Chapter 2

Data Collection
The most important aspect of preparing the well plan, and subsequent drilling
engineering, is determining the expected characteristics and problems to be encountered in the
well. A well cannot be planned properly if these environments are unknown. Therefore, the
drilling engineer must initially pursue various types of data to gain insight used to develop the
projected drilling conditions.

Offset Well Selection

The drilling engineer is usually not responsible for selecting well sites. However, he
must work with the geologist for the following reasons:

 Develop an understanding of the expected drilling geology.

 Define fault block structures to help select offset wells similar in nature to the
prospect well.
 Identify geological anomalies as they may be encountered in drilling the prospect
well.

A close working relationship between drilling and geology groups can be the difference between
a producer and an abandoned well.
An example of geological information that the drilling group may receive is shown in
Figure 2-1. The geologists have found significant production from E.B. White #2. Contouring
the pay zones has yielded the contour map in Figure 2-1. The prospect well should encounter the
producing structure at the approximate depth as the E.B. White #2.
A trimetric plot (Figure 2-2) is useful as a conceptual tool. It adds a third dimension not
presented in Figure 2-1. The drilling engineer can view the projected targets and develop a
better understanding of the goal.
Maps showing the surface location of offset wells are available from commercial
cartographers. (Figure 2-3) These maps normally provide the well location relative to other
wells, operator, well name, depth, and type of produced fluids. In addition, some maps contour
regional formation tops.
The map in Figure 2-3 is defined according to township, range and section. In some rare
cases, a specific township and range may have several hundred sections. This scheme is used
throughout the United States except in Texas where the wells are usually located by county and
abstract. (Figure 2-4)
Selecting offset wells to be used in data collection is important. Using Figure 2-3 as an
example, assume that a 13,000 ft prospect is to be drilled in the northeast corner of Section 30,
T18S, R15E. The best candidates for offset analyses are as follows:

2.1
Fig. 2-1 Contour map.

Fig. 2-2 Trimetric Plot.

2.2
Fig. 2-3 Section map illustrating townships, ranges and sections.

Fig. 2-4 Texas map illustrating abstracts.

2.3
 Operator Section (T18S, R15E)
Shell, 15,000 ft 30
Union of California, 14,562 ft 29
Huber, 12,521 ft 21
Exchange, 12,685 ft 19
Houston Oil and Minerals, 17,493 ft 19

Although these wells were selected for control analysis, available data from any well in the area
should be analyzed.

Data Sources

Data sources should be available for virtually every well drilled in the US. Drilling costs
prohibit the rank wildcatting that occurred years ago. Although wildcats are currently being
drilled, seismic data, as a minimum, should be available for pore pressure estimation.
Common types of data used by the drilling engineer are as follows:

 bit records  seismic studies

 mud records  well surveys
 mud logging records  geological contours
 IADC drilling reports  databases of service company
 scout tickets files
 log headers
 production history

Each record contains data that may not be available with other sources. For example, log
headers and seismic work are useful, particularly if these data are the only available sources.
Many data sources exist in the industry. Some operators consider the records
confidential, when in fact the important information such as well testing and production data
becomes public domain a short time after the well is completed. The drilling engineer must
assume the role of “detective” to define and locate the required data.
Data sources include bit manufacturers and mud companies who regularly record
pertinent information on well recaps. Bit and mud companies usually make this data available to
the operator. Log libraries provide log headers and scout tickets. Internal company files often
contain drilling reports, IADC reports, and mud logs. Many operators share old offset
information if they have no current leasing interest.

Bit Records
An excellent source of offset drilling information is the bit record. It contains data
relative to the actual drilling operation. A typical record for a relatively shallow well is shown in
Figure 2-5.
The heading of the bit records provides information such as the following:

 operator  well location

 contractor  drillstring characteristics
 rig number  pump data

2.4
 Fig. 2-5 Bit record for a shallow well.

In addition, the bit heading provides dates for spudding, drilling out from under the surface
casing, intermediate casing depth, and reaching the hole bottom.
The main body of the bit record provides the following details:

 number and type of bits  pump data

 jet sizes  mud properties
 footage and drill rates per bit  dull bit grading
 bit weight and rotary operating  comments
conditions
 hole deviation

The vertical deviation is useful in detecting potential dogleg problems.

