SPE/IADC 163420

Drillstring Mechanics Model for Surveillance, Root Cause Analysis, and

Mitigation of Torsional and Axial Vibrations
Deniz Ertas, ExxonMobil Research and Engineering Company; Jeffrey R. Bailey, SPE, ExxonMobil Development
Company; Lei Wang, SPE, ExxonMobil Technical Computing Company; Paul E. Pastusek, SPE, ExxonMobil
Development Company

Copyright 2013, SPE/IADC Drilling Conference and Exhibition

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE/IADC Drilling Conference and Exhibition held in Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 5–7 March 2013.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE/IADC program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper have
not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers or the International Association of Drilling Contractors and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not
necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers or the International Association of Drilling Contractors, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or
storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers or the International Association of Drilling Contractors is prohibited. Permission to
reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE/IADC copyright.

Abstract
Vibrations have been identified as one of the most frequent and persistent performance limiters by limiting weight-on-bit,
rate of penetration, or borehole quality even when they may be low enough not to cause damage to downhole tools and
equipment.

A general purpose drillstring mechanics model has been developed to analyze axial and torsional vibrations in the frequency
domain and provide vibration indices indicative of dysfunction in these modes. The model utilizes transfer matrices to solve
for harmonic perturbations around a baseline solution obtained from a torque-and-drag type analysis, and accounts for effects
of well path, tool joints, viscous damping due to the drilling fluid, surface boundary conditions, bit characteristics, and
special vibration mitigation tools. The model supports workflows for real-time vibration surveillance as well as post-drill
root cause analysis and well redesign. For example, real-time stick/slip severity monitoring is enabled using 1-second
surface measurements. As a well redesign tool, a large number of design alternatives can be quickly evaluated to mitigate
vibrations.

Case studies utilizing high-frequency surface/downhole drilling mechanics data validated the model and identified three types
of torsional dysfunctions with distinct signatures and mitigators: Unstable Stick/Slip, an instability associated mostly with the
lowest-frequency torsional resonance of the drillstring; Bit/Bottomhole Assembly (BHA) Stall, intermittent, sudden
mechanical jamming at the bottom of the drillstring; and Synchronous Torsional Oscillation, the amplification of periodic
excitations at torsional resonances of the drillstring. In one case study, the stick/slip surveillance tool was superior to real-
time downhole measurements in lag time, bandwidth, and accuracy. In another case, the root cause of prevalent Unstable
Stick/Slip was identified as velocity-weakening aggressiveness of the bit. Among redesign options using a topdrive
controller tuned to damp out the lowest-frequency torsional resonance was deemed most effective. One such controller was
evaluated in the field and was very effective at mitigating stick/slip in subsequent wells.

Introduction
The operator’s drilling performance-management process (Dupriest et al. 2005a; Dupriest et al. 2005b; Remmert et al. 2007)
has identified vibrations as one of the most frequent and persistent performance limiters. The issue is not restricted to
potential damage to downhole tools and equipment or non-productive time caused by severe vibrations. Even low levels of
vibration may impact performance by limiting weight-on-bit, rate of penetration, or borehole quality. A recently deployed
lateral vibration modeling tool, which was developed to enable drilling engineers to design vibration resistant BHAs, has
been providing substantial performance gains in worldwide drilling operations (Bailey et al. 2008; Bailey et al. 2010a; Bailey
et al. 2010b). In order to complement this capability for other vibrational modes, a general purpose model has been
developed to analyze axial and torsional vibrations independently of the lateral modes and to provide vibration indices
indicative of dysfunction in these modes. Although both axial and torsional vibrational dysfunctions are governed by
nonlinear motions in their ultimate manifestation, a significant amount of useful information can be obtained by an analysis
of small dynamic deviations of the drillstring configuration and forces around a baseline solution (i.e., a particular solution to
the equations of motion corresponding to specific operational parameters for which no vibrations are present). This
2 SPE/IADC 163420

perturbation analysis involves computation of linear response functions in order to subsequently investigate forced dynamic
response and linear stability of the system. The linearization of the motion around the baseline solution allows independent
linear harmonic analysis in the frequency domain and the use of the superposition principle to analyze the overall dynamic
motion.

Whereas prior work has utilized similar mathematical methods to analyze vibrations in drillstrings (Paslay and Bogy 1963;
Clayer et al. 1990), the drillstring mechanics model presented here (Ertas 2012) has novel features that substantially improve
on the effectiveness of the workflows it is intended for, and the model is more fit-for-purpose than much more sophisticated
and computationally intensive models developed for simulating drillstring mechanics (Aslaksen et al. 2006):

 The linearized equations are derived from a fully nonlinear equation of motion that incorporates known physics such as
rod elasticity, viscous damping, and Coulomb friction. Thus, the origin of various terms in the linearized equations and
their sensitivity to various operational parameters and boundary conditions is better understood.
 The solution technique utilizes semi-analytical transfer matrices that greatly reduce the number of discrete elements and
the associated computing time, enabling rapid screening of a large number of design alternatives on a PC.
 The model is able to account for effects related to well path, tool joints, viscous damping due to the drilling fluid, surface
boundary conditions, bit characteristics, as well as special drillstring elements including vibration mitigation tools,
provided that adequate mechanical response data is available. This allows the complexity of the model to be tailored to
available information.

