. Technology transfer will be facilitated through sharing of sponsoring operator and supplier experiences with drilling shale at high downhole pressures. Current sponsors also recommend in part the study of shale drilling performance at optimized conditions in order to effectively correlate and/or apply learning to their own operations. Additionally, DEA 90 Phase 4 plans to compile developments which have resulted from DEA 90 testing at TerraTek and ensure basic learnings (e.g. bit balling principles, qualitative models) are transferred to sponsors.

Project Deliverables:

Progress reporting at periodic planning and review meetings and a comprehensive final report summarizing all findings, including raw computer files, photos, etc.

image002

Expected Benefits to the Industry:

Practical field solutions and guidelines for applying this technology to improving penetration rates and reducing drilling costs in shale formations at high borehole pressure conditions is targeted for the DEA 90 Phase 4 project.

Time Scale, Project Cost, Amount per Participant and Number of Participants:

The project will be completed in 18 months. The project requires minimum funding of $105,000 (3 participants). Existing Phase 3 participants include BP, ChevronTexaco, ExxonMobil, Geodiamond/MI, Halliburton/Baroid, Shell, and PEMEX. The cost of DEA 90 Phase 4 will be $35,000 and anticipated start date is mid 2002.

DEA-157 – Step Change in Directional Drilling Control and Efficiency when using Motor Steerable Systems

Eric Maidla  / E-Mail: eric.maidla@maidla.com / Phone: +1 281 770-3009

DEA Project Number: 157

Title: Step Change in Directional Drilling Control and Efficiency when using Motor Steerable Systems

Date Submitted: 01/13/2005

Technical Area: Exploration and Production

Sponsor: DAVID DOWELL, ChevronTexaco, Tel: (713) 954-6107, e-mail: daviddowell@chevrontexaco.com, 3901 Briarpark Rm BP516, Houston , TX 77042

Submitted by: Slider, LLC, 3318 Spring Trail Drive , Sugar Land , TX 77479 +1 281 770-3009 e-mail: TUeric.maidla@maidla.comUT

Startup Date:  04/15/2005 (15/April/2005)

Project Duration: Approximately 4 months

Project Cost: US$ 116,000

Cost per Participant: US$ 29,000

Minimum Number of Participants Required: 4

157

Slider, a new technology, is a surface system that significantly increases the efficiency of a downhole motor/MWD directional system. Field tests in the Austin Chalk showed that the surface system increased sliding rates of penetration from 60% to 200%, for estimated savings of 11% to 23% of total well costs.

Hardware and software components in the new system integrate surface and MWD data to provide the following benefits in the sliding mode:

  • Improved ROP and horizontal reach capability through automatic rocking, using torque as an input
  • Improved tool-face correction through a torque pulse method, using the drillstring
  • Improved well trajectory through a step-change in tool-face correction while on bottom
  • Improved motor life, because stalling is practically eliminated
  • Elimination of orientation time losses through a semi-automatic transition from rotating to sliding

This development evolved over the course of one year of laboratory experimentation and has undergone alpha and beta testing in the field. Laboratory experiments were performed with a scaled model of the drilling system. Dimensional analysis was used to scale the drawworks action, topdrive action, wellbore torque and drag, drillstring and bit behavior (including stick slip), downhole motor, rock bit interaction, and formation strength.

This technology provides any downhole motor/MWD system today with competitive cost advantages, compared to more expensive rotary steerable systems.

Technical Objectives

  1. To substitute part of the directional driller’s interaction to rock the pipe (using the rig console’s devices) by small “robots” that manipulate the same devices (buttons, levers, switches, wheels, etc). These automatic “rocking” interfaces have been successfully developed for hydraulic power swivel controls and there is the need to extend this development for electric top drives. The first task will be to interface with the Ross Hill SCR control panel model 425 or similar equipment that is quite commonly used in the market that has one button and one wheel that need to be controlled in a special sequential order by individual robots to be able to achieve the full rocking benefits.
  2. To build a two robot system and necessary software to rock the pipe as needed to achieve all the benefits that this technology can provide.
  3. To build a prototype unit and test it in the field.
  4. To test this on at least 3 field tests (about 5 to 10 days each).
  5. To develop a new Computer Torque and Drag Program that incorporates the rocking effect.

Methodology

Slider has built and has access to a complete physical simulator that is capable of reproducing many different field scenarios (from directional to horizontal, including particular cases of vertical holes). We would develop all the software necessary to test the commands of the robotic solution on this simulator before building the prototype to be taken to the field. This has proven to be of great value as proven by the results demonstrated on the first field test that used a hydraulic power swivel in which everything worked as planned on the first attempt (only minor adjustments were needed and resolved)

Deliverables

  1. Development of the Slider Robotics interface solution for someelectric top drives depending on the participants interests.
  2. Conduct at least 3 field tests to prove the technology on electric top drives. This would normally be costed out at US$ 30,000 per job (this would include rental, personnel and training).
  3. Documentation on the  cost effectiveness of this technology.
  4. New Computer Torque and Drag Program that incorporates the rocking effect. Each participant will have the right to have one executable software program for their internal use.

Field Tests

Each participant will have the right to have one directional/horizontal job, which will not exceed 10 days, using this technology at no extra cost (cost already included in the project), provided they are willing to share the data with the other project participants. These jobs should be scheduled within 4 weeks from the project start to allow time to have it completed within the first 3 months of starting the project (since the report and data analysis must be concluded within 4 months from the start of the project).

Goal

Is to save the sponsors some money by accelerating the uptake of this technology by the industry seen that many directional and horizontal wells are drilled today using a motor steerable/MWD system (many using electric top drive systems) and this would greatly increase their performance without adding any equipment downhole.

Confidential Information

The information Generated by this project will be confidential so companies must join to have access to this information

Intellectual Property

Will be owned by Slider LLC. No IP rights will be granted to the project participants. The participants benefits will derive from the reduced drilling costs of drilling directional, horizontal and vertical well (to maintain verticality).

Participants Rights

Participants will have the first call on the use of the technology to be provided by Slider LLC for a period of two years after the end of this project

Technology Transfer

  • Technical Meetings
  • Detail technical reports will be written after each directional job, analyzing problems encountered, alternative procedures used to overcome these problems, success of these alternative procedures, and recommendation on how to improve the process.

Key Personnel

Qualifications of key personnel are summarized below with full resumes found in the appendices.

Eric E. Maidla, Ph.D., – Slider LLC

Dr. Eric Maidla is a partner in Slider LLC that was founded early in 2004. Has published over 50 technical articles (including patents)

Prior to this engagement he was Vice President of Business Development for Noble. He joined Noble in July 2001 coming from Australia after leading for 7 years the Drilling group CSIRO an Australian Government Organization.

Among his major accomplishments are:

  • Founded and chaired the Petroleum Engineering Department at the State University of Campinas in Brazil in 1988 and worked there for 7 years.
  • Partially Conceive, Managed and Developed a new an Heuristic Drilling Analysis Process called Genesis 2000 for CSIRO in Drilling Data Management
  • Co-managed and Developed a new directional drilling technology for Noble – today known as the Slider

Marc Haci, Ph.D., – Slider LLC

Dr. Marc Haci is a partner in Slider LLC that was founded early in 2004. Has published technical articles, patents and conducted industry workshops.

Prior to this engagement he was.

Among his major accomplishments are:

  • Supervised operations over 200 directional and horizontal wells in the US . Involved in planning & engineering of re-entries and multi-laterals
  • Introduced Tractor technology to high angle well logging and completions operations in Gulf of Mexico
  • Co-managed and Developed a new directional drilling technology for Noble – today known as the Slider

NADET INSTITUTE

Company

NADET INSTITUTE
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Room E40-481
77 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139-4307

Representative

CARL R. PETERSON / PETER SMEALLIE
NADET INSTITUTE
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Room E40-481
77 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139-4307
Tele: (617) 253-5782
Fax: (617) 253-8013

M/D Totco


Company

M/D Totco
Martin-Decker Totco
1200 Cypress Creek Rd.
Cedar Park, TX 78613-3614

Representative

WILLIAM KOEDERITZ
Principal Engineering Specialist
Martin-Decker TOTCO, a Division of Varco
1200 Cypress Creek Road
Cedar Park, Texas 78613-3614
Tele: 512-340-5632
Fax: 512-340-5285

Los Alamos National Laboratory

Company

Los Alamos National Laboratory
P.O. Box 1663, MS P240
Los Alamos, NM 87545

Representative

ROBERT J. HANOLD
Los Alamos National Laboratory
P.O. Box 1663
EES-DO, MS D446
Los Alamos, NM 87545
Tele: (505) 667-1698
Fax: (505) 667-3494

Alternative

EARL M. WHITNEY
Los Alamos National Laboratory
MS F665
Los Alamos, NM 87545
Tele: (505) 667-3595
Fax: (505) 667-3687

Lincoln Composites

Company

Lincoln Composites
4300 Industrial Ave.
Lincoln, NE 68504-1197

Representative

DOUGLAS B. JOHNSON
4300 Industrial Ave.
Lincoln, NE 68504-1197
Tele: (402) 465-6575
Fax: (402) 464-2247

Knowledge Systems, Inc.