Comments throughout the various bit runs are informative. Typical notes such as “stuck
pipe” and “washout in drillstring” can explain drilling times greater than expected. Drilling
engineers often consider the comments section on bit (and mud) records as important as the
information in the main body of the record.
Bit grading data can be valuable in well planning if the operator assumes the observed
data are correct and representative of the actual bit condition. The bit grades assist in preparation
of a bit program identifying the most (and least) successful bits in the area. Bit running problems
such as broken teeth, gauge wear, and premature failures can be observed and preventive
measures can be formulated for the new well.
Drilling Analysis. Bit records can provide significantly more useful data if the raw
information is analyzed. Plots can be prepared that detect lithology changes and trends. Cost-
per-foot analyses can be made. Crude, but often useful, pore pressure plots can be prepared.
Raw drill-rate data from a well and an area can detect trends and anomalies. Figure 2-6
shows drill-rate data from a well in South Louisiana. A decreasing drill rate is expected as
shown.

2.5
 Changes in the trend might might suggest some anomaly, as in Figure 2-7. This
illustration is the composite drill rates for all wells in a South Louisiana township and range.
The trend change at approximately 10,000 ft was later defined as the entrance into a massive
shale section.

Fig. 2-6 Raw drill rate from South Louisiana well.

Cost-per-foot studies are useful in defining optimum, minimum-cost drilling conditions.

A cost comparison of each bit run on all available wells in the area will identify bits and
operating conditions for minimum drilling costs. The drilling engineer provides his expected rig
costs, bit costs, and assumed average trip times. The cost-per-foot calculations are completed
with Eq. 2.1:

C B  C R TT  C R TR
$/ft  (2.1)
Y
Where:
$/ft = cost per foot, dollars
CB = bit cost, dollars
CR = rig cost, dollars
TR = rotating time, hrs
TT = trip time, hrs
Y = footage per bit run, ft

A cost-per-foot analysis for Figure 2-5 is shown in Figure 2-8.

Trip times should be averaged for various depth intervals. Several operators have
conducted field studies to develop trip-time relationships. (Table 2-1) The most significant
factors affecting trip time include depth and hole geometry, i.e., number and size of collars, and
downhole tools. Table 2-1 can be used in the cost-per-foot equation (Eq 2.1).
2.6
 Table 2-1
Average Trip times

Hole (bit) size, in.

Medium
Small (8.75- Large
Depth, ft (< 8.75) 9.875) (> 9.875)
2,000 1.5 3.0 4.5
4,000 2.5 4.2 5.75
6,000 3.5 5.4 7.0
8,000 4.7 6.5 8.0
10,000 5.8 7.25 9.0
12,000 7.0 8.25 10.25
14,000 8.25 9.25 11.50
16,000 9.75 10.25 12.50
18,000 11.00 11.25 13.75
20,000 11.8 12.25 15.0

Fig. 2-7 Composite drill rate data for a South Louisiana region. A significant trend change is
observed at approximately 10,000 ft.

The dc-exponent method of pore pressure calculations has been applied successfully on bit
records. Although the quantitative results should be viewed with caution, the method is useful in
many cases. (Fig. 2-9) The quality of the results increases in formations with few sand
sequences (cleaner shales). A variety of pressure prediction techniques are covered in Chapter 3.
The data required must be gathered from offset well records.

2.7
 Fig. 2-8 Cost per foot for the bit run in Figure 2-5.

Example 2.1

Calculate the cost per foot and the cumulative section costs for the following data.
Assume a rig cost of $12,000/day.

Depth in, Depth out, Rotating

ft ft time, hrs Bit cost, $
Well A 6,000 7,150 23 1,650
7,150 8,000 20 1,650
Well B 6,000 8,000 42 2,980

Determine which drilling conditions, Well A or B, should be followed in the prospect

well. Use a 9.875 in. bit.