A brief description the model is given in the Appendix. A more detailed description can be found in (Ertas et al. 2009,
2011a, 2011b). This manuscript focuses on the application of the model in drilling operations and associated workflows that
were developed for the benefit of operations personnel.

Surveillance from Surface

Extensive field validation and testing has illustrated the beneficial aspects of a frequency-domain model to develop a robust
surveillance workflow for torsional vibrations using real-time measurements commonly available at the surface. A common
difficulty in utilizing time-domain models to estimate downhole conditions from surface measurements is the ever-changing
and relatively unpredictable nature of the downhole boundary conditions (Clayer et al. 1990). In addition, changes in drilling
parameters can induce transient events that are difficult to analyze, since they typically depend on details of the system that
are not known, such as the precise trajectory of the borehole or the bottom-hole pattern created by the bit. Thus, trying to
match the observed time-series of rotary speed and torque to a drilling mechanics model can be counterproductive. Instead,
we focus on the robust features of torsional vibrations that do not depend strongly on the unknown details of the system and
have observable consequences at the surface.

For a given well section, the drillstring description, planned well survey, and planned drilling fluid properties such as density
and viscosity are known pre-drill with high certainty. Using these inputs, the linearized torsional response of the drillstring to
harmonic excitations at the bit as a function of frequency is calculated. For surveillance purposes, this computation uses a
“fixed” boundary condition at the surface and a “free” boundary condition at the bit. This choice is justified since most top
drive systems are controlled to keep rotary speed constant, and the reactive torque generated by the bit is often weakly
dependent on the rotary speed, as long as it does not stop turning to the right.

In one case study involving the lower vertical production section of an S-shaped well in the operator’s Piceance Creek Unit in
western Colorado, from 8,500 ft to 13,000 ft measured depth (MD), the surveillance tool was successfully validated. The
baseline solution shown in Fig. 1, at a MD of 8,800 ft, rotary speed of 70 RPM and weight-on-bit (WOB) of 15 klb, was
computed based on pre-drill information provided by the drill team. Displayed are the time-averaged stretch, tension, twist
and torque along the drillstring from the bit all the way to the surface, around which the linearized torsional and axial
vibrational modes are to be computed perturbatively. The user can easily change the drilling parameters with the provided
slider bars and rerun the calculation within a few seconds.

Fig. 2 shows a typical torsional compliance characteristic of the drillstring, which measures the ratio of the amplitude of the
twist experienced at the bit to the amplitude of torque at the bit as a function of driving frequency. The sharp peaks in the
plot (note the logarithmic scale) signal torsional resonances of the drillstring, where a relatively small torque excitation at a
specific frequency triggers a large variation in the bit rotary speed. The center frequencies, which can also be obtained by
traditional critical speed analysis, are only sensitive to the drillstring description and MD, which are known to relatively high
accuracy. Thus, these frequencies can be estimated pre-drill to within 3 to 4 %. The analysis tool also allows changing the
location of the excitation and detection points to compute impedances and amplification factors in addition to compliances.
SPE/IADC 163420 3

Fig. 1—The baseline solution around which linearized axial and torsional modes are computed.

Fig. 2—The effective torsional compliance at the drill bit as a function of excitation frequency. The peaks in magnitude correspond
to torsional resonances.
4 SPE/IADC 163420

The tool can also be used to display the waveform at any desired frequency. Fig. 3 shows the waveform of the first torsional
vibration resonance (i.e., the magnitudes of twist and torque as a function of position along the drillstring) corresponding to a
torque excitation at the bit with a reference amplitude of 50 lb-ft. This waveform is superimposed on the baseline solution
and oscillates at the frequency of the resonance. This resonance is frequently associated with the phenomenon that is called
stick/slip in the industry. Stick/slip can occur when the effective damping coefficient of this resonance becomes very small,
or even negative (see root-cause analysis below). This often results in a mechanical instability that grows until the dynamics
becomes nonlinear, typically when the bit momentarily stops at each period of the resonance. When the right conditions are
present, the instability can be triggered spontaneously by any random excitation associated with changing downhole
conditions.

Fig. 3—The amplitude of twist and torque oscillations along the drillstring, from the bit (left) to the surface (right), for the primary
torsional resonance at 13.1 cycles per minute, or a period of 4.58 seconds.