Company

Knowledge Systems, Inc.
P. O. Box 1279
Stafford, Texas 77497-1279
Web Site: http://www.knowsys.com

Representative

JAMES W. BRIDGES
Knowledge Systems, Inc.
11104 W. Airport Blvd. #125
Stafford, Texas 77497-1279
Tele: (281) 879-1400
Fax: (281) 879-1499

Alternative

JAMEY WEBSTER
Knowledge Systems, Inc.
P. O. Box 1279
Stafford, Texas 77497-1279
Tele: (281) 879-1400
Fax: (281) 879-1499

Charles Saron Knobloch

Company

Charles Saron Knobloch
4900 Woodway, Suite 900
Houston, TX 77056

http://www.aklaw.com

Representative

CHARLES KNOBLOCH, JD, PG

Arnold & Knobloch, LLP
Patent Attorney, Professional geophysicist
4900 Woodway, Suite 900
Houston, TX 77056
Tele: (713) 335-3021
Fax: (713) 972-1180

Kelco Oilfield Group

Company

Kelco Oilfield Group
P.O. Box 23576
San Diego, CA 92193-3576
8225 Aero Drive
San Diego, CA 92123-1718

Representative

MAC SEHEULT
Kelco Oilfield Group
3300 Bingle
Houston, Texas 77055
Tele: (713) 329-7220
Fax: (713) 895-7586

J. Vozniak and Associates (JVA)

Company

J. Vozniak and Associates (JVA)
9185 Six Pines Drive
The Woodlands, TX 77380

Representative

JOHN VOZNIAK
J. Vozniak and Associates (JVA)
9185 Six Pines Drive
The Woodlands, TX 77380
Tele: (713) 502-0981
Fax: (281) 466-8063

Idaho National Engineering & Environmental Laboratory

Company

Idaho National Engineering & Environmental Laboratory
P. O. Box 1625
Idaho Falls, ID 83415-2110

Representative

DAVID M. WEINBERG
Idaho National Engineering & Environmental Laboratory
P. O. Box 1625
Idaho Falls, ID 83415-2110
Tele: (208) 526-4274
Fax: (208) 526-9822

Alternative

JENN-TAI LIANG
Idaho National Engineering & Environmental Laboratory
Lockheed Martin Idaho Technologies Company
P. O. Box 1625
Idaho Falls, ID 83415-2110
Tele: (208) 526-5232
Fax: (208) 526-9288

TIPRO / GRI

Company

TIPRO / GRI
1100 Louisiana, Suite 3630
Houston, TX 77002

Representative

TOM R. SIFFERMAN
TIPRO – GRI
1100 Louisiana, Suite 3630
Houston, TX 77002
Tele: 713-652-3893
Fax: 713-650-0789

DEA-160 – Shoulder/Thread Verifier System

Shoulder/Thread Verifier System

Raymond J Dishaw, Global Systems Inc/12865 CR 577, Anna, Tx. 75409/972-924-5000/ exsearch@msn.com

Final report from Global Systems Inc. to the DEA:

“On November 17, 2008, a final round-table meeting of participants involved in the DEA PROJECT 160 was held a the Marathon Oil Company’s offices, in Houston, Texas. The Purpose of DEA Projeect 160 was to test the Shoulder Thread Verifier System (“STVS”), to determine if it presents new technology which benefits verification of proper make-up of joint connections prior to and/or during installation. The project involved testing various types of connection products, from various manufacturers, bothe in the laboratory environemnt and in the field. All phases of the testing were completed, and all the required deliverables including data representing the various tests of their chosen equipment have been delivered to the participants. The participants have agreed thecnology which benefits the verification process of proper make-up of joint connections, and constitutes a system whoch can be beneficial to the industry. The participants gave unanimous approval fo the Shoulder Thread Verifier System process of commercialization.”

Houston Advanced Research Center

Company

Houston Advanced Research Center
4800 Research Forest Drive
The Woodlands, TX 77381
www.harc.edu

Representative

DR. RICHARD C. HAUT
Houston Advanced Research Center
4800 Research Forest Drive
The Woodlands, TX 77381
Tele: (281) 364 6093
Fax: (281) 363 7935
Mobile: (281) 787 8768

Alternative

TERRI KURTIN
Houston Advanced Research Center
4800 Research Forest Drive
The Woodlands, TX 77381
Tele: (281) 363 7926
Fax: (281) 363 7935

Halliburton Integrated Solutions

Company

Halliburton Integrated Solutions
10200 Bellaire Blvd
Concourse/91-1SE-14L
P.O. Box 4574 (77210-4574)
Houston, TX 77072-5299
www.halliburton.com

Representative

GLENDA WYLIE
Halliburton Energy Services
(91) 2 SW 25 K
P. O. Box 4574
Houston, TX 77210-4574
Tele: (281) 575 4176
Fax: (281) 575 4045

GSM, Inc.

Company

GSM, Inc.
P. O. Box 50790
Amarillo, TX 79159-0790

Representative

MAX D. MEFFORD
Technical Sales Representative
7201 I-40 West, Suite 308
P.O. Box 50790
Amarillo, TX 79159-0790
Tele: (806)-358-6894
Fax: (806) 358-6800

Gas Technology Institute

Company

Gas Technology Institute
1700 South Mount Prospect Road
Des Plaines, IL 60018

http://www.gastechnology.org

Representative

BRIAN C. GAHAN
Principal Technology Manager
Exploration and Production Research
Gas Technology Institute
1700 South Mount Prospect Road
Des Plaines, IL 60018
Tele: (847) 768-0931
Fax: (847) 768-0995

EATON INDUSTRIES OF HOUSTON,INC.

Company

EATON INDUSTRIES OF HOUSTON,INC.
7670 Woodway, Suite 250
Houston, TX 77063

Representative

BEN A. EATON
EATON INDUSTRIES OF HOUSON, INC.
7670 Woodway, Suite 250
Houston, TX 77063
Tele: (713)787-5155
Fax: (713)787-6141

Alternative

DARRELL MOLNAR
EATON INDUSTRIES OF HOUSTON,INC.
7670 Woodway, Suite 250
Houston, TX 77063
Tele: (713)787-5155
Fax: (713)787-6141

Drill Thru Systems Inc

Company

Drill Thru Systems Inc
P.O. Box 891
Stafford (Houston), Texas 77497

Representative

FERNANDO GUZMAN
Drill Thru Systems Inc.
P. O. Box 891
Stafford, TX 77497
Tele: 281-265-8974
Fax: 281-277-0608


Alternative

KEN SMITH
Drill Thru Systems Inc.
P. O. Box 891
Stafford, TX 77497
Tele: 281-265-8974
Fax: 281-277-0608

U.S. Department of Energy National Energy Technology Laboratory

Company

U.S. Department of Energy
National Energy Technology Laboratory
3610 Collins Ferry Road
P.O. Box 880
Morgantown, WV 26507-0880

Representative

JOHN D. ROGERS, Ph.D., P.E.
Petroleum Engineer/Project Manager
DOE/NETL
Gas Supply Projects Division
3610 Collins Ferry Road
P.O. Box 880
Morgantown, WV 26507-0880
Tele: (304) 285-4880
Fax: ( 304) 285-4403

Alternative

ROY LONG
U.S. Department of Energy
National Petroleum Technology Office
One West Third St., Suite 1400
Tulsa, OK 74103-3532
Tele: (918) 699-2017
Fax: (918) 699-2005

JAMES L. BARNES
U. S. Department of Energy
National Petroleum Technology Office
Williams Center, Tower One
One West Third St., Suite 1400
Tulsa, OK 74103
Tele: (918) 699-2076
Fax: (918) 699-2005

DIAMOND Offshore

Company

DIAMOND Offshore
15415 Katy Freeway, Suite 100
Houston, TX 77094

Representative

DAVID STEERE
DIAMOND Offshore Drilling, Inc.
15415 Katy Freeway, Suite 100
Houston, TX 77094
Tele:281-647-2264
Fax: (281) 647-2158


Alternative

M. R. “MOE” PLAISANCE
DIAMOND Offshore Drilling, Inc.
15415 Katy Freeway, Suite 100
Houston, TX 77094
Tele: (281) 492-5303
Fax: (281) 647-2158

Det Norske Veritas (USA) Inc

Company

Det Norske Veritas (USA) Inc
16340 Park Ten Place, Suite 100
Houston, TX 77084

Representative

BRYCE LEVETT
281 721 6877
fax, 281 721 6906


Alternative

HAVARD BRANDT
281 721 6649
fax, 281 721 6906

CTES, L.C.