Solution:
1. The hourly rig cost is $500. Trip times from 7,150 and 8,000 ft are 6.0 hr and 6.5
hr respectively.
2. The cost per foot for Bit #1 on Well A (6,000-7,150 ft) is :

2.8
 C B  C R TR  C R TT
$/ft  (2.1)
Y
1,650  (500)(23)  (500)(6.0)

1,150
 $14.04 /ft
For Bit #2:

1,650  (500)(20)  (500)(6.50)

$/ft 
850
 $17.53/ft

3. The cumulative cost for Well A is:

Bit #1 $14.04/ft  1,150 ft  $16,146.00

Bit #2 $17.53/ft  850 ft  $14,900.50
Total  $31,046.50

4. The cost per foot for Well B is:

2,980  (50)(42)  (500)(6.5)

$/ft 
2,000
 $13.62/ft

The section cost is $27,230.

5. Since the cost per foot is lower in Well B, drilling conditions for Well B should be
implemented.

Mud Records

Drilling mud records describe the physical and chemical characteristics of mud system.
The reports are usually prepared daily. In addition to the mud data, hole and drilling conditions
can be inferred. Most personnel believe this record is important and useful.
Mud engineers usually prepare a daily mud check report form. Copies are distributed to the
operator and drilling contractor. The form, Fig. 2-10, contains current drilling data such as the
following:

 well depth  pump data

 bit size and number  solids controls equipment
 pit volume  drill string data

2.9
 Fig. 2-9 Formation pressure (and fracture gradient) plot as calculated from the dc exponent
example; fracture gradient plot shown for illustrative purposes.

The report also contains mud properties data such as the following:

 mud weight  chloride content

 pH  calcium content
 funnel viscosity  solids content
 plastic viscosity  cation exchange capacity (or MBT)
 yield point  fluid loss
 gel strength  solids content

An analysis of these characteristics taken in the context of the drilling conditions can provide
clues to possible hole problems or changes in the drilling environment. For example, an unusual
increase in the yield point, water loss, and chloride content suggests that salt (or salt water) has
2.10
contaminated a fresh-water mud. If kick control problems had not been encountered, it is
probable that salt zones were drilled.
A composite mud recap form, Fig. 2-11, is usually prepared. It contains a daily properties
summary. It may also include comments pertaining to hole problems.
Drilling Analysis. Daily reports prepared by the mud engineer are useful in generating
depths vs days plots (Fig. 2-12). These plots are as important to well cost estimating as pore
pressures are to the overall well plan. Other types of records, i.e., bit records and log headers, do
not provide sufficient daily detail to construct the plot as accurately as mud records.

An analysis of the plots in the offset area surrounding the prospect well can provide the
following:

 expected drilling times for various intervals

 identification of better drilling conditions by examining the lowest drilling times in the
offset wells
 location of potential problem zones by comparing common difficulties in the wells

After the offset wells have been analyzed, a projected depth vs days plot is prepared for the
prospect well. (Chapter 19 provides additional details on developing depth vs days projections.)

IADC Reports
The drilling contractor maintains a daily log of the drilling operations, recorded on the
standard IADC-API report. It contains hourly reports for drilling operations, drillstring
characteristics, mud properties, bit performance, and time break-downs for all operations. These
reports are usually unavailable to other contractors or operators and, as a result, cannot be
obtained for offset well analysis without the operator’s cooperation.

Scout Tickets
Scout tickets have been available as a commercial service for many years. The tickets
were originally prepared by oil company representatives who “scouted” operations of other oil
companies. Current scout tickets contain a brief summary of the well (Fig. 2-13). The data
usually include the following:

 well name, location, and operator

 spud and completion dates
 casing geometries and cement volumes
 production test data
 completion information
 tops of various geological zones

The data source for scout tickets are the state or federal report forms filed by oil companies
during the course of drilling the well.

2.11
Fig. 2-10 Daily mud check report form. (Courtesy of NL Baroid)

2.12
Fig. 2-11 Composite mud recap. (Courtesy of NL Baroid)

2.13
Fig. 2-12 Depth vs days plot developed from a mud record.

2.14
Mud Logging Records
A mud log is a foot-by-foot record of drilling, mud, and formation parameters. Mud
logging units are often used on high pressure or troublesome wells. Many engineers consider the
mud log to be the best source of penetration rate data. Mud logging records are seldom available
to groups other than the well operators.
A section of a mud log is shown in Fig. 2-14. Drilling parameters normally included are
as follows:

 penetration rate
 bit weight and rotary speed
 bit number and type
 rotary torque

Mud logging scales are often arranged so the drill rate curve can be compared to the SP or
Gamma Ray curve on offset logs. The mud log may contain drilling-related parameters, such as
follows:

 mud temperatures  lithology

 chlorides  pore pressure analysis
 gas content

2.15
 Fig. 2-14 Section of a mud log.

The pore pressure can be computed form models such as the d-exponent or other proprietary
equations or can be measured by drillstem tests.