In order to distinguish this from other torsional vibrations as well as the generic term, we refer to it as unstable stick/slip. It is
manifested at the surface as large torque oscillations with a specific periodicity corresponding to the center frequency of the
resonance (or longer for full stick/slip), often at a relatively constant rotary speed, while the bit undergoes large rotary speed
oscillations with little to no change in bit torque, as seen in Fig. 3. Fortunately, the ratio of peak-to-peak surface torque –
dTorque – to bit rotary speed amplitude (Maximum bit RPM – Average bit RPM), hitherto referred to as dTorque-per-RPM,
is rather insensitive to the poorly constrained details of the drilling geometry, and can be obtained pre-drill with a moderate
accuracy of 10 to 15%. These two quantities, rotary speed and peak-to-peak surface torque variation, allow real-time
surveillance of maximum and minimum bit speed from commonly available surface data, provided the data is available at a
sufficient rate, such as 1 sample per second without excessive filtering or averaging. Note that we estimate only the
magnitude of the bit RPM fluctuations, not the actual time series, and our frequency-domain approach is well-suited for this
purpose.

For a given well section, the pre-drill calculation provides a lookup table or interpolating function for the period and
associated dTorque-per-RPM as a function of MD, as shown in Fig. 4. The surveillance system is connected to the rig
acquisition system via a WITS interface to obtain top drive torque, and rotary speed, and bit depth in real time. Estimated
dTorque is computed on the fly by generating an envelope function for the torque signal and subtracting the lower envelope
from the upper one. This data is then converted to an envelope for Max/Min RPM, as well as Torsional Severity Estimate
(TSE), defined as:

Max bit RPM Ave bit RPM real-time dTorque estimate

≝
Ave bit RPM dTorque-per-RPM for current bit depth Rotary Speed at Surface
SPE/IADC 163420 5

Fig. 4—The pre-drill portion of the surveillance workflow involves computing the primary stick/slip period (top) and dTorque-per-
RPM (bottom) as a function of measured depth. These curves are used during drilling operations to estimate stick/slip severity in
real-time.

A TSE value less than one indicates that the bit always turns to the right, whereas at TSE = 1 the full stick/slip condition is
reached and the bit periodically stops turning for an instant. At higher values of TSE, the bit stops turning for longer periods
of “stuck time.” Fig. 5 shows a screenshot of the surveillance tool that can display Max/Min rotary speed as well as current
value for TSE, along with other monitored drilling parameters.

Fig. 5—Real-time implementation of the stick/slip surveillance tool. Third trace from the left shows the surface torque (purple), its
30-second running average (blue), and the torque envelope (black). The width of the torque envelope is converted to an envelope
for the bit RPM by utilizing the surface RPM (second trace from left, pink), the measured depth (far left, blue) and the pre-computed
dTorque-per-RPM. The result is displayed in the RPM-track as an envelope (gray area between black traces), as well as in terms of a
Torsional Severity Estimate (far right). The user can adjust what level of TSE is considered tolerable (green), moderate (yellow) and
actionable (red) and establish mitigation protocols accordingly. The disappearance of stick/slip observed here is likely caused by
penetrating a softer rock formation in this highly laminated geology.
6 SPE/IADC 163420

Field validation for the surveillance tool was performed by comparing high-frequency downhole memory sensor data (50
samples/second data rate, located within a few feet of the bit) with the real-time estimates after the drilling was completed
and the downhole tool retrieved. Fig. 6 shows an example. The top trace shows the bit RPM envelope for a 1-hr drilling
interval during which the drilling parameters (surface RPM and weight-on-bit) were kept fairly constant. The drillstring is
seen to experience widely varying levels of stick/slip, likely associated with rapid changes in formation properties. The
RPM-envelope estimated from surface data (blue trace) matches the downhole sensor data (red) very well. A closer look at a
5-min interval (middle trace) resolves the quasi-periodic nature of the bit RPM, with a period within 3% of the pre-drill
estimate.

Fig. 6—Validation of the real-time stick/slip surveillance tool in the field. Top: Blue traces show the Max/Minrotary speed at the bit,
inferred in real time from top drive torque using only bit depth, rotary speed and pre-drill computations using the well profile. For
validation, the red trace shows the actual RPM measured at the bit with a downhole memory tool collecting 50 Hz data. Middle: A
five-minute portion of the trace resolves individual stick/slip cycles with a period that closely matches the pre-drill estimate. Bottom:
One-second top drive torque (upper trace), from which the real-time estimate is made, and actual torque at bit measured via the
memory tool (lower trace). Note that bit torque shows very small variation during unstable stick/slip, but a very prominent sawtooth
ramp occurred during the bit stall event detected around 17:18:00. The stall and unstable stick/slip contributed roughly equally to
the peak bit rotary speed that exceeded 250 RPM.