Company

CTES, L.C.
9870 Pozos Lane
Conroe, TX 77303
Web Site: http://www.ctes.com

Representative

KEN NEWMAN
CTES, L.C.
9870 Pozos Lane
Conroe, TX 77303
Tele: (936)521-2203

Cudd Well Control

Company

Cudd Well Control
4544 Post Oak Place, Suite 280
Houston, Texas 77027
Web site: www.cuddwellcontrol.com

Representative

Richard Childree
Vice President Well Control Operations
Cudd Well Control
12243-C FM 529
Houston, TX 77041
Tele: 713-849-2769
Fax: 713-849-3861

Alternative
Les Skinner
Director of Well Control Engineering
Cudd Well Control
12243-C FM 529
Houston, TX 77041
Tele: 713-849-2769
Fax: 713-849-3861

CSIRO Petroleum

Company

CSIRO Petroleum
P. O. Box 3000
Glen Waverly
Victoria 3150
Australia
Web-site: http://www.petroleum.csiro.au

Representative

DR EDSON NAKAGAWA
CSIRO Petroleum
PO Box 1130, Technology Park
Bentley
Perth, W. Australia 6102
Tele: 61 8 6436 8752
Fax 61 8 6436 8555


Alternative

DR THOMAS GABLER
CSIRO Petroleum
PO Box 1130, Technology Park
Bentley
Perth, W. Australia 6102
Australia
Tele: 61 8 6436 8751
Fax: 61 8 6436 8555

Crescent Drilling & Production, Inc

Company

Crescent Drilling & Production, Inc
2400 Veterans Memorial Blvd., Ste 110
Kenner, LA 70062
Web-Site: http://www.crescentdrilling.com

Representative

RICK FARMER
Crescent Drilling & Production Inc.
2400 Veterans Memorial Blvd, Ste 110
Kenner, LA 70062
Tele: 504 467 5100
Fax: 504 467 5175

C-FER Technologies


Company

C-FER Technologies
200 Karl Clark Rd.
Edmonton, AB T6N IH2

Representative

CAM MATTHEWS
Director, New Technology Ventures
C-FER Technologies
200 Karl Clark Rd.
Edmonton, AB T6N IH2


Alternative

PETER KIS
Manager – Drilling and Completions
C-FER Technologies
200 Karl Clark Rd.
Edmonton, AB T6N 1H2
Tele: 780-450-8989 ext. 284
Fax: 780-450-3700

Branch M. McNeely, Jr.

Company

Branch M. McNeely, Jr.
5213 Pine Street
Bellaire, TX 77401

Representative

BRANCH M. MCNEELY, JR.
5213 Pine Street
Bellaire, TX 77401-4820
Tele: (713) 664-0331
Fax: (713) 664-0331

Black Box Inc.

Company

Black Box Inc.
D.B.A. UniTrak
Parallinx
UniTrak Information Systems
P.O. Box 3662
Midland, Texas 79702-3662

Representative

FRED M. NEWMAN
D.B.A. UniTrak
Parallinx
UniTrak Information Systems
P.O. Box 3662
Midland, Texas 79702-3662
Tel: 915-682-5223

Big “6″ Drilling Company

Company

Big “6″ Drilling Company
7500 San Felipe, Suite 666
Houston, TX 77063

Representative

MIKE STONE
Big “6″ Drilling Company
7500 San Felipe, Suite 666
Houston, TX 77063
Tele: (713) 783-2300
Fax: (713) 783-4463

Baroid Drilling Fluids

Company

Baroid Drilling Fluids
P.O. Box 1675
Houston, TX 77251

Representative

FERSHEED MODY
Baroid Drilling Fluids
P.O. Box 1675
Houston, TX 77251
Tele: (281) 871-5927
Fax: (281) 871-5810

01. Introduction

What is a forum? By definition a forum is “A medium of discussion conducted out of doors where public business is transacted”. To industry this translates to intermixing with one other to determine and introduce work needed to conduct successful business. Forums are becoming an increasingly popular tool to bring industry leaders together to solve the worlds problems. However, if not conducted correctly or if the timing is not right, a forum could produce negative results.

This report is being written to help organize the steps necessary to conduct a successful forum. Furthermore, it is being generated in hopes of preventing mistakes from occurring over and over again when holding forums. This report is by no meanings an accurate step-by-step guideline to conducting a successful forum. Each individual forum held to date has had a unique set of objectives thus, mandating unique proceedings.

In June of 1998, the American Association of Drilling Engineers (AADE), Drilling Engineering Association (DEA), Energy Research Clearing House (ERCH), and the Minerals Management Service (MMS) held a joint industry forum on Shallow Water Flow (SWF) to identify the technical challenges and needed forward research. This forum was probably one of the most successful forums held to date. It brought one of the largest multi-disciplinary groups of people together to share information and to identify gaps surrounding the SWF phenomena. The forum was well attended with over 180 participants representing Operators, Governmental Agencies, Service Companies, Research Facilities, and Academic Institutions.

The suggestions and recommendations that follow in this report were based mainly on the experiences with this particular SWF forum. Although I have had experiences with organizing other successful forums, I will use this forum as a foundation, if you will, to identify the positive as well as negative results in conducting a successful forum.

02. Identify Specific Topic

In order to capture the audience’s attention to hold a successful forum, it is absolutely critical to identify topics that reflect the needs of industry at that particular period in time or what industry feels will be of interest in the future. There are several ways of doing so, but perhaps one of the most productive ways is to survey the needs of the companies. For example, the survey that was conducted last year by the Drilling Engineering Association (DEA) and the Energy Research Clearing House (ERCH) identified twenty-five topics faced by industry. Individual companies in order of importance to their specific needs or future goals then prioritized these topics.

The question at this stage is which topic do you select? It would seem logical to use the topic with the highest priority reflecting the greatest need by voting companies. However, several key issues must first be examined. What are other organizations investigating? You don’t want to pick a topic that overlaps with what others are exploring. What topic has the greatest possibility of generating the most interest? Will the selected topic meet your objectives? It must be determined, right from the start, what are your goals. In other words, what specific outcome would you like to see as a result of holding a forum? At this point the topic should be of a general nature in hopes of capturing the largest audience and meeting the interest of the largest possible portion of industry.

Once the general topic is selected, an intermediate stage or workshop should be held to narrow down specific key challenges to carry forward. The SWF forum topic resulted from a Deep Water Drilling Workshop held jointly with the DEA and ERCH the previous year. The workshop was an informal meeting where companies expressed their views and discussed with other companies their personal experiences. This workshop lasted for several days and was limited to a specific number of attendees for better interaction. The attendees of the workshop were evenly divided into smaller groups so that each attendee had an opportunity to voice their views and opinions. A combination of several general and break-out sessions followed by voting periods were required to identify the key issues and narrow down the specific topics. The result of this workshop was several topics that the participants felt could be brought to industry for wide support. One of the topics that resulted from this workshop was SWF that was scrutinized in the same manner as the general topic mentioned in the previous paragraph. If industry is not willing to support your ideas, then the success of your forum will be jeopardized.

Lessons Learned:

* Use the most effective means available to determine the needs of industry
* It could take several stages to select the correct key topics
* Don’t assume that you should use the topic with the most interest
* Topics should meet the needs of interested companies in hopes of gaining support from their business units
* Topics should cover multi-disciplinary arena.