Log Headers

Drilling records similar to the previously described information are not available on all
offset wells. In these cases, log headers can yield useful drilling data. Easily attainable data from
the log headers, Fig. 2-15, include the following:

 logging depths
 mud weight and viscosity at each logging depth
 bit sizes
 inferred casing sizes and actual setting depths

If enough logging runs were made, a useful depth vs days plot can be constructed. Fig. 2-16 is
the depth vs days plot for Fig. 2-15. In some cases, drilling and well logging problems are noted
on the log.

Fig. 2-15 Top sections of a log header from a deep well.

2.16
Fig. 2-15 (continued)

2.17
 Fig. 2-16 Depth vs time plot from log header data. (Figure 2-15)

Production History

Production records in the offset area can provide clues to problems that may be
encountered in the prospect well. Oil and gas production can reduce the formation pressure and
cause differential pipe sticking. Production records provide pressure data from the flowing zones.
Unfortunately, pressures in the over- and underlying formations will not change appreciably.
This obscures detection with drilling parameters. (Chapter 5 gives suggestions on the amount of
differential pressure that can be tolerated without inducing pipe sticking.)

2.18
Example 2.2
A prospect well has the Concordia B sand as its intermediate target zone. Production
records indicate the original bottom-hole pressure prior to production form the B sand was 5,389
psia at 9,890 ft true vertical depth (TVD). Currently, the producing BHP is 3,812 psia and the
product is gas. A 10.7 lb/gal mud was required to drill the intermediate shale sections contiguous
to the Concordia sand. A 12.1-lb/gal mud is required to drill to 12,050 ft. If a maximum pressure
of 2,000 psi is used as the upper differential limit, can the well be drilled with the Concordia
sand exposed or must the casting be set below the sand before reaching 12,050 ft? (Convert all
mud hydrostatic pressures to absolute pressure by adding 15 psia for atmospheric conditions.)

Solution
1. The mud required to balance the Concordia sand is 10.7 lb/gal, which exerts a hydrostatic
pressure of:

H.P.  0.052  9,890ft  10.7 lb/gal

 5,502 psig

2. The differential pressure with 10.7 lb/gal is:

5,517 psia  3,812 psia  1,705 psia

Therefore, pipe sticking should not be a problem with the 10.7–lb/gal mud.

3. A 12.1-lb/gal mud is required to reach 12,050 ft. This mud weight will create a
hydrostatic pressure at 9,890 ft of:

0.052 12.1 lb/gal  9,890 ft  6,222 psig

The differential pressure will be:

6,237 psia  3,812 psia  2,425 psia

4. A casing string, or liner, must be set below 9,890 ft since the 12.1 lb/gal required at the
bottom creates a differential pressure in excess of the 2,000-psi upper limit

Seismic Studies
Wildcat wells are seldom drilled without preliminary seismic work being done in the
area. Analysis of seismic reflections can eliminate the “wildcat” status of the well by predicting
pore pressures. Reynolds has shown that good agreement on the pore pressures can be attained
with seismic and sonic log data. Calculation techniques for travel time data are discussed in
Chapter 3.

2.19
 Problems
2.1 The company geologist indicates a well is to be drilled to 12,100 ft. The target is the
Discorbis A sand. The well location is Township 8S, Range 6W, is as follows:
“From the northwest section corner, go 1,580 ft east
along the section line and then 1,700 ft south.”
A section map shown in Fig. 2-17, and a counter map is in Fig. 2-18. Which wells should
be used to control the prospect well? Is the prospect well properly positioned according to
the contour map?

Fig. 2-17 Section map for Problem 2.1. The depth at which the Discorbis “A” sand is
encountered in each well is shown in parenthesis.