The bottom trace shows the surface and bit torque during this interval, which confirms that the variations in bit torque are
tiny during unstable stick/slip, with the exception of a single stick/slip cycle towards the end of this interval which is
registered as a severe sticking event followed by a slip cycle where the bit momentarily exceeds 250 RPM. This event is
distinct from unstable stick/slip in that (i) it is not periodic, but rather intermittent, (ii) involves prolonged stalling of the drill
bit and associated buildup of bit torque as detected by the downhole sensor, and (iii) transmission of the additional bit torque
to the surface. Interestingly, the surveillance tool can estimate the severity of the subsequent slip cycle even before it actually
occurs, since the ramp-up of the surface torque happens in the preceding stick phase – note how the Max RPM trace inferred
from surface torque increases before the high peak RPM is recorded at the bit. We refer to this type of torsional dysfunction
as “Bit/BHA stall” as it can occur when either the bit or stabilizers in the BHA are spontaneously stuck against the borehole
and require a significantly larger torque to release. The conversion from surface torque envelope to TSE is not expected to be
quantitative for these events; however in practice the correspondence is remarkably good.
SPE/IADC 163420 7

An important learning during the field validation is that Bit/BHA stall can be very severe while off-bottom, especially when
reaming in or out of the hole at low rotary speed. This is typically a time when the driller and drill team may not be
particularly vigilant about monitoring vibration levels. Fig. 7 shows an interval while tripping in the hole with a large
number of stall events, some of which cause the Bit/BHA to reach maximum RPMs upwards of 500-600, sometimes
followed by reverse rotation as high as 250, even though the drillstring is rotated at only 20 RPM. Severe damage to bit
cutting elements, stabilizers and downhole tools, as well as back-off events, can be caused by such stalls if not monitored and
mitigated. This type of event, which is seldom recorded or analyzed, may help explain some of the performance variations
and bit dull conditions that have not been obvious from the “drilling” data alone. A real-time surveillance tool that is
available at all stages of the drilling and tripping process is crucial in order to inform the driller of the severity of such events
as they occur so that they can take immediate mitigative action.

Fig. 7—Severe Bit/BHA stall observed while tripping in hole after a bit change. One stall event starting around 05:19:40 took about
30 seconds to wind up the drillstring by an additional 15 wraps (surface RPM is 30), followed by a release event that caused the BHA
to accelerate to 800 RPM and back to zero within 3 seconds, followed by three seconds of reverse rotation peaking around 200 RPM.
Slow rotation while tripping is often considered a safe drilling practice, and it may need to be re-evaluated. The surveillance tool is
able to alert the driller to the approximate severity of the impending release event even before the actual release occurs, which may
allow mitigative action to minimize potential damage.

A third, generally less severe, type of torsional vibration can occur when the frequency of a periodic excitation coincides with
one of the higher-frequency torsional resonances shown in Fig. 2. Even though the torsional mode is stable, the combination
of large excitation amplitude and large torsional compliance can result in a significant variation in bit RPM. This is referred
to as synchronous torsional oscillation (STO). The location and potential severity of these resonances can be communicated
to the driller via a Torsional Rotary Response Map (TRRM, see Fig. 8). The primary periodic excitation of concern is the
rotary speed of the bit; therefore this map shows at what values of surface RPM one might expect to see a potential resonance
as a function of MD. The resonances move toward lower RPMs as drilling progresses. Fig. 9 shows an instance where STO
is observed in the downhole sensor data when unstable stick/slip is not present, while drilling at the third torsional resonance,
indicated by a lightning bolt in Figure 8. In other case studies, we have also observed such instances in wells that do not
exhibit any unstable stick/slip. In these cases, typically the variation in bit RPM remained well below the average RPM.
8 SPE/IADC 163420

Fig. 8—Torsional Rotary Response Map, showing rotary speeds as a function of measured depth where synchronous torsional
oscillation may be observed (red regions) and off-resonance rotary speeds (green regions). As drilling proceeds, critical rotary
speeds decrease and the resonances may coincide with the rotary speed if it is not actively managed.

Fig. 9—An instance where both the unstable stick/slip and first-harmonic resonance is observed in the downhole RPM. This
corresponds to the depth at which the rotary speed matches the predicted third torsional resonance marked by a lightning bolt in
Fig. 8. The Fourier Transform shows the two dominant frequencies in the signal, corresponding to the primary stick/slip mode and
the synchronously excited resonance at the rotary period.

While these resonances may not be considered critical from a tool damage perspective, the variation in bit RPM, however
small, may cause sub-optimal drilling performance. Unfortunately, the period of torque oscillations for this type of torsional
vibration is typically too short for most currently used surface data acquisition systems to detect. For this type of oscillation,
a minimum of 10 Hz data is required. Torque sensors for autodrillers and top drive controllers do have the required
bandwidth to detect these oscillations, but these measurements are not often available in the WITS network. As the
importance of vibration surveillance from surface is more appreciated, higher bandwidth surface data will be more ubiquitous
in the future. In the meantime, the driller is provided with a TRRM prepared for the particular well section to make them
aware of the potential for this dysfunction, which can be easily avoided by staying away from the resonances. One feature
that is of interest to the driller is the observation that torsional (and axial) vibrations can appear merely by keeping parameters
constant and continuing to drill, running into a resonance feature as the drillstring lengthens. This reinforces the practice of
continuously adjusting parameters to minimize dysfunction (Dupriest et al. 2005a).
SPE/IADC 163420 9