03. Determining A Champion

Next to identifying a specific topic, determining a champion to take on the responsibility of carrying out the work necessary for a successful forum is perhaps the most important issue. This individual must posses a number of key qualities:

  • They must be driven to make the forum successful
  • They must be a prominent figure in industry
  • They must understand the details involved with the selected topic
  • They must be willing to donate a great amount of time and effort for the cause
  • He or she must be a proven and influential leader
  • And finally, they should reap (or their company/organization should reap) the benefits as a result of the forum along with all the other participants.

These qualities pretty much speak for themselves, however it may be difficult to find an individual who meet all of these requirements. The only thing I would like to add is that the champion should elect on his or her own to take on this task and not be nominated by some group or committee. Most, if not all champions I am familiar with have a primary job and if nominated feel pressured or required to take on this task. If they elect themselves, they probably have a personal interest, which will reflect on the work being done. There is a one-to-one relationship between the individual who posses these qualities and the successfulness of a forum.

Lessons Learned:

  • A champion should posses a minimum number of key qualities
  • The champion should elect on their own to take on forum task, not be nominated
  • The champion should chair the proceedings of the forum
  • The champion should have as much to gain from the forum as all other participants.

04. Selecting an Organizing Committee

The groups of individuals who are selected to help organize a forum play a key role and should posses similar qualities as the chairman but perhaps not as explicit. The number of members in the organizing committee can vary but should be between five to seven members. Too large of a group can cause delays due to the number of varying opinions. Their main responsibilities should be to:

  • Help select speakers
  • Determine forum proceedings
  • Promote forum to industry
  • And finally, help chairman and moderators identify challenges and gaps at the completion of the forum.

The members of the organizing committee should represent the interest of their individual companies. However, their ultimate goal should be to focus on industry as a whole. One of the lessons learned with organizing committee members involves their backgrounds. A group of multi-disciplinary members will better represent industry than a group of members with similar interest. A multi-disciplinary organizing committee will undoubtedly generate a greater interest throughout industry thus increasing the interest and attendance of the forum.

Lessons Learned:

  • The number of members in the organizing committee should carefully be evaluated
  • Members of the organizing committee should have specific tasks
  • Members of the organizing committee should represent their respect companies but must concentrate their ideas on the entire industry
  • The backgrounds of each organizing committee member should be diverse in order to represent as much as industry as possible.

05. Selecting Moderators

The underlining function and purpose of the moderator is to help the chairman delegate and direct forum proceedings. But the moderator’s job does not end there; they have more important responsibilities:

  • Work with chairman to identify gaps and challenges as a result of the forum
  • Regulate meeting proceedings
  • Encourage discussion and audience participation
  • Moderate break-out sessions if applicable
  • Report out to general session

To maintain consistency and unity, each moderator should also be an organizing committee member. If not capable of doing so, they should be included in the loop and briefed at all times on all decisions that affect the outcome of the forum. Moderators should also posses the distinguishing qualities as those of the chairman. An important function of a moderator is to introduce opposing views in hopes of encouraging discussion and debate.

Lessons Learned:

  • Moderators should keep forum within defined measures and bounds
  • Moderators should not be speakers
  • Moderators should be part of the organizing committee
  • Moderators should elect to take on task

06. Selecting Speakers

The next stage will be to select prominent speakers for the forum. With the help of the organizing committee, the chairman should seek those individuals who are best qualified to accurately and most effectively present the selected topic. In other words, the speaker should be an individual that has the most experience and knowledge of the topic he or she is chosen to describe.

Each speaker should be willing to convey to the audience, the positive as well as negative aspects about the chosen topic. They should also be able to entice and introduce possible solutions in hopes of creating discussion. He or she should be an enthusiastic individual who is an excellent communicator that comes across well.

The ideal chosen speakers will add value to the forum in a number of ways. First, they should attract people to the forum due to their reputation. Second, they should help set the tempo of the proceedings through their means of communication. Third, they should encourage interaction by the manner in which they present their topic. Finally, they should leave the audience with a since of fulfillment by teaching them something they don’t already know. Each of these items will assure participation and add to the success of the forum.

Lessons Learned:

  • The selected speakers should be well educated on the topic they are chosen to present
  • The speaker should present their topic in a subjective and bias way
  • The speaker should be very energetic and know how to excite the audience

Baker Hughes Incorporated

Company

Baker Hughes Incorporated
Baker Hughes Global Headquarters
2929 Allen Parkway, Suite 2100
Houston, TX 77019-2118
www.bakerhughes.com

Representative

MARCUS OESTERBERG
Performance Drilling & In-bit Sensing
9110 Grogans Mill Road
The Woodlands, TX 77380
Tel: +1 281 363 6430
Fax: +1 281 363 6030

Alternative

ROBERT A. ESTES
Mgr. Navigation / Directional Technology
Houston Technology Center
2001 Rankin Road
Houston, TX 77073
Tel: +1 713 625 4414
fax: +1 713 625 6633

07. Set Date, Length, and Cost

Once you have identified your topic, determined the champion, selected organizing committee members, and selected forum speakers you are ready to begin preparations. First and foremost, the date of the forum must be set. It is critical at this point to set a date that does not overlap with other scheduled meetings. One should thoroughly check through calendars of other societies and organizations to determine the best time to hold the forum. Also, you must recognize that certain times of the year, such as holidays and school sessions, will effect participation.

The next thing you should set is the length of the forum. This value will be depended on several items, (1) The number of speakers, (2) Whether or not you will be conducting breakout sessions, (3) Whether or not you plan to have open periods for discussion, (4) Whether or not you will hold a poster or exhibitor session. Care must be taken on the length of the forum. The overall length of any forum will be driven by the selected topic and its’ value to industry.

Finally, an admission fee must be set. This amount should not be more than what it takes to accommodate each attendee and pay for meeting cost. It is absolutely crucial that you outline what each attendee will receive for the cost. Items such as hotel accommodations, transportation, meals, materials, and reports should be included in the forum cost whenever possible. If paying for items is to perplex or cumbersome, such as having to make your own accommodations and transportation, having to pay for meals separately, and having to purchase report separately can all have an effect on the overall turn out. For this reason, it is a good idea to have the capability to process both checks and credit cards. This simplifies things for the organizers and provides the participant a flexible means of payment.

Lessons Learned:

  • Forum date should not overlap with other meetings so attendance will not be deterred
  • The date of forum should be flexible and perhaps a back-up date should be set
  • Too short or too long of a forum may discourage attendance
  • Don’t over charge for admittance
  • Both checks and credit cards should be accepted as payment.

08. Determine Size of Audience & Location

It is important to know who the forum will be catering to and the anticipated number of participants. But in order to do so, some sort of mechanism must be use to calculate a ball park figure. Some possible key indicators might be:

  • Value or importance of topic to industry
  • Word of mouth
  • State of the economy
  • Groups or fields who may have an interest.

No matter what size of audience you expect a limit should be set on the number of attendees. This number will be governed by the details of the forum proceedings, size of space at the facility, cost, and objectives. Large forums (100 participants or more) make it difficult to hold breakout sessions and seem to focus on only technology transfer. On the other hand, smaller forums (Less than 100 participants) are more like workshops where interaction is essential to meet objectives.

After determining the size of audience you expect to attend the forum, a location that can accommodate this size of a group must be found. The location should be centered in an area where the audience you’re trying to attract has the greatest presence. In other words, you don’t want to hold a forum in Nigeria for a topic that deals with the Gulf of Mexico unless it’s applicable to that region. When selecting a location, keep in mind to search for these key factors:

  • Where are the facilities
  • What are the advantages of using this particular facility
  • What are the associated costs and what is included
  • How far are the facilities from an airport, restaurants, and activities
  • Will they provided assistance in preparing meeting rooms
  • How far in advance must you book

The location you choose must me the forum objectives. Nevertheless, it is a good idea to keep a back-up location available in case something was to fall through the cracks.