2.2 Calculate the drilling cost for the following data:

bit cost = $3,750
footage = 1,800 ft
rig cost = $8,500/day
trip time = 9.5 hr
rotating time = 64 hr

2.3 Recalculate the drilling cost in Problem 2.2 for rotating times of 20, 30, 40, and 50 hr.
Construct a cost plot. Summarize the conclusions from the calculations.

2.20
 Fig. 2-18 Contour map.

2.4 A well is to be drilled to 9,000 ft in an area where three control wells are available.
Compute the cost per foot to determine which control well should be used for optimum
drilling performance. Use Table 2-1 for trip times. Rig cost is $15,000/day.

Well Bit Size Depth In Depth Out Rotate Time Bit Cost IADC Type
(in.) (ft) (ft) (hrs) ($)
A 12.25 0 2,000 38 1,804 1,1,1
8.5 2,000 3,700 25 1,468 1,1,4
8.5 3,700 4,919 17 1,468 1,1,4
8.5 4,919 5,710 19 1,468 1,1,4
8.5 5,710 6,625 29 1,468 1,1,4
8.5 6,625 8,411 84 4,376 5,1,7
8.5 8,411 8,735 18 1,468 1,1,4
8.5 8,735 9,000 21 1,468 1,1,4

B 12.25 0 2,100 36 2,515 1,1,4

8.5 2,100 4,609 49 4,376 5,1,7
8.5 4,609 6,304 51 4,376 5,1,7
8.5 6,304 7,800 93 4,376 5,3,7
8.5 7,800 9,000 42 4,376 5,1,7

C 12.25 0 1,900 38 1,804 1,1,1

8.5 1,900 2,950 16 1,468 1,1,1
8.5 2,950 4,605 18 4,376 5,1,7
8.5 4,605 4,710 24 1,468 1,2,4

2.21
 8.5 4,710 5,308 29 1,468 1,2,4
8.5 5,308 6,992 49 4,376 5,1,7
8.5 6,992 7,905 47 4,376 5,1,7
8.5 7,905 8,614 65 4,376 5,3,7
8.5 8,614 9,000 12 1,468 1,1,4

2.5 A mud record was analyzed for an upcoming well. It showed a 12.0-lb/gal mud was used
at 14,050 ft when a kick was taken. The SIDPP was 480 psi. The SICP was not recorded
on the record. A mud weight of 14.2 lb/gal was used successfully to kill the well. The
well was drilled to 15,500 ft with no additional kick control problems.
The mud record indicated numerous pipe sticking problems after the kick was
killed. On two occasions, the pipe was stuck in normal pressure zones at 10,400 and
11,000 ft, respectively. The water-based mud system was finally displaced with an oil
mud that alleviated the pipe sticking problems.
What are the probable causes for the pipe sticking? Can it be prevented (or
minimized) in the prospect well? How? (For additional assistance, see Well Control
Problems and Solutions by Adams.)

2.6 Construct depth vs days plots for the 3 wells in Problem 2.4.

2.7 Construct a depth vs days plot for the bit record in Fig. 2-5.

2.8 Construct a depth vs days plot for the mud record in Fig. 2-11.

2.9 Refer to the trimetric plot in Fig. 2-2 and assume that a well is planned for one of the
fault blocks. Will offset well data from adjacent fault blocks be of value? What type of
information will be useful and why?

2.10 Townships are approximately 36 sq miles in area. What causes the area to vary in
different townships? Research other literature sources and discuss the method used by
federal agencies to define township locations.

2.11 What is the significance of Section 16 in some townships throughout the United States?

2.12 Discuss common well location methods used outside of the United States.

2.13 Define commonly used sources of public domain data.

2.14 Certain pieces of data from bit records are considered by many industry personnel as
questionable in reliability. What items are considered as unreliable and why?

2.15 Refer to the scout ticket shown in Fig. 2-13. What are the bottom-hole pressures in the #1
and #1-D sand? What is unusual about these data?

2.16 Using Fig. 2-15, prepare a drill-rate plot (ft/day) from the log header. How can this plot
be used in preparing the well plan? What are its weaknesses?

2.22
 References
Adams, N.J. Well Control Problems and Solutions, Tulsa: PennWell Publishing Co., 1978.

Various publications, Louisiana State Department of Natural Resources.

Fertl, Walter F. Abnormal Formation Pressures, Elsevier Press.

2.23