Root Cause Analysis

While surveillance is very useful to monitor vibrational performance of a drilling assembly, it is not always sufficient to
identify the root cause of the problem. This may require more acquisition of data and in-depth post-drill analysis. The model
can also be used for this purpose since it can provide more detailed information with additional assumptions and/or
measurements. For example, the destabilizing effect of velocity-weakening bit torque with stick/slip (Brett 1992) can be
quantified; however, it is necessary to deploy high-frequency downhole tools to establish the true boundary conditions at the
bit. Fig. 10 shows downhole measurements (just above the near bit stabilizer) that verify velocity-weakening behavior of the
bit at constant weight-on-bit. Armed with this information, the model can be used to perform a linear stability analysis as a
function of depth, rotary speed and weight-on-bit to determine when unstable stick/slip is expected. The resulting stability
diagram corresponding to the depth at which the downhole data is collected is shown in the inset. It is clear that the drilling
parameters that were used are well inside the unstable stick/slip region, i.e., the measured velocity weakening is in itself
sufficient to induce the observed unstable stick/slip behavior without having to invoke any other root cause. Some design
element must be changed in order to mitigate stick/slip since there is no stable WOB/RPM combination. In other case
studies, we have identified other root causes such as excessive BHA mass, reduction in drillpipe OD due to ECD constraints,
and overly aggressive bits, which allowed us to propose the most appropriate design and operational changes to mitigate
stick/slip.

Fig. 10—Root cause analysis of stick/slip. Field data collected via memory tool (time traces on the left, cross-plots with
instantaneous bit RPM on the right) reveals that the torque is a decreasing function of instantaneous bit RPM while the WOB
remains nearly constant in each stick/slip cycle, indicating velocity-weakening bit aggressiveness. Linear stability analysis
performed with the model (inset, bottom right) shows that the drilling parameter range (dashed rectangle) is well within the zone of
stick/slip instability (red region) that is attributable to this root cause.

Mitigation Via Redesign

There are usually many alternative mitigation methods that are available, each with its own financial, logistical and
performance costs. Increasing rotary speed may trigger whirl and lateral vibrations. Lowering weight-on-bit or decreasing
bit aggressiveness reduces rate-of-penetration. Increasing OD of drillpipe increases ECD and may affect bit and hole
cleaning. Once the root cause is established, arguably the most powerful capability of the developed model is its ability to do
a side-by-side comparison of the effectiveness of various design alternatives in order to help select design or redesign
options. This is possible due to the flexibility and execution speed of the model, allowing hundreds of stability computations
within minutes even on a standard PC.

Fig. 11 shows an example where a change in bit aggresssiveness, drillpipe, and top drive controller are considered. These are
all mitigation measures that have been used and proven by the operator. For example, Davis et al. (2012) describe the
successful application of increasing drillpipe size and the addition of depth of cut control elements to reduce bit
aggressiveness to mitigate stick/slip and dramatically improve drilling footage per day. The particular results in Fig. 11
10 SPE/IADC 163420

suggest that a properly tuned top drive controller may be even more effective at mitigating this stick/slip. Fig. 12 illustrates
one case where the drill team installed such a controller and was able to significantly suppress stick/slip.

Fig. 11--Post-drill redesign. After matching velocity-weakening bit aggressiveness to observed behavior (A), the model can be used
to assess the relative impact of various redesign choices on the region of stick/slip instability (red). In this application, a top drive
controller with torsional damping tuned to the primary stick/slip frequency (B) shows the greatest benefit, followed by bit redesign
with depth-of-cut control features (C), and increasing drillpipe OD from 5” to 5 7/8” (D). The drill team decided to install the top drive
controller and saw a substantial decrease in the occurrence of unstable stick/slip in subsequent wells.

Surveillance Quality vs. Real-Time Downhole Tools

Stick/slip surveillance from surface data using this method has been found to be more reliable than traditional downhole
measurements of stick/slip. Most commercial downhole sensors suffer from very low data transmission bandwidth for real-
time operation, necessitating loss of data bandwidth and resolution. As an example, in one of our validation case studies in a
sidetracked well with a build-and-hold profile at 50 degrees, a hindcast analysis was performed using 1-second surface data,
for a drilling interval at a depth of 14,700 ft. As shown in Fig. 12, the TSE tracks the stick/slip severity reported by the
downhole tool very well, except for two intervals where very high levels of whirl are present. During the whirl events, the
downhole tool reports high stick/slip levels that are incompatible with the well-understood physics of torsional wave
propagation along the drillstring. With this well design at this depth, when the the rotary speed is steady at the surface, peak-
to-peak surface torque oscillations of about 10 kN-m are required to achieve stick/slip at the bit. The likely explanation is
that the accelerometers on the downhole sensor see very large fluctuations during whirl, which throws off the rotary speed
calculation that is based on the accelerometer data. Incidentally, the test showed that the top drive controller was effective in
mitigating stick/slip when it was properly tuned.