Lessons Learned:

  • Some sort of formula should be derived to determine size of audience
  • By determining the size up front, objectives can be met through proper preparations
  • Pick a central location where industry has a major presence
  • Try to always maintain a back-up location in case something goes wrong

09. Initial Announcement

Once you have set a date and selected a location to hold the forum, an initial announcement should be distributed to industry. The question is how do you determine who should receive the announcement? One way is to use the names of members of specific societies or associations. Another way is through advertising in publications. But perhaps the best and most effective way is through word of mouth. A major responsibility of the champion, organizing committee members and speakers should be to promote the forum to their colleagues, companies, and any affiliated organizations.

Another question that will need to be answered is, how long before the actual forum do you make this initial announcement? This really depends on how long it takes to make all necessary meeting arrangements. However, between two and three months should give everyone sufficient time to prepare. When making the initial announcement these items should be declared:

  • Date of the forum
  • Location and cost of the forum
  • General description and purpose of the forum
  • Directions to the facilities
  • Accommodations in the area
  • Means of registration and payment
  • Where to look and who to contact for more information

With the advent of the internet several years ago, this tool is an excellent way of keeping forum additions and changes up to date without having to make additional mail-outs. Also, online registration with credit card processing is an efficient and easy way to process registration forms.

Lessons Learned:

  • Do all you can to promote the forum
  • Always disclose forum specifics during initial announcement
  • Give everyone enough time for preparations from the time you make the initial announcement
  • Use the internet when possible for forum information and registration

10. Hold Initial Organizing Committee Meeting

The first of a series of meetings should be the initial organizing committee meeting. All individuals who will be involved in any part of the forum preparations should attend this meeting. The purpose of the meeting is to:

  • Define the scope and objectives of the forum
  • Formulate forum proceedings
  • Set agenda and schedule
  • Confirm speaker selection
  • Distinguish which committee member(s) will contact each speaker
  • Set guidelines and time table

The organizing committee should determine at this stage what role each will play. They should also determine speaker presentation format. This is probably the most important meeting before the forum. It will set the foundation for future goals that will shape the outcome of the forum.

Lessons Learned:

  • Assign specific task to each member
  • Set definitive time table for completion of assigned task

Charter

Article I

(Name, Purposes and Objectives)

1.The name of this organization is the Drilling Engineering Association. The purposes and objectives of the Association are to advance the state-of-the-art of drilling wells by providing a forum for:

2.The presentation of proposals for industry drilling-related projects sponsored by Membership of the Association for participation by the Membership and non-members alike.

3.Exploring the levels of interest of the Membership in potential drilling related problems to aid in developing future industry sponsored projects.

4.Advising the academic organizations and other drilling research oriented groups of the needs and interests of the Membership.

5.This organization is not organized for profit or organized to engage in an activity ordinarily carried on for profit. No part of any net earnings of this organization shall inure to the benefit of, or be distributed to, its members, trustees, officers or other private persons; provided however, that the Association shall be authorized and empowered to reimburse its membership, trustees, officers or other private persons for reasonable expenses incurred by these persons in furtherance of the purpose for which the Association was organized.

Article II
(Membership)

1.MEMBER: Any individual, firm, partnership, association or corporation engaged in the production of oil and gas may become a Member of the Association by (a) paying the then current Initial Fee, (b) accepting this Charter, (c) appointing a Representative and an Alternate Representative who shall have the power and authority to represent such Member in all matters relating to the Association and (d) paying a pro rata share of the routine expenses of the Association as determined by the Advisory Committee. Any such Representative or Alternate Representative may be replaced at any time by the particular Member. Memberships may not be transferred. A Membership shall continue so long as the Member complies with the terms and provisions hereto and continues to pay its share of fees and assessments as provided for herein.

2.INITIAL FEE: Members joining the Association on or before February 1, 1983, shall pay one time, an Initial Fee of Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00). After February 1, 1983, the one time Initial Fee for new Members joining the Association shall be established annually by the Advisory Committee.

3.ASSOCIATE MEMBER: Any individual, firm, partnership, association, university, college, or other organization associated with the oil and gas industry or interested in drilling engineering may become an Associate Member of DEA by (a) paying the then current Initial Fee for Associated Members, (b) accepting this Charter, (c) appointing a Representative and an Alternate Representative with the intent of staying abreast of the Association’s activities via meetings and correspondence, (d) paying a pro rata share of the routine expenses of the Association as determined by the Advisory Committee. Any such Representative or Alternate Representative may be replaced at any time by the particular Associate Member Organization. An Associate Membership shall continue so long as the Associate Member complies with the terms and provisions hereto and continues to pay its share of fees and assessments as provided herein.

4.INITIAL FEE FOR ASSOCIATE MEMBERS: Associate Members joining the Association on or before December 31, 1995, shall pay one time, an Initial Fee of Two Hundred Dollars ($200.00 U.S.). After December 31, 1995, the one time Initial Fee for new Associate Members joining the Association shall be established annually by the Advisory Committee.

Article III
(Organization)

1. OFFICERS: The Officers of the Association shall consist of a Chairman, Vice-Chairman, and Secretary-Treasurer. Candidates for Chairman and Vice-Chairman shall be a Member Representative or an Alternate Member Representative. Candidates for Secretary-Treasurer may be a Member Representative, an Alternate Member Representative, an Associate Member Representative or an Alternate Associate Member Representative. Candidates will be nominated by a Nominating Committee of at least three (3) Member representatives selected by the Chairman at least sixty (60) days prior to the Annual Meeting. Additional candidates may be nominated from the floor. Officers shall be elected by majority vote of the Members present and voting at the Annual Meeting and shall take office on the first day of the following calendar year. Their term of office shall be for two (2) years or until the next set of officers takes office, unless earlier removed for cause by vote representing at least eighty percent (80%) of all of the members.

a. The Chairman shall preside at and conduct meetings of the Association and appoint such task forces, special and standing committees as he deems necessary and advisable to carry out the purposes and objectives of the Association. The Chairman may appoint individuals to such task forces or committees or he may invite Members to furnish individuals to serve on such task forces and committees.
b. The Vice-Chairman shall act in the absence of the Chairman.
c. The Secretary-Treasurer shall prepare and distribute a meeting agenda prior to each meeting of the Association, any committee or task force, maintain the minutes, records, and files of the Association, pay routine and authorized expenses by checks drawn on the account of the Association, and furnish at least an annual accounting statement to the Membership.

2. CHAPTERS: A chapter of the Association may be formed with the approval of the Membership. The approved resolution creating the chapter shall constitute the Charter of the chapter and define the chapter and its scope. No chapter shall have the power to obligate the Association. The Charter of the chapter may be modified or revoked by the Membership.

a. The chapter charter shall include provision for a Chapter Chairman, whose Responsibilities and authority are as follows:

1. Schedule and conduct chapter meetings, and otherwise direct chapter activities.

2. Represent the chapter with the Association.

3. Approve chapter expenditures within the currently approved annual budget and chapter reserve.

4. Submit a written accounting of chapter expenditures and financial status to the Association Chairman and Secretary-Treasurer, along with a proposed annual budget and chapter reserve for the next annual period. These shall be submitted two weeks prior to the Association Annual meeting.

b. Procedures for the election of the Chapter Chairman and any other chapter officers shall be included in the chapter charter. The Association Chairman shall have the power to appoint a temporary Chapter Chairman unless an acting Chapter Chairman is otherwise provided.

c. Each Association Member may name one Chapter Representative and one Alternate Chapter Representative for each active Association chapter. These Representatives may be either different or the same as the Association representatives.

3. ADVISORY COMMITTEE: In addition to the various task force(s) and committee(s) which the Chairman is authorized to appoint, there shall be an Advisory Committee. No Member or Associate Member shall have more than one representative on the Advisory Committee.

a. Advisory Committee shall be as follows:

1. One shall be the current Chairman of the Association who shall also be the Chairman of the Advisory Committee.

2. One shall be the current Vice-Chairman of the Association who shall also be Vice-Chairman on the Advisory Committee.

3. One shall be the current Secretary-Treasurer of the Association who shall also be the Secretary of the Advisory Committee.

4. Three (3) additional Advisory Committee Members shall be elected from Member or Alternate Members by the Members. The tenure of office of these committee members shall be concurrent with the Association officers unless earlier removed by a vote representing at least eighty percent (80%) of all the Members.

5. Three (3) shall be elected from Associate Member Representatives by the Associate Membership. The desired (though not required) makeup of the three will would consist of one representative from the “Service Company” sector; one from a Government agency; and one from a University or Research organization. The tenure of office of these committee members shall be concurrent with the Association officers unless earlier removed by a vote representing at least eighty percent (80%) of all the Membership.

