Mud-Motor Characterization Joint-Industry Project Proposal September 1 st, 2016
Previous Joint-Industry Projects Conoco Consortium SPE Paper 22735
Objectives Improved Motor Quality Assurance Consistent Performance Longer Motor, MWD & Bit Life Realistic Models for Automation Higher Performing Motor Designs End-of-Run Motor-Grading Motor Specification Guidelines
Torque (ft-lbf) rev / gal Rubber Meets the Rock New Quasi-Steady State ~ Power-Section Wear ~ Lithology Changes Dynamics ~ Micro-Stalling ~ Transmission Wear 0 0 Time Worn Differential Pressure (psi)
Instrumented Dynamometer Rotation Speed & Torque Rigid Support Stator Temperatures & Pressure Damped Constraint Bit Dynamics Rotor Dynamics & Temperature Bending Force BHA Dynamics Output Flow Rate, Pressure & Temperature Input Flow Rate, Pressure & Temperature
Primary Work-Scope a. 6 ¾ * Conventional Dynamic Performance vs. Fit b. 6 ¾ Conventional Rotor vs. Wear Rate c. 6 ¾ Conventional Transmission Dysfunctions d. 6 ¾ Conventional Downhole Technique e. 6 ¾ Even-Wall Dynamic Performance vs. Fit f. 6 ¾ Even-Wall Rotor vs. Wear Rate g. 6 ¾ Even-Wall Downhole Technique * 6 ¾ are 7:8 motors with 5.0 and 3.3 Stages
d. Downhole Technique 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Pre-Drill X-mission Inspection + Rotor & Stator Mapping Pre-Drill Instrumented Dynamometer Performance Test Pre-Drill Downhole Performance Matrix Test Drill Using Lessons Learned & Occasional Matrix Tests Pre-Trip Downhole Performance Matrix Test Post-Drill Instrumented Dynamometer Performance Test 7. Post-Drill X-mission Inspection + Rotor & Stator Mapping
Secondary Priorities h. 6 ¾ Fit, Polymer & Profile i. Conventional 6 ¾ Work per Stage vs. Dogleg j. Even-Wall 6 ¾ Work per Stage vs. Dogleg k. Conventional 8 * Dynamic Performance vs. Fit l. Conventional 8 Wear Rate m. Conventional 8 Downhole Technique n. Conventional 6 ¾ Shelf-Life & Re-Run Criteria * 8 is a 7:8 motor with 4.0 Stages
h. Fit, Polymer & Profile 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Measure Snug Rotor & Stator Profiles * before Testing Perform Conventional Soft Dynamic Performance Tests Perform Even-Wall Soft Dynamic Performance Tests Measure Stator & Rotor Profiles after Testing Repeat with a Looser Rotor-Stator Fit 6. Measure Stator & Rotor Profiles after Testing * Nominally the same motors from different manufacturers
i. Work per Stage vs. Dogleg 1. 2. 3. 4. Measure Snug Rotor & Stator Profiles before Testing Insert Pressure & Temperature Probes into Stator Insert Temperature & Vibration Probes into Rotor Measure Dynamic Performance while Applying Bending 5. Measure Rotor & Stator Profiles after Testing
Possible Investigations o. 5 * Even-Wall Performance vs. Fit p. 5 Even-Wall Wear Rate q. 5 Even-Wall Downhole Technique r. 5 Work per Stage vs. Pitch & Dogleg s. 6 ¾ Conventional 4:5 / 7.0 Performance vs. Fit t. 6 ¾ Conventional 4:5 / 7.0 Wear Rate u. 6 ¾ Conventional 4:5 / 7.0 Downhole Technique * 5 are 7:8 motors with 5.0 Stages
Summary of the Science Measure Fit, Wear & Roughness using Downhole Sensors Optimize Downhole Performance from Lessons Learned Assess the Effects of Polymers, Profiles & Shelf Life Measure the Effect of Doglegs on Motor Stages Improve our Understanding of Data Uncertainties Develop More Realistic Models for Drilling Automation
Project Timeline I. Initial Proposal (7/16-8/16) II. Refine Scope-of-Work (9/16) III. Participants Review (10/16) $ Subscription (1/17) $$ V. Acquisition of Data (2/17-6/17) VI. Data Distribution (7/17) VII. Publish Generic SPE Report (9/17)
Participants ( ~ US$ 80k) Oil Companies Science Committee Motors Dynamometer & Sensor Rental Witnessing Tests Motor Manufacturers (in-kind) Science Committee Motors Service Companies (in-kind) Sensors & Motors 3 rd Parties (in-kind) & Universities Data Analyses & Models
Deliverables Qualified Dynamometer Data Recommended Dynamometer Procedures Quantified Motor Performance Procedures to Extend Motor, MWD & Bit Life More Realistic Motor Models Data Quality Audits & Data Analyses SPE Paper Documenting the Project