Real-time downhole surveillance tools can only be operated and interrogated while mud circulation is on. The surface-based
method can be used during all stages of the drilling operation, including trips where a significant amount of damaging
torsional vibrations can occur. As seen in Fig. 7, it can even forecast an impending stall event before it actually occurs,
alerting the driller to take mitigative action.
SPE/IADC 163420 11

Fig. 12—Comparison of mid-level downhole vibration tool and surface-based stick/slip surveillance during the testing of a properly
tuned top drive controller for stick/slip mitigation. Top: Surface-based 1-sec rotary speed and Max/Min RPM data is shown
alongside the lateral vibration levels (0-7) reported by the downhole tool. Middle: A direct comparison of the surface-based TSE and
the stick/slip level reported by the downhole tool. Bottom: Surface–based 1-second torque data clearly indicates unstable stick/slip
intervals as reported by TSE. The two estimates show a very good match, except for intervals with lateral vibration levels 4 and
above indicating severe whirl. This suggests that stick/slip measurement using downhole tools may be sensitive to whirl and may
lead to misdiagnosis.

Conclusions
The ability to continuously monitor and correctly identify torsional vibrations is a critical first step towards real-time
mitigation. In certain operational situations, establishing the root cause and evaluating various design alternatives allows the
most effective mitigation measures to be identified and implemented. Real-time response alone is insufficient to eliminate
vibration, and the model can be used to evaluate design options in the well planning stage. The torsional-axial drillstring
vibration model provides a robust research platform to monitor, analyze, and mitigate most common dysfunctions, while
remaining accessible to operations personnel and requiring little in terms of computational resources. The assumption of
small vibrational amplitudes inherent in the linearization procedure does not unduly limit its usefulness, since the goal is to
deeply understand the behavior at the emergence of vibrational dysfunction where the amplitudes are still relatively small to
avoid the fully evolved, nonlinear, large-amplitude dysfunctions in the first place.

Acknowledgements
We are grateful for the support of ExxonMobil and its affiliates for permission to publish this paper. All figures in this paper
are original figures created by ExxonMobil.
12 SPE/IADC 163420

References
Aslaksen, H., M. Annand, R. Duncan, A. Fjaere, L. Paez, and U. Tran. Integrated FEA Modeling Offers System Approach to Drillstring
Optimization. 2006. Paper SPE 99018 presented at the IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, Miami, Feb 21-23.
Bailey, J. R., E. A. O. Biediger, V. Gupta, D. Ertas, W. C. Elks, Jr. and F. E. Dupriest. 2008. Drilling Vibrations Modeling and Field
Validation. Paper IADC/SPE 112650 presented at the IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, Orlando FL, 4-6 March.
Bailey, J. R., L. Wang, M. J. Tenny, N. Armstrong, J. R. Zook, and W. C. Elks, Jr. 2010a. Design Tools and Workflows to Mitigate
Drilling Vibrations. Paper SPE 135439 presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference, Florence, 19-22 September.
Bailey, J. R. and S. M. Remmert. 2010b. Managing Drilling Vibrations Through BHA Design Optimization. SPE Drilling & Completion
Journal. SPE 139426-MS.
Brett, J. F. 1992. The Genesis of Torsional Drillstring Vibrations. Paper SPE 21943, SPE Drilling Engineering, Volume 7, pp. 168-174.
Clayer, F., J.K. Vandiver, and H.Y. Lee. 1990. The Effect of Surface and Downhole Boundary Conditions on the Vibration of Drillstrings.
Paper SPE 20447 presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, Sep 23-26.
Davis, J, E., G. F. Smyth, N. Bolivar, and P. E. Pastusek. 2012. Eliminating Stick-Slip by Managing Bit Depth of Cut and Minimizing
Variable Torque in the Drillstring. Paper SPE 151133 presented at the IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, San Diego, Mar 6-8.
Dupriest, F. E., J. W. Witt, S. M. Remmert, and D. R. Aberdeen. 2005a. Maximizing Rate of Penetration with Real Time Analysis of
Digital Data. Paper IPTC 10706 presented at the International Petroleum Technology Conference, Doha, Qatar, 21-23 November.
Dupriest, F. E. and W. L. Koederitz. 2005b. Maximizing Drill Rates with Real-Time Surveillance of Mechanical Specific Energy. Paper
SPE/IADC 92194 presented at the SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, Amsterdam, 23-25 February.
Ertas, D. 2012. Torsional-Axial Drill String Mechanics Model for Surveillance, Root Cause Analysis, and Mitigation of Vibrational
Dysfunctions. Proceedings of the Second International Colloquium on Nonlinear Dynamics and Control of Deep Drilling Systems.
Eindhoven, May 15-16, pp. 53-59.
Ertas, D., E.A.O. Biediger, S. Sundararaman, J.R. Bailey, V. Gupta, N.R. Bangaru. 2009. Methods and Systems for Mitigating Drilling
Vibrations. WO 2009/155062.
Ertas, D. J.R. Bailey, D.N. Burch, L. Wang, P.E. Pastusek, S. Sundararaman. 2011a. Methods to Estimate Downhole Drilling Vibration
Amplitude from Surface Measurement. WO 2011/017626.
Ertas, D. J.R. Bailey, D.N. Burch, L. Wang, P.E. Pastusek, S. Sundararaman. 2011b. Methods to Estimate Downhole Drilling Vibration
Indices from Surface Measurement. WO 2011/017627.
Landau, L.D. and E. M. Lifshitz. Theory of Elasticity, 3rd Ed. (Course of Theoretical Physics Volume 7), §16-§20, pp. 59-83
Paslay, P. R. and D. B. Bogy. 1963. Drill String Vibrations Due to Intermittent Contact of Bit Teeth. J. Eng. for Industry, Volume 85,
Issue 2, May 1963, pp. 187-194.
Remmert, S. M., J. W. Witt, and F. E. Dupriest. 2007. Implementation of ROP Management Process in Qatar North Field. Paper
IADC/SPE 105521 presented at the IADC /SPE Drilling Conference, Amsterdam, 20-22 February.