6. Each current Chapter Chairman

b. Duties of the Advisory Committee shall include the following:

1. Provide advice and consultation to the Chairman with respect to the performance of his duties in meeting the purposes and objectives of the Association.

2. Establish guidelines and procedures for the submittal of programs and/or projects to be considered by the Association.

3. Establish the current Initial Fee at the first meeting of each calendar year and administer the expenditure of funds as set forth in Article VI of the Charter. Such Initial Fee shall not exceed an amount approved by a vote of two-thirds (2/3) of the voting Members of the Association.

4. Elect interim replacements for officers of the Association or individuals in the Advisory Committee who resign or are removed prior to the completion of their term of office. Such interim replacements shall hold office until the next regularly elected officers take office.

5. Such other duties as may be authorized by the Association.

c. The Advisory Committee may act, within its scope of authority, without a convened meeting by telephone, e-mail, or letter. For such actions, five (5) Advisory Committee members will constitute a quorum.

Article IV
(Rights of Members/Associate Members)

1. The right of each Member and Associate Member of the Association to act individually and independently concerning any matter within the scope of the Association’s activities shall not be impaired or restricted by the action of the Association. Each member shall have the right individually to take such action as it deems advisable, whether or not such action conflicts with the action of the Association. Such individual action shall not purport to represent action of the Association.

2. Association business will be conducted on a non-confidential basis.

3. At reasonable times upon reasonable notice, each Member/Associate Member shall have access to and the right to inspect for any proper purpose the books and records of the Association and to make copies or extracts thereof.

4. Any Member or Associate Member may withdraw from the Association by giving notice in writing as provided in Article II, and such party shall not be liable for any costs or expenses incurred subsequent to receipt of such notice of withdrawal by the Secretary-Treasurer. However, such party shall continue to be liable for its proportionate part of all costs and expenses incurred or committed to prior to Association receipt of notice of withdrawal.

Article V
(Conduct of Business)

1. Expect as otherwise specifically provided herein, all matters coming before the Association shall be decided by the vote of a majority of the total voting Membership present.

2. Prior to the conduct of business at a meeting of the Association, a quorum of at least fifty percent (50%) of the Members must be present, but a lesser number may adjourn the meeting. Members present at a duly called or held meeting at which a quorum is present may continue to do business until adjournment notwithstanding the departure of Members leaving less than a quorum. Each Member present shall be entitled to one vote. A Member may issue a written power of proxy to one of its employees to exercise in person. No other form of proxy shall be permitted.

a. If a quorum is not present, the attending Members at a regular Association meeting may direct that a mail, or e-mail ballot be conducted on a proposal of Association business.

3. By direction of the Chairman, the Advisory Committee, or as provided in Article V.2.a, a vote of all of the Members may be taken by mail or e-mail but requests for such mail or e-mail votes must be accompanied by as much notice and supporting information as the time and circumstances will reasonably permit. If a majority of all of the Members approve any matter by vote taken by mail or e-mail, the matter shall be considered as approved the same as if voted on in a meeting of the Association. The Secretary-Treasurer shall promptly advise the Members of the results of all such mail or e-mail votes and any action taken pursuant thereto.

4. This Charter may be amended by affirmative vote of at least seventy-five percent (75%) of all of the Members.

5. The Association shall not itself participate in joint industry projects. Each Member or Associate Member who participates in a joint industry project presented by the Association hereby agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless, the Association and the Association’s Members/Associate Members who are not participants in such project of and from any liability of any kind whatsoever in any way resulting from any contract, agreement, understanding, or dealing in connection with such projects, which indemnity and obligations shall survive the withdrawal or expulsion of the Member/Associate Member from the Association.

Article VI
(Funding)

1. Funding will be handled by the Advisory Committee through an annual budgeting process which anticipates routine and incidental administrative expenses. Such funds shall be raised by equal assessments to the Members/Associate Members.

2. The annual budget for the coming year shall be presented to the Membership for approval by majority vote at the Annual Meeting. The budget will include anticipated expenditures and revenues, and will state the proposed Annual Fee.

a. The Annual Budget shall include provision for chapter budgets and reserves for Membership approval. Once approved, these funds shall be transferred to the Chapter, and may be disbursed under the authority of the Chapter Chairman.

3. If additional funds are required by the Association during the year due to increased expenditures, needs and/or a decrease in the membership count, an updated budget will be submitted for approval by a majority vote of the Members/Associate Members. Such approved funding not covered by the Annual Fee may be acquired by assessment of the Members/Associate Members. The Association or its officers are prohibited from making commitments that would exceed the approved budget and reserves. The Annual Fee shall be in addition to the one time Initial Fee.

4. If additional funds are required by a chapter during the year, these may be approved by the Association Chairman, but in no event exceeding the authority in paragraph 3 of the Article. The Chairman shall advise the Membership of such action at the next regular Association meeting.

Article VII
(Meetings)

1. The Association will meet as often as deemed necessary by the Chairman or Advisory Committee to carry out the purposes and objectives of the Association. In any event, however, no less than one (1) meeting shall be held in any calendar year, the Annual Meeting. Written notice of any meeting will be given at least fourteen (14) days prior to such meeting unless a shorter notice is unavoidable. All notices shall contain the reason for the meeting, the date, place, and time it is to be held, and an agenda of the items proposed to be considered.

2. The Annual Meeting shall be held each year in November or December.

Article VIII
(Payment Delinquency)

In the event a Member or Associate Member has not paid any assessment within ninety (90) days after receipt of billing from the Secretary-Treasurer, the account of such Member or Associate Member shall be considered delinquent. At the expiration of ninety (90) days, the Secretary-Treasurer shall mail notice of delinquency to such Member or Associate Member by Registered or Certified Mail. In the event the Secretary-Treasurer has not received payment within thirty (30) days after the mailing of notice of delinquency, such Member or Associate Member shall be dropped automatically from the Membership as of the end of such thirty (30) day period. Such Member or Associate Member, however, shall continue to be liable for its obligations accrued prior to such termination of its Membership

Article IX
(Dissolution)

1. This Association may be dissolved upon the affirmative vote of at least seventy-five percent (75%) of all the Members.

2. Upon the dissolution of the Association, the Advisory Committee shall, after paying or making provision for the payment of all of the liabilities of the Association, dispose of all of the assets of the Association to such organization or organizations organized and operated exclusively for charitable, educational, religious, or scientific purposes as shall at the time qualify as an exempt organization or organizations under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 (or the corresponding provision of any future United States Internal Revenue Law), as the Advisory Committee shall be disposed of by the appropriate court of the county in which the principal office of the Association is then located, exclusively for such purposes or to such organization or organizations, as said court shall determine, which are organized and operated exclusively for such purposes.

Original Charter Approved 1st day of January, 1983.

Amended April 27, 1983.

Amended March 9, 1987.

Amended November 16, 1995.

Amended April 1, 2002.

Amended November 20, 2003

This Charter is hereby approved and accepted this ________________ day of ______________
20_______.

MEMBERS: ___________________________________________ Signature

______________________________________________ Company

11. Hold Initial Speakers Meeting

The next meeting to be held is the speaker meeting. Each speaker should be prepared to discuss with others his intention and outline of his or her presentation. The main purpose of this meeting is to:

  • Confirm topic for each speaker
  • Describe objectives of forum to each speaker
  • Establish abstract and presentation format
  • Determine central location for delivery of abstract and presentation

It is important that each speaker be present at this meeting so that everyone is on the same level as to what the goals are of the forum.

Lessons Learned:

  • Speaker should be aware that their presentation should not be a sales pitch
  • Set deadline for electronic format of presentation which should be sent to a central location
  • Speaker presentations should all be presented from the same media or PC if possible

12. Coordinate Set-Up with Meeting Location

After assuring that everyone is on the same level regarding forum objectives, the next step is to convey this idea to the conference location. An extensive meeting with the facility representative should be held to:

  • Determine layout to meet forum objectives
  • Audio/Visual equipment needs and cost
  • Food/Drink requirements and cost
  • Determine man-power to be furnished during the forum
  • Set timetable for occupying and vacating conference rooms

The conference center should be receptive to all your ideas and should be willing to go out of their way to assure that the forum layout meets your goals. The facilities should be made available the night before the forum so that the organizers, moderators, and speakers have an opportunity to do a trial run.