Glossary of Terms
Baseline Solution – A solution to the drillstring state that describes the stretch, tension, twist and torque along a drillstring in the absence of
any vibration; similar to what is computed in traditional torque-and-drag analysis
Bit/BHA Stall – Momentary mechanical jamming of the drillbit or stabilizers in the BHA while the drillstring is rotated at the surface,
resulting in a winding of the drillstring and linear increase in surface torque. Depending on its severity, it can stall the top drive or
terminate in a release event that can cause heavy damage.
BHA – “Bottomhole Assembly” includes bit and tools up to the heavy-weight pipe
ID – Inner diameter
Compliance – The amount of harmonic motion experienced by a system when subjected to a unit of harmonic excitation, expressed as a
function of excitation frequency. For an extended system like a drillstring, the point where the motion is measured can be different
from the point of excitation.
MD – “Measured depth”, the length of the drillstring between the drillbit and the top connection at surface
MSE – Mechanical Specific Energy is a measure of the amount of energy expended to remove a unit volume of formation
OD – Outer diameter
RPM – “Revolutions per Minute” is a measure of the speed of rotation of the bit or BHA
STO – “Synchronous Torsional Oscillation”, the amplification of periodic excitations at torsional resonances of the drillstring
Unstable Stick/Slip – Torsional vibration that results from an instability in the torsional dynamics of the drillstring due to the velocity-
weakening characteristic of the bit torque or borehole friction as a function of RPM
TRRM – “Torsional Rotary Response Map” that shows drilling parameters where STO might occur
TSE – Torsional Severity Estimate is a normalized torsional vibration index that indicates the severity of stick/slip; a TSE of 1 corresponds
to the level at which the drillbit comes to a complete stop at each stick/slip cycle
WOB – “Weight on Bit” is the applied axial load acting on the bit
SPE/IADC 163420 13

Appendix: Description of the Model

The solution technique utilizes semi-analytical transfer matrices that greatly reduce the number of discrete elements and the
associated computing time, enabling rapid screening of a large number of design alternatives on a PC. The model is able to
account for effects related to well path, tool joints, viscous damping due to the drilling fluid, surface boundary conditions, bit
characteristics, as well as special drillstring elements including vibration mitigation tools, provided that adequate mechanical
response data is available. A more detailed description is provided in Ertas et al.(2009, 2011a, 2011b).

The drillstring is approximated as a collection of axially symmetric pipes connected rigidly end-to-end, whose material
properties (elastic moduli, density) and geometry (OD, ID, cross-sectional area, torsional moment) are allowed to vary as a
function of arc length l from the drill bit. Rod elasticity is used to relate the small-strain deformations of the drillstring to the
internal forces and torques (Landau and Lifshitz). First, a “baseline solution” is constructed, which describes the
configuration of the drillstring, as well as the external forces and torques exerted on the drillstring, in the absence of
vibrations. To do this in our implementation, the “soft-string” approximation is used (i) to ignore the bending rigidity of the
drillstring, and (ii) to constrain the drillstring to follow the well trajectory, thus eliminating its lateral degrees of freedom.
Remaining torsional and axial degrees of freedom can be expressed in terms of stretch h and twist  as a function of arc
length l as measured from the drill bit:

h(l , t )  h0 (l )  hdyn (l , t ), hdyn (l , t )   h (l )e  jt d ,



 (l , t )   RPM t   0 (l )   dyn (l , t ),  dyn (l , t )     (l )e  jt d ,


Here, the term linear in time t accounts for the overall rotation of the drillstring, h0 and 0 represent the baseline solution that
includes nominal values for weight on bit WOB and torque on bit TOB, i.e., the amount of stretch and twist that is present in
the drillstring when it is rotating smoothly. The dynamic motion of the drillstring relative to this baseline solution is broken
into its (complex) Fourier amplitudes h and . (here, j2 = −1).

The motions of the drillstring are accompanied by internal tension T and torque transmitted along the drillstring, which
can be likewise described as:


T (l , t )  T0 (l )  Tdyn (l , t ), Tdyn (l , t )   T (l )e  jt d ,



 (l , t )   0 (l )   dyn (l , t ),  dyn (l , t )     (l )e jt d.


The tension and torque are aligned with the local tangent of the well path and a sign convention is chosen such that  is
positive when pointing towards the bit. Within the soft-string approximation, these are given in terms of the drillstring
configuration as: T  EAh , τ  GJ  , where E and G are the Young and Shear Moduli of the drillstring material, A is the
cross sectional area, J is the torsional moment of inertia, and the prime denotes a derivative with respect to arc length l. The
drillstring parameters can and do vary with l.

Three types of external forces acting on the drillstring are accounted for. Gravitational forces do not change with time and
only enter the baseline force balance. Forces and torques exerted by the mud are aligned with the local tangent vector in the
absence of lateral motion. Forces and torques exerted by the borehole are computed by (i) requiring that the net lateral force
must be zero everywhere along the drillstring, and (ii) utilizing the relative sliding direction and velocity, along with a
(possibly velocity-dependent) friction law.

Newton’s equations of motion for the baseline solution reduce to a system of coupled (non-linear) first-order ordinary
differential equations (ODEs) in the arc-length variable l. These are solved subject to specified boundary conditions (BCs) at
the bit. At the bit, twist and stretch are arbitrarily set to zero, and weight-on-bit (WOB) or depth-of-cut (DOC) is specified. A
simplified bit model that relates WOB and bit torque to DOC (and possibly RPM) is used to set the remaining BCs. The
14 SPE/IADC 163420

formulation allows for arbitrary functional forms including lookup tables in order to be able to model various bit design
features such as DOC control, as well as velocity-weakening bit aggressiveness.

Next, Newton’s equations of motion are expanded around the baseline solution to linear order in the dynamical variables,
which decouples equations for each frequency component  from each other. For each Fourier mode , this results in a set of
linear ODEs (once again in the arc-length variable l), whose coefficients depend on the particular baseline solution. For a
drillstring with uniform properties along its length, the solutions are axial and torsional harmonic waves with dispersion
relations:

ka  1  1  j  mud , a  j bh , a ,
E/

k  1  1  j  mud ,  j bh , .
G/
Here, ka and k are the wavenumbers associated with the axial and torsional waves, respectively. The dimensionless
parameters  reflect additional dispersion associated with mud and borehole forces (Ertas et al. 2009), in the absence of
which one recovers the familiar axial and torsional waves on a rod, with (non-dispersive) wave speeds given by material
properties of the drillstring only. Typically resulting in very under-damped waves with minimal dispersion.

The dynamical state on two ends of a section of drillstring (of length L) can be related through a transfer matrix, e.g., for
torsional waves:

 sin k L  
  si   cosk L  
S ,i ( )    k GJ  S ,i 1 ( ).
  s  
k GJ sin k L  cosk L  
  i 
The dynamical state at the bit can then be propagated up the drillstring to the surface by multiplying through the transfer
matrices associated with each section of drillpipe. For variations in the drillstring geometry that repeat many times within a
wavelength, such as tool joints on the drillpipe, the method of averaging can be used to account for the associated changes in
wavespeed (Ertas et al. 2009).

The transfer matrix formalism, whose use for drillstring dynamics was pioneered by Paslay and Bogy (1963), allows rapid
computation of the linear response of the drillstring to a localized harmonic external force or torque, typically applied at the
bit. This is obtained by solving the boundary value problem with the applied force subject to BCs at the two ends of the
drillstring. The BCs at the bit were already discussed. Various BCs can be implemented at the surface, including constant
RPM, constant hookload, constant feed rate, more sophisticated mass-spring-damper systems as discussed in Clayer et al.
(1990), and top drive controllers if their dynamical response is known. The particular choice of surface BC can have a
profound influence on the response of the system.

While the linearization assumption is not strictly valid when the drillstring experiences full stick/slip events, comparison of
this model to downhole data suggests that it degrades gracefully. Since the goal is to eliminate full stick/slip, not model it,
this has not been a significant limitation to engineering utility.

Finally, the linear response functions can be used in various ways to monitor, analyze and mitigate various axial and torsional
dysfunctions.