Lessons Learned:

  • Do an initial walk through
  • Have the layout of the facilities prepared the day before the forum
  • Get assurance of spare audio/visual equipment and parts
  • Make sure extra pointers, microphones and other equipment are available
  • Don’t assume anything and get all agreements in writing
  • Make sure the correct name for the forum is used for reservation and location purposes

13. Final Announcement

At this point you should have communicated with quite a number of people regarding objectives, goals, and purpose of the forum. Consequently, your mailing list probably increased through word of mouth from those individuals you have been in contact with and through the feedback you may be receiving from the initial announcement. Therefore, when sending out the final announcement, be sure to include everyone that received the initial announcement plus all the new names you acquired.

The final announcement should be more specific than the initial announcement. All corrections, changes that resulted from organizing, speaker, and location meetings should be reflected in the details of the final announcement. The declaration items mentioned in the initial announcement should again be mentioned with set deadlines established during your preparations.

Be specific when referencing items such as:

  • Number of available spaces
  • Forum dates and times
  • Dress code
  • Number of available rooms and location of other accommodations
  • What the deliverables are in regards to the registration fee
  • Who should be contacted for more information

Quite a bit of promotion will still be necessary to get the word out. If you haven’t done so already, consider contacting and inviting companies and organization abroad. It is very amazing when you look at the lack of communication with our colleagues overseas. It seems as though we live in two separate worlds.

Lessons Learned:

  • Send final announcement at least one month prior to the forum
  • Be sure to keep the name of the forum consistent
  • Set deadline for registration and payment
  • Declare that there are a limited number of spaces available
  • Make international contacts

14. Hold Final Organizing Committee Meeting

This is the time to make any and all last minute changes in the agenda, speaker replacement, and set up of facilities. This meeting should probably be held at the facilities where the forum will be held and prior to distributing the final announcement. Any changes agreed upon at this meeting should be reflected in the final agenda and announcement. This is a good opportunity for the organizing committee members to view the facilities and layout of the forum therefore it is a good idea to have a facilities representative present. The most important items to be resolved at this meeting are:

  • Assure that each topic presented has a committed speaker
  • Make sure all moderators understand their individual forum responsibilities
  • Finalize the forum agenda
  • Make any last minute meeting location recommendations and changes
  • Determine what materials should be distribute at the forum
  • Determine who will generate the final report and what media and format will be used

All of the tasks assigned to each committee member should be reviewed and discussed so that everyone is aware of any issue that is unsettled. A need to determine unresolved items should be a top priority at this meeting.

Lessons Learned:

  • Make sure everyone is aware of their individual responsibility
  • Re-assign uncompleted tasks to committee members
  • Set short timetable for completion of each new task and keep all members in the loop

15. Hold Final Speakers Meeting

The final of a series of meetings is the speakers’ meeting. This should be an interactive meeting where the speakers are given an opportunity to ask questions and express any concerns they may have. This meeting should be held the day or night before the forum. The goals of this meeting is to:

  • Make sure speakers are prepared to present their topic
  • Make sure speakers are familiar with the surroundings of the facility
  • Familiarize the speakers with how the proceedings will be conducted
  • Make the speakers aware of where they can get assistance before, during, and after they present their topic

All speakers should be given a tour of the facilities and shown where they can meet privately to review or rehearse their presentations. A trail run of each presentation should be done so that the speaker’s gets a chance to view their presentations, as it will appear the following day. It may be a good idea to invite organizing committee members, moderators and all others involved in preparation of the forum to this meeting. This is a great opportunity for everyone to get acquainted and discuss the role each will be playing.

Lessons Learned:

  • Always do a trial run the day before the forum
  • Make sure each speaker lets you know if any extra audio/visual equipment will be necessary during his or her presentation
  • Invite others involved to the speaker meeting
  • Use of some sort of timing device to let speakers know when their time is up is helpful to keep proceedings moving smoothly

16. Conduct Forum

This is the moment you have been waiting for. All of the hard and long work put forward will now be displayed to a great number of people. The main thing you want is for everything to run smoothly. Arrangements should have been made to have sufficient people to do various functions throughout the proceedings of the forum. It’s a good idea to divide the responsibilities among these people so that not one person has to handle too much and can focus on his or her specific task. Some of the responsibilities of these people are:

  • Greet guest as they arrive
  • Distribute nametags, handouts, and other material or literature
  • Coordinate with audio/visual personnel
  • Coordinate with chairman, organizing committee, moderators, and speakers on their needs
  • Light and lapel microphone responsibility
  • Coordinate with facilities on food placement and service
  • Technical writer to keep notes for final report

The more you make the attendees feel comfortable the more they will enjoy the forum. Not everything will go as planned. Try to have a mental picture of what you plan to do if and when something goes wrong. A good forum is one that is able to recover from problems in an efficient and effective manner.

Lessons Learned:

  • Be prepared for the worst
  • Have sufficient personnel to handle specific tasks and don’t overload them with too many responsibilities
  • Know your surroundings in case of emergencies or if someone needs directions

17. Publish Report

Generating the final report will take some time to complete after the forum has concluded. To help this process a specialized technical writer should be hired to keep detailed notes of the forum proceedings. Several other methods can be used to aid in this process:

  • Make all available presentations, abstracts, and other materials accessible to those who are generating the report
  • Have chairman, organizing committee members, and moderators keep accurate notes
  • Video tape forum proceedings
  • Record audio comments throughout the proceedings

The final media and format of the published report is an issue that should have been discussed and defined at one of the earlier organizing meetings. Some of the media options that can be made available are hard copies (paperback), disk (floppy, zip, CD-ROM etc), or live videotape. In addition, the format of the produced media should be one that is popular and easily accessible to as many people as possible. A few of the types of formats, when generating disk copies, that are readily used due to popularity, simplicity, and availability are Word documents, PowerPoint presentations, and Adobe Acrobat files. The bottom line of which media and format to use will probably be governed by the budget allocated to produce the report and the audience that you plan to distribute the report to.

Lessons Learned:

  • Technical writer should have some background of forum topics
  • If video taping the proceedings, announce to the audience to mention if their statement is to be kept off the record
  • Publish the final report in a media and format that is accessible and readable to most of industry

18. Road Ahead

Your job is not’t completed once the forum has concluded. You have committed yourself to see the entire process to the end. The big question is what is the end? The end is to successfully accomplish the goals and objectives you originally set out to achieve. Conducting the forum has only laid the cards on the table. You must now determine how to play these cards in a way that will fulfill the desired needs of the participants, your organization, and industry as a whole.

Most forums are held for a specific reason. Some incentives that may have lured you to conducted the forum are:

  • A way to get people together that have similar goals
  • A means to openly discuss achievements and/or problems faced in a specific area
  • A tool to display and learn about new technology
  • A method of generating an interest to develop projects in a specific field
  • A manner of introducing an unexplainable problem in hopes of attracting sufficient interest to resolve this problem on a joint industry basis

Whatever the goal was that pushed you into conducting the forum; the doors can not be shut until you achieve what you initially intended to gain as a result of the forum. Then, you must take these results to the next level in hopes of finding a resolution to your original objectives.

Lessons Learned:

  • Announce at end of forum how you plan to follow-up with results
  • To maintain momentum, don’t wait too long to follow-up with the results of the forum

19. Conclusion, Acknowledgements, References

Conclusion

A forum is not only a great way to intermix with others to develop work needed to conduct successful business, it’s an ideal location where you can meet industry leaders with similar purposes and background. A key factor to conducting a successful forum is the atmosphere in which it is held. If you keep things off the record, participants tend to open up more with their thoughts and ideas. A well-conducted forum will allow sufficient time for interaction and give everyone an opportunity to express his or her point of view.

This report was intended to give you a bit of insight to what it takes to organize and conduct a successful forum. Since each forum has its own specific goals, the manner in which you conduct your forum can vary. However, there is one commonality with all forums, you want it to be successful and you want the outcome to meet your objectives. I hope by following some of the guidelines and lessons learned conveyed in this report, helps when conducting your next forum. Just remember that time, teamwork, and dedication should always be included in the equation.

Acknowledgements

American Association of Drilling Engineers (AADE)

Drilling Engineering Association (DEA)

Energy Research Clearing House (ERCH)

Minerals Management Service (MMS)

Shallow Water Flow Forum – Chairman, Organizers, Moderators, Speakers, and Attendees

References

Shallow Water Flow Forum: June 24-25, 1998; The Woodlands Conference Center & Resort, The Woodlands, Texas

Deep Water Drilling Workshop: September 24-25, 1997; Energy Research Clearing House (ERCH)/Houston Advanced Research Center (HARC) Facilities, The Woodlands, Texas

Drilling Engineering Association (DEA) / Energy Research Clearing House (ERCH): 1997 Membership Survey – DEA WebSite (http://www.dea.main.com)

Athens Group, Inc.

Company

Athens Group, Inc.
950 Threadneedle, Suite 275
Houston, Texas 77079
www.athensgroup.com

Representative

DON SHAFER
Safety Officer and Chief Technology Officer
Athens Group Inc.
950 Threadneedle, Suite 275
Houston, Texas 77079
512 345 0600, ext 117
Toll free: 877 499 8393, ext 117
Fax: 512 345 4088

Alternative

BILL O’GRADY
VP Engineering
Athens Group Inc.
950 Threadneedle, Suite 275
Houston, Texas 77079
512 413 5183
Toll free: 877 499 8393
Fax: 512 345 4088

Advanced Geotechnology, Inc.

Company

Advanced Geotechnology – A Weatherford Company.
Suite 1540, 521-3rd Ave. S. W.
Calgary, Alberta Canada T2P 3T3
www.advgeotech.com

Representative

PATRICK MCLELLAN
General Manager
ADVANCED GEOTECHNOLOGY INC.
1540, 521 – 3rd Ave S.W.
Calgary, Alberta, CANADA T2P 3T3
tel: 1-403-264-8433 fax: 1-403-234-9123

ABB Vetco Gray Inc.

Company

ABB Vetco Gray Inc.
1221 N. Houston Rosslyn Td
Houston, Texas 77086

Representative

IAN D. CALDER
ABB Vetco Gray Inc.
12203 Cypresswood Drive
Houston, Texas 77070

Mission

The Drilling Engineering Association (DEA) was formed to advance the technology related to drilling wells by providing a forum for:

* Presenting proposals for industry drilling-related projects sponsored by members of the Association for the benefit of both members and non-members.
* Exploring the different levels of interest from members in potential drilling related problems to aid in developing future industry sponsored projects.
* Acting as a liaison for DEA members with universities and other research groups

Welcome

Welcome

The Drilling Engineering Association (DEA) was formed to advance new technology related to drilling wells.
For additional information about the DEA, contact the DEA Chairman.

Click here to view the 2009 Quarterly Meeting Schedule:
The 2009 DEA Workshop will be held on 19 August at the Omni Houston Hotel Westside.

Click here to view the 2nd Quarter DEA meeting presentations.
The Drilling Engineering Association (DEA) was formed to advance the technology related to drilling wells by providing a forum for:

* Presenting proposals for industry drilling-related projects sponsored by members of the Association for the benefit of both members and non-members.
* Exploring the different levels of interest from members in potential drilling related problems to aid in developing future industry sponsored projects.
* Acting as a liaison for DEA members with universities and other research groups

DEA Workshop 2009

DEA Workshop 2009 – August 19, 2009

LOCATION:

AGENDA:

No info present

Second Quarter Meeting

Second Quarter Meeting – June 23, 2009

LOCATION: Weatherford, 515 Post Oak Blvd Houston, TX 77027

AGENDA:

9:00 am  Coffee, welcome & introduction

MAP:

First Quarter

Meeting Canceled

Third Quarter

Third Quarter – September 18, 2008

LOCATION: Chevron / 1500 Louisiana, Houston TX 77002

AGENDA:

Meeting was canceled due to Hurricane IKE.

DEA Workshop 2008

DEA Workshop 2008 – June 16th 2008

LOCATION: Moody Gardens Hotel / Seven Hope Blvd. / Galveston TX, 77554

AGENDA:

2008 Drilling Engineering Association Workshop & Exhibition 17-18 June, Moody Gardens Hotel, Galveston

Click here to download the conference registration form in PDF format.
Click here for online conference registration Speakers and Exhibitors are not eligible for online registration.

Click here for information on Sponsorship & Exhibition Opportunities

Click here to view Hotel Information
Click here to view information on Continuing Education Credits for Professional Engineers.

Click here to submit an abstract online

Drilling Engineering Association is pleased to issue a call for abstracts for its upcoming 2008 DEA Workshop & Exhibition, which will examine cutting-edge deepwater technologies and completions for sand control. The event will be held 17-18 June at Moody Gardens Hotel in Galveston, Texas.

For consideration, an abstract for each proposed presentation must be submitted to IADC no later than 15 March 2008.

General subject themes envisioned for the event include the following:

  • Deepwater Technologies
  • Innovative Rigs
  • Cutting-edge Deepwater Equipment
  • Completions for Sand Control

Authors are invited to submit proposals for presentation at the conference.

For consideration, an abstract for each proposed paper must be

submitted to IADC no later than 15 March 2008.

IADC will notify prospective presenters by 31 March 2008.

Please note that formal papers will be accepted, but are NOT required for this conference.

To be selected for presentation, papers must be of great interest to drilling contractors, operators, service companies, training institutions and equipment manufacturers.

EXHIBITION INFORMATION

A 10×10 space is $1500.
For more information, please contact
Stephanie Murphy at +1-713-292-1945 or stephanie.murphy@iadc.org

SPONSOR OPPORTUNITIES

Sponsor opportunities are now available!
For more information please contact
Stephanie Murphy at +1-713-292-1945 or stephanie.murphy@iadc.org

Hotel Information
Moody Gardens Hotel
Seven Hope Blvd.
Galveston, TX 77554
Phone: 1/409-741-8484
Fax: 1/409-683-4936
Internet: http://www.moodygardens.com


Room Rates: $500.00 per night (single or double) Rates available until 26 May 2008

Continuing Education Credits for Professional Engineers

Engineers are responsible for enhancing their professional competence throughout their careers. Licensed, chartered, and/or certified engineers are sometimes required by government entities to provide proof of continued professional development and training. Training credits are sometimes defined as Continuing Education Units (CEU) or Professional Development Hours (PDH).

10 hours of continuing education = 1 CEU
1 hour spent in professional-development activities = 1 PDH

CEU and PDH credits may be earned in a variety of activities that include:

  • Completion of college credit courses
  • Completion of continuing education courses offered by professional associations
  • Completion of correspondence, on-line, televised, videotaped, and other short course tutorials
  • Presenting or attending seminars, in-house courses, workshops, or professional technical presentations
  • Teaching or instructing courses
  • Publishing papers, articles or books
  • Active participation in professional or technical societies

IADC does not have information about number of credit hours that can be earned in these activities. Individuals should contact their licensing, chartering, or certifying entity for specific details.

Licensing authorities normally require the engineer to keep a diary of PDHs. If audited, the licensed engineer can use conference registration receipts to document attendance. IADC can also provide written confirmation of participation in this activity, if requested.

For more information on the continuing education program,
visit the Texas Board of Professional Engineers.

MAP:


First Quarter Meeting

First Quarter Meeting – March 27 2009

LOCATION: Baker Hughes, 2001 Rankin Road, Houston TX 77073

AGENDA:

9:00 AM

Coffee (Business Cards)

9:25 AM

Introduction and Welcome – Cheryl Stark, BP

9:30 AM

Update on DEA Projects:

  • Shoulder/Thread Verifier System (DEA 160)Raymond J Dishaw, Global Systems Inc
  • Project to Develop an Improved Methodology for Wellbore Stability Prediction (DEA-161) William Standifird, Knowledge Systems Inc.
  • DeepTrek JIP for Advancing Deep, Hard Rock Drilling Performance Through Controlled, Full-scale Laboratory Drilling Experiments with Aggressive Bits and Specialized Fluids (DEA-162) – Ron Bland, Baker Hughes Drilling Fluids

10:15 AM

2008 DEA Workshop Planning Mike Killalea, IADC

10:30 AM

Break

10:45 AM

Applications of Intellipipe in the Wamsutter Area– Maximo Hernandez, Grant Prideco & Steve Edwards, BP

11:45 AM

Lunch & Adjournment – Cheryl Stark, BP

MAP: