DRILLING TECHNOLOGY

FOR THE MAN ON THE RIG

By William J. Murchison

1....fSSlJ<ll'; CONTROl I

First Printing 1978

© copyright 1982 Murchison DriJling Schools
Revised/reprinted; 1984, 1987, 1990, 1991. 1992, 1994, 1997,1998,
2001,200~2003,2004,

MURCHISON DRILLlNG SCHOOLS, INC.

P. O. BOX 14577
ALBUQUERQUE, NEW MEXICO 87191
PHONE:SDS-293-6271 FAX:505-298~5294
 MurchisDn Drilling SchaDI

DRILLlNG OPERATIONS TECHNOLOGY & WELL CONTROL SCHOOL

OBJECTIVES: To provide informatien tor pre-planning field operations: and methods and tech-
nfques to analyze and solve Drilling Operational Problems.

PURPOSE: To better equip the field man with background lnforrnctíon on DrjlJjng Operations
Techno!ogy so that he can comfortably put a pencil to an operation prior to per-
forming the Job.
,;,~
METHOOS: Lecture, homework, simulator practice, workshop, tests, class discussion & feed-
" \ -:~' \"~~~\ back.

\;, ~_ ' ;1\

\~\ ; %~\
o\!,
'\ \
"
_. ... ,.~
~ -~.- -
 GOOD MUD PRACTICES
1. Ask only for the mud properties you actually need.
2. Delay conversión (mud-up) as long as possible.
3. Improve top hole mud with minor chemical treatments.
4. See that rig equipment can carry out the mud programo
5. In field development drilling, re-evaluate the mud properties systematically.
6. Use mud additives which are compatible with the base system.
7. Think about Iost circulation before treating it.
8. Use solids control equipment wisely, and make sure primary separator (shale shaker)
does its jobo
9. Remember how much mud materials cost when handling them on the surface.
10. Add water before or below the shaker screen, not on it.
11. Use water wisely.
12. Carry good practices on through well completion.
13. Follow the trend method when treating mud or analyzing problems.
PROBLEM AREAS IN DRILLING OPERATIONS & WELL CONTROL:

1. Basic Rig Math. Not being comfortable with the numbers and therefore,
faílíng to put a penci1 to the operatíons.
2. Lack of concern for pre-pIanning and lack of scope.
3. Not using the basic drilling pararneters such as strokes, pressure, torque,
drag, and mud to monitor drilling trends on a regular minute by minute basis,
4 Not relating surface indications to what ís taking place down holeo
5 Not understanding the U-tube principIe, and how it is related to DP and
annulus.
6 Not understanding Pump Pressure and Pump Stroke relationslúp
7 Not understanding effect of Additive Pressure PrincipIe.
8 Start-up procedures when arrivíng at Initial Circulating Pressure (la)
without either causing Iost circulatIon or allowing a 2nd kick,
9. Not really keyed-ín on how to monitor a trip in or a trip out
10. Getting drill pipe pressure with a float in fue string.
11 . Arriving at Final Circulating Pressure (FCP) without flow or losses.
12. Expansion oí gas.
13. Haw te maintain constant bottom hole pressure when gas is percolating
during shut down periods.
14. Stripping techniques and ronsiderations.
15. Casing and cementing pre-plan and execution,
16. Gas at choke and quick changes in pressure.
17. Lost circu1atian and all implications whích include cernent plugs and kicks.
18. Concern for Safety.
19. The "Shift Concept" where work is put off so that it can be done by relíef,
20. General misunderstanding of constant bottorn hole pressure rnethod.
21. Lack of understanding of mud and how it influences operation.
22. Making truck drivers out of our drillers because of peor foundations, and lack
of rig discipline on what we should expect the drillers te do, and in sorne
cases not enough flexibility in poliey to allow the driller to 'think',
23. Lack of consern about BOPE and testing.
24. Inability to 'síde step', almost daily, obstacles in order to reach objectives
without getting weighted down with details.
25. Inability to deveIop team concept between operator and con tractor.
26. The fear oí being the "scape goat" willlead to indecision, and therefore lack of
progress, even to the point oí a "cover-up''.
27. Not understanding the drilling prograrn, and what the operator's and contrae-
tor' s obliga tions are.
28. Poor cornmunications up and down and between colleagues.
29. Incorrect reportíng of facts, and consequentIy bad recornmendations and

30.
decision
Lack oí concern for training. >~'?'fÍ!(~~!¡:r: ,,;'?¡ii~":':
. i, "ji.. . ~ (\ (\~
f;\ !

1 ~ JUL ¡.." .

,.I---~
- \'=\{~';:~-:"."", ....
 1 HAVE MET TIffi ENEMY ....

AND TIIEY 15

U8!

e
WHO IS TO BLAME?
MOTI-lER
CAUSES OF BLOWOurS NATURE US

1 NOT MAKING SURE HOLE lS TAKING TI-IE PROPER AMOUNT üF MUD. O 100%
2 LOST CIRCULATION AND NOT STARTING FLUID IN ANNULUS
(GAS CAP.). 2 98%
3 TOO LOW MUD WEIGHT. 2 98%
4 NOT ENOUGH CASJ:NG SET. 2 98%
5 M::ECHANlCAL FAlLURES. O 100%
6 DRILLING INTO ABNORMALLy PRESSURE PERMEABLE ZONE. 10 90%
7 FAILURE TO DETEcr KICK. O 100%
 Murchison Drilling Schools, Ine.

INTRODUCTION ANO COMMUNICATION

Table of Contents

Il'.'TRODucnON _.. 1

l. KEYS ro COMMUNICATIONS .••..•.....•........•.••.......................•..•.••. 1

n. TRENOS 1

m. TIIE COMMUNICATIONS NECESSARY BEFORE SPUD ro PREVENT PROBLEMS .....•..•...••• 3

N. COMMUNICATION NECESSARY TO PREVENT OR MIN1MIZE DRILLING PROBLEMS .•.•...•••• 5

v. COMMUNICATIONS NECESSARY ro PREVENT ASSOCIATED PROBLEMS FROM DEVELOPING

BECAUSE OF IMPROPER FIRST ACTlON ON A HOLE STABILTIY PROBLEM . . . . . . . • . • • . • . . • • •• 9

VI. COMMUNICATIONS NECESSARY ro CONTINUE DRILLING OPERATIONS WHILE El1HER

SOLVINGOR LNING WITHPROBLEM. 11

VII. TIIE DIFFERENCE BE1WEEN VERBAL ANO WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS. ...•.•.•••..••••• 12

VIII. COMMUNICATIONS NECESSARY TOENABLE ADRlLLING FOREMAN TODIAGNOSE ANDSOLVE

A DRILLING PROBLEM. • . . .. .. • .. • . • .. .. .. . .. • • . • • • • • • • . . • • . .. . . . . . . • . . . . . . .. . . . . •• 12

IX. HOW ro COMMUNICATE A PROBLEM TO THE OFFICE ANO FIRST ACTION. ......•..•..••. 12

X. COMMUNlCATIONS NECESSARY ro ENABLE A DRlLLING S'lJPERINTENDENT ro GET A

GENERAL-QUICK EVALUATION OF A PROBLEM. 12
'-.../

XI. COMMUNlCATIONS NECESSARY ro ENABLE A DRILLING SUPERINTENDENT ro HELP A

DRILLING FOREMAN EVALUATE SPECIF1C DRILLING PROBLEMS. ......•...............•. 12

XII. SUPERVISING BY THE TRENO METHOD ro PREVENT HOLE PROBLEMS, 10 DlAGNOSE HOLE
PROBLEMS, ANO TO SOLVE HOLE PROBLEMS . . .. .. . . . .. • . .. . . .. . .. . . .. . . .. . . . . • .. .... 16

INTRODUcnON
This book addresses alI phases of a drilling operation
which include fue planning, the implementing of the
program to prevent drilling problerns, and the post
appraising oí the operation. lt is focused at alI levels of
drilling supervísíon, from the driller te the manager.
This book has been written te use as the main text for
the Operations Drilling Technology and Well Control
course taught in .Murchiso n DriHing-Schools. In addítíon,
the author hopes that the book will serve as a reference
for the roan on the rig. The material in the text is
arranged by subject for easy reference. Problems and
practices under each subject, however, are discussed by
hole intervals, simply because the depth and hole
interval have such an overall influence on the solution
and approach. For example, if the topie is lost circula-
tíon, the solution and approach are dictated by hole
intervals. Lost circulation in top hole, with only a short
string of casing set, is a completely different problem
than lost circulation below a deep casing string. The list
of possible altérnate solutíons is different, If we treat all
lost cireulation as one problem, the cure will be very
costIyand unsuccessful.
Transferring drilling teclmology to the man on the rig in
a way that the teehnology is made simple and usable is
not an easy task. The job is easier, however, when the
man on the rig can relate to the technology being
discussed. To accomplísh this job in the book, case
histories by hole interval are used to introduce the
practice or solution to the drilling problems. The book is
ded.icated to the men on the rig who are the co-develop-
ers oi all drilling technology that has evolved over the
last half century. Without the rig man's contribution all
of our technology would still be theoretical.
COMMUNICATIONS
The key te successful drilling operations is communíca-
tions . A Supervisor's job becomes one of giving instruc-
tíons, receivíng questions, answering questíons, asking
questions and keeping the flow of information or
communications moving effectively at all times. Failure
to communicate at a11 levels of supervision leads to
drilling problems that cost millions of dollars,
l. KEYS TO COMMUNICATIONS
A drilling problern is anything that interfered with
carrying out a successful drilling programo The drilling
problern can be 10s5 of hole stability, such as lost circula-
tion, shale heaving, hole cleaning, stuck pipe, well
control, etc., but many times the problem is people and,
Murchison Drilling Schools, Ine.
more spedñcally, communications between people. Most
drilling problems can be either prevented or solved by
being more effective at the art of communications.
Communications is realIy just a question and answer
session te interchange knowledge between people to get
work done in an effective way and, if work isn't done
correctly, to find out why.
The one thing in common about most successful drilling
operations is that they malee sure drilling plans are well
understood by the people carrying out the work. Drilling
pIans should be clearly written operational steps. Good
well trend monitoring habits make proper diagnosis oí
problems more corred and this leads to proper reporting
and solving of the problems.
11. TRENOS
The only way a hole has of cornrnunicating with a driller
is by the drilling trends, Drilling people should record
drilling trends so that the ehanging drilling parameters
are properly diagnosed to prevent problems. Remember
the trend of numbers in most cases is more important
than the actual nurnbers,
H a problem does develop, a rig supervisor should be
able to analyze the trends and implement the proper
operational plan to corred the problern, The basic
drilling trends are pressure & stroke, torque, drag,
tripping, rnud, U-tube, rate of penetration & well control.
A. Pressure and Strokes
Changes in pressure and stroke trends indicate that
the hydraulic system has been altered. The trends
that alter the hydraulíc system are:
1. Drill string washouts and twist-offs
2. Hole squeezing or bridging with formation
3. Hole bridging with drilled euttings or cuttings
that heave or slough
4. Changes in lithology if drilling with diamond
bit
5. Formatíon kiek
6. Porosity gas cutting which causes mud heading
or surging
7. Leaking water valve in pump suction or active
mud system
8. Lost circulation
9. PIugged nozzle
10. Plugged choke (íf on choke)
11. Mud treatment with frictíon reducer
12. Aeration from mixing mud in suction tank (or
other reasons)
13. Pump mechanical problems
14. Balling of drilling assernbly
'~'"r:~':7 r~":';\::'t,:-0:~';·:~-:t0:¡¡.!C~~~
1\ !"...,\, , ,. . ,
\ Introduction - 1
" 2 Iq ?DuS \
_--\
.., ..
. _.._---'

G. Rate oí Penetration Trend
Rate oí penetration trends indicate:
1. The need for hole sweeps during fast drilling
formations and/or control drilling
2. Caprocks or well control transition rones
3. Uthology changes and type fonnation
4. The need for mud property changes (solíds,
plastíc viscosity and yield val úes.
5. Change in overbalance (formation vs . hydro-
static pressure)
6. Potential ki~ zone -íuse with d'exponent)
7. Dull bit and/or econonúca.l time lo pull bit
8. Wrong bit for formation (or proper bit selec-
tion)
9. Potential casing seat (or poor selection)
10. Improper weight and /or RPM on bit for hy-
draulics being used. This is usually found out
by a drill-off test.
11. Porosity and sometimes permeability (if roud
solids or high permeability can have negative
influence on ROP)
12. Bit balling in slicky formations (and this is
influenced by hydraulic horsepower at bit and
weight on bit)
13. The need for control drilling particularly when
related lo gas cut mud or gumbo
H. WeIl Control Trends
Well control trends indicate:
1. To the driller and/or drilling supervisor that a
potential or actual kick is possible or is taking
place
2. Amount of under balance of the mud (usually
in a shale transition zone either using shale
densities, d'exponents or logging information)
3. The need for mud weight adjustrnents from
flowline tests while drilling or bottorns-up
after trips
4. The posslbl1ity of kick if lost circulation trend
is not controlled carefully
5. Transition zones
6. Swabbing (and/or surge)
7. The need for closer surveillance (drilling and
tríppíng)
8. The need for controlling ROP
9. The need for special drilling practices and
contingencies (H~, etc.)
10. The need to caJculate kick tolerances and
re-evaJuate casing seat selection
111. THE COMMUNICAnONS NECESSARY
BEFaRE SPUD la PREVENT PROBLEMS
Pre-spud meetings are very necessary for successful
drilling operations because the lines of cornmunica-
Murchison Drllllng Schools, !ne.
tions are opened. There are two mistakes being made
conceming pre-spud meetings. One místake is that
they are ill-prepared and really become muy a
kíss-and-promíse meeting. Lack of support frorn
rnanagement (drillíng superintendent or hígher) ís
the chief cause of this complaeent attítude. The
second rnistake 15 that only one meeting is normally
scheduled, and too many tlúngs are discussed with
parties who have no business at the meeting. One
meeting should be attended by only drilling contrae-
tor and operator staff. A second meeting would be
attended by servíce eompany personnel, eontractor &
operator personnel.
A. Pre-spud Meeting ONE - Operator & Con tractor
Staff
This meeting is very important for opening the
communications between the two parties. The
following points should be discussed:
1. The Supervisory Línes oí Communications -
When operating practices of either party are
being violated, what are the lines of communi-
cation necessary to prevent the rig people from
becorníng cross-threaded? When rig problems
require contíngency plans, what are the neces-
sary lines of communication? Do operating
representatives give orders lo drillers, bypass-
ing the toolpusher?
2. Review 01 the drllling contraet - The key
poínts outlining the responsibilities of each
party should be discussed. Is the Operator's
Policy Manual part of drilling contract, and if
yes is a copy available for rig people?
3. Review oí the drilling program -The program
should be reviewed, wilh special emphasis on
anticípated problem zones and how to prevent
the problems. The con tractor should be told
what drilling trends must be kept up with on
a minute-by-minute basis to prevent and diag-
nose problems, The contractor dríllers have to
know what the first action wiIl be in case of a
problem, i.e., in case of lost círculatíon the ñrst
action ís to start fluid in annulus to prevent
secondary problems of kicks and stuck pipe.
4. Rules & regulations should be reviewed
pertinent to MMS or other commísslons
5. Contractor and Operator polícies should be
reviewed - If the drilling program requires any
deviation from poli des, this is the time lo
discuss the differences. Make sure the rig
drillers know what these policies are.
6. Personnel qualifications for the Operator &
Contractor should be reviewed by each dríll-
ing superintendent. Many times, requirements
for technical or operational back-up can be
evaluated, ar.t,d .Jhis-· Id head off serious
rv" " ;~" ~ :' . ':.' .... ;-:':", 1""':1',\ <JI....
~ 1, ' , "r~ \~ r
1¡:, ." lntroduction - 3
1 Z .J U\ 7.00S
~'\
1\
¡ :-
~
"
....
Murchison DrUling Schools, Inc,
drilling problems, such as those described in
Section IV. Contractor and operator people that
s ttend training programs are generally better
motivated and keyed-up.
7. The Operator should spedfy the manner in
which the IADC report Is lo be filled out -
This book should accurately reflect the drilling
operation and people who pcrforrned the
work. Hole trends should be spotlíghted on
the tour sheet for aJ1 drillers lo see.
8. Blowout Preventiorr Drílls ~ BOP drills should
be thoroughly díscussed, Such things as who
initiates the 00115, and which type of drills,
should be discussed. These drills should have
heart & meat in them. Toolpusher & Operator
Representatives should be involved together.
9. Blowout Preventer Testing - Con tractor &
Operator policies should be studied closely.
Who should witness the tests on BOPE and
accumulators should be specified by the drill-
ing superintendents at the meeting. These tests
should comply with Government reguIations &
Operator/Contractor polícies,
10. How the well ís closed-ín when a kick is
dctected. - Again, operator & contraetor poli-
cies may vary, and this should be resolved by
the drilling superíntendent. Will a soft closure
or a modified soft closure be used? 15 the BOP
system lined up to comply with the method of
dosing the we11 in?
11. Morning Reports - Operators & Contraetors
differ in what they want reported on the
moming report, and this should be clarified,
Post appraisal is a very important part of
problem prevention and solution, and rig
people must provide the information for the
analysis. Both field men & drilling engineers
benefit from good communication about the
drilling operation & problems regarding carry-
ing out the drilling program.. The dialogue can
stand in this pre-spud meeting by explaining
what information is required & the format for
reporting it. The lADe book & report tumed
in to the offices should reflect the same infor-
mation.
12. Work Schedules - Operators & contractors
sbould stagger shíft change days to make
certain the continuity of the operation is main-
tained. Toolpushers should surnmarize impor-
tant hole problems from the JADC book to
make certain the driller retuming from days
OFF is infonned of potential problems.
13. Tour Change - Many problems and unsafe
drilling praetices develop at tour change.
Operator and contractor drilling superinten-
4 - lntroduction
dents should agree to having either the toolpu-
sher or drilling foreman on the floor at tour
change to assure the proper comrnunícatíons
between the key people has transpíred, Re-
member that written operational plans are
easier to pass on 10 the next driller.
14. Equipment Check and Ríg-up - Almost every-
one agrees that nothing is gained by spudding
befare the rig ís eompletely rigged-up. Safe
drilling operations result from good organiza-
tion, and good organizatíon starts with a good
rig-up. Equipment limitations should be stud-
ied closely, and whatever action is necessary
before spud shouId be taken. Solids control,
trip tanks, diverter BOP Systems and monitor-
ing devices should be studied closely because
of their importance in problem prevention in
top hole,
15. OriU Stríng Oesign and Operating Practices -
Operators and contraetors should agree on
operating praetiees related to the driIl string.
The operating practiees would include: desígn,
MOP, corrosion control, mud mixing practíces,
tripping praetices and pipe inspection. Corro-
sive environments (02-H~~) should be
given special attention. Mixing mud away from
pump suction should be eoordinated to help
elirninate drill string corrosion (and other
drilling problema).
16. Land Owner Covenants - Many times the
operator & land owner agree to many special
considerations concerning the traffic into and
off of locations and these should be clearly
outlined. An example might be not bringing
guns on to the land (or location),
17. Drug Enforeement Polícies - Most operators
eomply with contractor drug enforcement
policíes and this should be reviewed befare
Spud.
18. H 2S Contingencies (or other Spedal Prcblems)
- The polícies, people, safety equiprnent, etc .,
should be reviewed . Safety people need to
have the cooperation of contraetor and operator
people.
19. Hydraulics Program - Hydraulics requires
speciaJ consideration because it is the part oí
the driUing program that may need modifying
with agreement between contractor and opera-
tor management (engineering & operational
staff). The mud & hydraulícs program should
be close1y coordinated, with the influencing
factors being hole stabil íty, bit deaning, hole
cleaning, and lost circulation. The hydraulics
program should be written for the rig pumps
to be used and, ii a rig change takes place after
 the program is prepared, the neeessary chang-
es should be made. The use of hole sweeps
should be a part oí lhe prograrn with the
driller indicating when sweeps are needed.
B. Pre-spud Meeting TWO - A second prespud meet-
ing should be held with the service company repre-
sentatives invíted, These meetings can be a series oí
prívate meetings (rather than one single all encorn-
passing meeting). The following points should be
díscussed:
1. The Drllling Program - The general drilling
program should be reviewed and, again, special
emphasis placed on potentiaI problem rones. The
part of the drilling program that pertains lo each
service company should be reviewed with that
cornpany.
2. The Mud Program - The mud program is the
key te optimízation & should be reviewed in
detail with the mud company representative (or
consultant mud engíneer). An operator should
spedfy which tests are to be run and fue mud
property ranges required to assure hole stability.
Operators should specify that the mud represen-
tative keep an up-to-date mud trend chart with
mud propertíes, drilling parameters, and hole
condítions recorded.
3. Casing & Cement Program - The casing program
should be diseussed with fue geologist and mud
loggers making sure to poínt out how critical a
particular casing seat is and how the casing point
will be selected. Cement programs should be
discussed with the cernent service company
representative, with special emphasis given to
cementing production & problem zones.
4. Directional Program - If the welI is to be deviat-
ed, this prograrn should be reviewed careful1y,
with specíal emphasis on kick off point, building
and dropping rate, bottorn-hole assemblies, mud,
surveys, and tripping practices. In fact, alI oper-
ating practices should be reviewed because oí the
potential hazards of deviated welIs . The direc-
tional program should be discussed with direc-
tional driller, loggi.ng company, and rnud compa-
ny.
S. Mud logging.. electríc loggíng, & testing These
programs should be well coordinated in advance
with alJowance for contingencies in case oí 105s
oí hole stabUity. High angle holes need special
planning with logging and testing companies.
IV. COMMUNICATION NECESSARY JO PREVENT OR
MINIMIZE ORIUlNG PROBLEMS
Al1 successful drilling operations have one th.ing in
common, and that is good communications between
rig and operational office personnel. Operator and
Contractor personnel are cornmunicating openly on
all levels and are working toward a common objec-
tive, which is canying out the drilling programo The
keys lo preventing or minimizing drilling problems
are: Good well plans; good supervisión: good opera-
tional practiees; good well trend monitoring habits,
and; corred first action when a problem develops, lo
prevent associated problerns. This should be based
on written operational plans, propér diagnosis oí
problern and proper reporting of the problem,
A. Good Well Plans. A drilling engineer must be a
good cornrnunicator if he is lo plan & implernent a
drilling programo The general steps in planning a
well are:
1. Post appraisal oí control well data
a. Data gatherlng. AH offset welI infonnation
has sorne use. Emphasis should be given
to logs, bit record s, rnud recaps and trend
charts, daily reports, and problem case
histories.
b. Data evaluation, AHdata should be evalu-
ated for its effect on hole stabUity and cost.
Computer programs are useful in the
evaluation.
c. Arranging data in order oí ímportance,
Give prioríty to hole stability. Mud, hy-
draulícs, bit selection, & weight/RPM will
follow probably in this order in how they
affect hole stability & cost.
2. Program planning
3. Program implementing.
4. Reviewing results, (Post Appra ísíng). Field
people should record accurate data when drilling
a well so that future wells can be planned from
the recap & post appraisal. Better information is
needed on: mud, hydraulícs, bits (more grading
comments) & problems. (1f a good solution to a
problem is developed in a specífic area, this
should be recorded in the fietd man's recap.)
B. Good Supervision A driUing superintendent rnust
know the drilling foreman. Otherwise, he won't
know the wellsite supervísor's strong and weak
poínts. By knowing the rig site supervisor, the
drilIing superintendent can give technical or opera-
tional back-up, depending on the weakness, Rig and
office supervísors must communicate on the same
level, or costly goof-ups will develop. A proper
chaín-of-cornmand will help communications be-
tween the rig and the office and will help avoid
costly mix-uEs: ':':r.~~pmg, elps to keep rig personnel
.....( ~. ; > I _ "./'''.;'- I~''' (~ ·· '' , .....:~ " d ' . : :.. ~: ::\ I ~\ 1
, \; :::!
\ ' :PT
\ jJjJ. '~) '1 1\ 11 'mOr]
Introduclion - 5
~ l . ' o.'
1
t~~-~:\.,'~ ._·. _
,.,.
Murchiaon Drllling Schools, Inc,

keyed-up, and keyed-up supervísors tend to plan • Run in the hole with a bit and drilling assembly lo
ahead of the bit to stay out of trouble. A good the top oí the bridge plug: ~. \

supervisor will make use of offset logs, offset bit • Pressure-up to 700 psi and, ti it holds, release the I '
récords, offset mud récords, current rate of penetra- pressure & drill the bridge plug.
tion plots and rnud logging data. Most surprises can • RIH & continue drilling ahead lo 11,000 ft.
be eliminated ti proper offset data are available and
are properly used.
MW above 8.33 ppg 1;,
The following case histories are typical examples of plug 1137 ft Hole in casing
how poor communications between office and field
personnel loo lo serious well problems,
Bridge plug
Example 1: The following case history ís an example
of the office supervisor assumíng the man on the rig
understood equivalent mud weights, and how 4500 ft, 133/8"
additive pressures are used to obtain a certain
rnudweight equivalent. The lack of cornrnunications
tumed a routine problem into a lost hole fiasco . The MW 11.00 ppg :
example well developed lost circulation & since the
13-3/8" intennediate casing was set through a 10,700 ft ~ present depth
" I
).-......-,...-',.,. .-4
dogleg a hale in the casing was diagnosed & found I

at 1137 n.
At the time of the problem, drilling operations were
progressing at 10,700 feet, with the 9-5/8" casing pro-
grarnrned lo be set at 11,000 feet. An 11 ppg mud was
being used when the hole in the casing developed. A
bridge plug was used to find the hole and to isolate the
lower zone whíle squeezing the casing. After setting the
bridge plug, the 11 ppg mud was displaced with water.
Over a perlod of one week, the hole in the casing was
squeezed with 20,000 sacks of cement. At 5:30 p .m., after
a week of squeezing, the drilling foreman called in to the
office and reported the casing hole had been successfuLly
squeezed. The drilling superintendent asked the drilling
foreman to stand by while he checked with drilling
engineering about the future program for the well .
Drllllng engineerlng gave this simple program:
• Test the squeeze lo an equívalent of 11 ppg mud
• If fue squeeze stands up, drill the bridge plug, &
finish drilling the 12-1/4" hole to 11,000 ft.
• POH & ron 9-5/8" casing as prograrnrned
I
I
I ,
11,000 ft 95/8"
1--_---- -, casing depth
Fig 1-1 ~., ......
The toolpu sher fol1owed the drilling foreman's verbal
order and was in the process of pressuríng up when the
squeeze broke down. Conflicting reports prevented the
drilling superintendent from finding out what the
pressure was when the squeeze broke down. But, on
analysis, the 700 psi was equivalent to about 20.3 ppg.
An 11 ppg mud equivalent would have been 156 psi on
top of water. Needless to say, the squeeze broke down,
and the casing was in such bad condition that a joint (or
joínts) parted and caused the well to be abandoned after
spending 1.75 million dollars.
How could this order have been comrnunicated lo the
rig? Whom do you blame for this fiasco? The order
should have been given in this manner:

The order was communicated to the rig verbatim by the
drilling superintendent as it was received from driUing
engineering. The drilling-foreman gave the following
verbal order to the toolpusher:
• The office wants us to test the squeeze to an equiva-
lent of 11 ppg mudo
• We have water in the casing aboye the hole in the
casing. An 11 ppg mud equivalent would be about
700 psi on the casing.
• RIH to the top of the bridge plug.
• Displace the water out with 11 ppg mudo
• Observe the well.
• If no losses are observed, drill the bridge plug, and
run in the hale carefully.
• Drill to 11,000 ft, & prepare to run 9-5/8" casing as
programmed.
The order should have been communicatecl to the rig as
suggested aboye, and the office personnel are to be

6 - lntroduction
blamed for assuming the rig man understood the
teehnology related to additive pressure,
Example 2: The following case history took place very
recently on a well in the Bay Area below New Orleans.
The círcumstances are very similar te example one and
again involves a hole-ín-casíng. The hole was isolated
with a bridge plug and squeezed over severa! days. The
order was receíved at the rig to test the squeeze at 9100
feet lo an equivalent mud weight of 18.5 ppg. To
squeeze, a 16.5 .ppg mud was being used.
The roan en the rig did not understand the arithmetic
involved to arrive at an 18.5 ppg equivalent mud weight
with 16.5 ppg mud in the hole, and told the toolpusher
and servíce company pump operator to apply 1500 psi
on top of the 16.5 mud column. Thís is equivalent to
about 19.7 ppg. The correet pressure to give 18.5 ppg
weuld have been 946 psi. The squeeze broke down at
1230 psi (equivalent to 19.1 ppg) and, at last report, was
still not squeezed off. The mud bill was in excess of
three million dollars, Who is to be blamed for this
fiasco? Again, the roan in the office must make sure the
fie1d roan understands the programo
16.5 ppg Mud aboye
bridge plug
/: 9100 ft
::: Hole in casing
\
Mud below
bridge plug
21,200 ft
Fig.1.2
Summary of Ex. 1 & 2: The lack of proper communíca-
tions in the preceding examp1e can be summarized as
follows:
1. The drilling superintendent did not know the
technical competence of the man on the rig and
made bad assumptíons in communicating the
orders.
2. Too many times engineering personnel assume that
field operational personnel understand drilling
technology, & therefore fail to cornmunicate on the
same level as the man on the rig.
3. Many times field personnel have too much false
pride lo ask for c1arification oí an arder, and this
causes many aggravated drilling problerns.
4. Many drilling foremen and toolpushers are so
cross-threaded that adequate cornmunications don't
take place before an operation ís performed.
5. Many drilling foremen are not receptive to sugges-
tíons, and this false pride leads to poor communica-
tions,
Example 3:
In a recent history an order from the office partially
helped solve one problern, but the cure loo to two other
problems. The drllling foreman called his aftemoon
report into the office, and reported tight hole the last
three connections while drilling 17 1/2" hale with a 9.0
ppg mud o Without any questions asked, the drilling
superintendent ordered the man on the rig lo increase
his mud wt three points to 9.3 ppg.
MW - 9.0 ppg
Yp - 1.0 lb/lOO ft
~ Cuttings
High ROP
1711.z" ~
Fig.l.3
The order resulted in partially clearing up the tight hole
problern, because the tight hole was due to peor hole
cleaning, and the increased mud weight gave a litt1e
more viscosity and buoyancy. However, the increased
mud weight and additional solids caused the rate of
penetration to slow down. The proposed 8 day drilling
program in this sectíon of hole was now increased to 15
days. Thís section of hole was through a 10 day shale,
which means that casing needs to be cemented before 10
days. The additional 5 days allowed the 10 day shale to
take on water and heave, which resulted in sticking the
casing off bottom. The overall drilling program suffered
from this point on. What are the questions the drilling
superintendent should have asked. the drilling foreman,
and what are the questions the drilling foreman should
have asked the toolpusher and driller? When drilling fast
hole, with unweighted mud, hole cleaning sh ould always
be suspected when tight hole develops, and the line of
nj~:T::~~<··'·: "";·": .,.,~... :.. :~:':'. '~ -. ;.~\~'\
~ ,.,¡ ~., ~ Introduction - 7
'j
R
t.. ': . ! ' ; ·.l~G5 \
\
l. ..
'\ .. --_.1,
L~~~~~l~~~_. .. ,,~~,,~ .
Murchison Drilling Schools, lne.
questioning to diagnose and evaluate the problem
should be:
1. What trend changes have been observed (torque,
drag, pressure and stroke, etc.)?
2. How often have pills been circulated, and what was
the weight & yield value oí pills?
3. What has been recovered over shaker when pills
come around? Does the drag & torque reduce after
the hole sweep?
4. Have different circu1ation rates (lower and higher)
been tried to improve hale cleaning?
5. How long is mud circulated before each connection
and befare tríps.
6. 15 BHA causing the hale cleaning problem (hole
enlargement)?
7. Can the present mud (or water) be used to casing
point if more hale sweeps are used?
8. 15 there a need to mud-up and, if so, is there a need
to POH to shoe, or can mud-up be done while
drilling? Note: If pits are cleaned completely, it
probably would be better 10 do it at the shoe or out
of the holeo
9. 15 the hydraulíc program causing hale enlargement
and, consequently, a hole deaning problem?
C. Good Operational Habits
Good drilling practiees are too numerous to address
in this section, but a few are worth noting.
1. Good mud and mud mixing habits would
include how to mix a tourly treatment, when to
míx a tourly treatment, which tank to mix into
(mixing into the suction tank should be díscour-
aged), monitoring the diagnostic rnud trends,
and treating mud trends before and after mixing
mudo
2. Good tripping practíces would indude the trip
plan and trip rnonitoring. The trip plan would
include: the mechanical considerations, and; the
metal displacement consideration. Monitoring oí
a trip should be done using the trend technique
and rnaking sure hole takes the corred amount
of mud based on calculated metal displacement.
Bad tripping practices cause five majar drilling
problems: (1) kicks off bottorn, (2) lost circula-
tíon, (3) shale problema, (4) stuck pipe & (5) drill
string failure. An operator will be money ahead
to pay for a well traíned person to supervise
trips or require drilling supervisors too
3. Good hole making practices. A driller must be
ínformed of his responsibility concerning hole
making, and this would include such things as:
finding the best weight & RPM to drill with,
using drill-offtests; using hale sweeps to .unload
the hale as necessary, and; monitoring oí all the
8 ~ Introduction
drilling parameters (such as ROP, torque, drag,
pressure & strokes, etc.), A successful hole is one
that is drilled as planned, evaluated, and one that
can be cased off , if necessary.
4. Goad hydraulic practíces. Optimum hydraulics
is the proper balance of the hydraulic elements
that will adequately clean the bit and bore hole
with mínimum horsepower. The balance oí the
hydraulic elements is influenced by: hole stability
(erosión), lost circuIation, bit deaning, and; hole
cleaning. Mud and hydraulic elements rnust be
balanced to give hole stability, as well as an
optimum rate of penetration. Four key superví-
sors must be in clase communication to achieve
this balance. The supervísors are: the drilling
foreman, the toolpusher, the mud engineer, and
the driller. A1l four supervisors must be looking
below the rotary table lo rnaintain hale stability
and at the same time maximize the rate of pene-
tration. The variables to control are :
a) flowrate 30-50 gpm/in
b) Percent pressure at bit 50-65%
e) Hydraulic horsepower@ bit 2.5 - 5.0 HH/-
JN2
d) Jet velodty 35D-450 Fr /Sec.
5. Good pipe handling and connection making
practices. Many optirnízation programs fail
because of string washouts and bit damage, and
both can be caused by bad connection practíces,
Differential sticking also can result from poor
connection making practices. Lost circulation,
related to surge, is a problem in weighted mudo
Drillers need to be cautioned about these prob-
lerns and should be closely supervised.
6. Good monitoring of drilling parameter habits.
To avoid a brush fue operation, rig crews must
monitor drilling pararneters to prevent problems.
These trends were covered in Section TI of this
chapter.
 Murchison Drllling Schools,!ne.

V. COMMUNICAOONS NECESSARY ro PREVENT ASSOCIATED PROBlEMS FROM DEVElOPING BECAUSE OF

IMPROPER FIRST ACTlON ON A HOlE STABllJTY PROBlEM

When a hale problem develops the driller must take
quick fírst-hand action to prevent one or more associated
problems from developing. Since the required action
must be taken befare calling a toolpusher or drilling
foreman (in most instances), the driller must know
beforehand how each problem should be handled, befare
the problem develops.
Dropin ~
J.. .
Huid level
A good rig supervisor wilI communicate to the driller the
method oí preventing and handling each problem. Many
problems can be anticipated by the driller and drilling
foreman by studying the trends, and consequently the
driller ís ready lo take quick actíon,
A few examples of problems and associated problema
are listed. (This is by no means a complete Iist.)

'-l
~!,-Kick
Example 1:

Lost Circulation in a Potential Kick Zone

H a driller fails te start fluid in the annulus immediately,

,, a kick can result, and when the well is closed in, stuck
pipe is probable.
~
•
•
I
I
Primary Problem: Lost cireulation

d·········_~
Associated Problema; Kick and stuck pipe

Fig.1.4
Example 2:

J l Shale Sloughing.

H a driller fails to get the bit above a shale bridge, lost

~
_ ._ . ~~
circulation, a kick, and stuck pipe can develop quick1y.
Primary Problems: Shale sloughing and hole cleaning
-:..- :: ':.¿, 'Y' v O :4-..:; : Associated Problems: Lost circulation, kíck, and stuck
pipe
Problem on .--.
top oí bit ... - ... - .

Fig.1.5
Example 3:

Kick

If a driller fails to catch a kick quickly enough or fails to

Excess cIose in the kick properly, lost circulation, stuck pipe,
Pressure and underground blowouts are a possibility.
@Shoe Primary problem: Kick
Associated Problems: Lost drculatíon, stuck pipe, and an
underground blowout
Fig. 1.6
Murchíson Drllling Schools, Ine.

500 ft Shoe Example 4:

break down
Shallow Kick. If a driller fails lo divert a shallaw kick
and tries te close in the kick, lost circulation and t
blowout around the shoe wíll develop.
Primary Problemi Shallow kick
Associated Problems: Lost círculation & a blowout
around the shoe (to the surface)

Dropin
dp pressure --ti> Example 5:

Stríng Washout. If a driller fails to catch the washout, a

twist off will develop and, possibly, stuck pipe.
Primary problem: String washout
Associated Problems: Twist off & stuck pipe (and ruined
diamond bit)
W.O. missed

Led to twist-off

Fig.1.8

Example 6:

Hale Cleanlng. If a driller fails to unload the cuttings he

is drilling, a lost circulation & stuck pipe problem could
Cuttings develop. Also, a slaw ROP would result frorn the
Creating increased differential pressure.
Differential Prima.ry Problem: Hole cleaning
Pressure Associated Problems: Slow ROP, lost círculation, and
stuck pipe

Fig. 1.9

Example 7:

Hale Deviation (dogleg). If a driller ereates a dogleg

with improper drilling parameters, many problems can
Dogleg and develop, such as, key seated stuck pipe, tripping prob-
Potential lems, ayer hale exposure leading to poor general hale
Keyseat i stability, hales in the casing, and associated well control
Tensile problems and eompletion problema.
Force Prímary Problem: Hale deviation (dogleg)
J, Associated Problems: 5tuck pipe, tripping problem, over
hole exposure, hale instability, well control assodated
with hole in casing and eompletion problems.
Fig.l.l0

10 - Introduction

VI. COMMUNICAOONS NECESSARY ro CONT1NUE
DRILlING OPERATIONS WHILE EllHER SOLVING OR
LIVING WJTH PROBLEM.
Many times we can live with a drilling problem in
arder to prevent lost time operations, by changing
aperating practices such as: pipe movement, connec-
tion practices,rate-of-penetration, tripping practices,
and well control practíces, If the above practices do
not solve the problerns, possibly either a change in
mud properties (or compositíon) or a change in
hydraulics, accompaníed by eíther weighted or
unweighted hole sweeps, might make it possible lo
continue drilling operations. A high percentage of
the drilling problems are eíther caused (or con-
trolled) by:
• a sensitive hydrostatic balance or
• a restricted annulus (norrnally associated with hole
cleaníng)
This beíng the case, the followíng practices must be
reviewed closely to avoid a serious lost time opera-
tion.
Living With the Problem
A. Operating Practíces.
1. Connections. Many drilling problerns start or
take place on connections (differential sticking,
lost circulation, damage to drill string, darnage
to bit, kicks associated with 1055 of ECD, etc.) .
Many of these can be prevented.
a. Have driller leave pump on while picking
up.
b. Have driller pick up 10 to 15 feet aboye
rotary table and cut pwnp off before
loweríng pipe te break-out point. If drag
is noted on pick-up, extra pumping and
pipe working should be done.
c. Keep pipe moving during connection and
exercise good pipe handling and make-up
practíces.
d. Have pipe moving when pump is en-
gaged. This will help prevent differential
sticking and lost circulation.
e. Pressure-up complete joint before lowering
pipe below rotary tableo
f. Put the bit on bottom gently and, if fill is
noted on connection, other drilling practíc-
es will have lo be exarnined.
2. Trips. Five major drilling problems are caused
by poor tripping practices. Basically, a trip plan
addresses the problem of surge and swabbing
and should cover . pullíng-out-of-hole and
running-in-hole. Monitoring by a key supervi-
Murchíson Drilling Schools, Inc,
sor should be done with a trip tank, using the
trend method. .
3. ROP Many problems that are associated with
mass volume of cuttings, such as gas-cut mud
and gumbo, can be minimized or prevented by
eontrolling rate-of-penetratíon,
4. Parameters to Monitor. A complete list of
parameters that pertain to particular problems
is given in this chapter and throughout the
book, Trend Method forces the driller and
foreman to look below the rotary table to
evalúate what is causing the trend change and
the proper diagnosis to prevent or solve a hole
problem.
B. Mud Practices
Many mud engíneers treat the mud and fail to treat
the holeo Mud trends, when closely associated with
hole trends, will help to pinpoint the problem and,
in many ínstances, the problem can be either pre-
vented or quickly solved without majar mud adjust-
ments, Complete mud tests are essential. A rig
supervisor should specify:
1. Mud properties to test.
2. Drilling trends to be recorded on the mud
trend chart.
3. That the mud engineer know whieh hole trend
he is treating when making major mud adjust-
ments.
C. Hydraulíes Practices.
When drilling very near balance, between a kick and
a lost circulation condition, hydraulics can be
fine-tuned to prevent both the kíck and loss prob-
lerns. Many hole cleaning problems are associated
with over pumping a hole, causing hale erosian and,
consequently, poor hale cleaning.
Turbulent flow can be prevented by either a hydrau-
lic or a mud approach, and the best solution is
when a balance has been achieved by trial and error.
The rig site supervisor should understand the clase
relationship between mud and hydraulics. He
should consider the:
1. Relationship oí surface pressure, flowrate, and
hydraulíc horsepower
2. Relationship of mud yield value and hydraulics
D. DriU String Design Consideration.
Many problems are closely associated with drill
string design, such as stuck pipe, hale cleaning,
deviation, twist-offs, rate-of-penetration, tripping, bit
performance, corrosi ón, and general hole stabílity,
Many drillers have not been told what their margin-
-of-overpull is in case tight hole is encountered, and
this lack of ..s~~Y.n!~,ª-tj.~ leads to expensive
~''' ' I'''~+ - ''''''''''' '~~~~~ , ;1 " . ~ I · " ' ~ ' ¡~':¡'. l'.). JI, !
, Ir!:' ,,;;''''1)' '' ' " " -'; '. "" ' " \\;:~ \
~ r. ~'i. ¡' . J 1
Introduction - 11
:¡I '¿ ,¡¡ .li ZI,jro U ' (.. l
'
~1.
J \
í ~
l.~ :'- ~ ~~~:=~
Murchison Drllling Schools, Ine.
ñshíng jobs. Rig site supervisors should examine
closely:
l. Drill collar design and should avoid over or
under designo
2. Stabilization and stiffness factors,
3. Drill pipe design and margin-of-overpull.
4. Handling practices to avoid down hole failures.
5. Corrosion practiees, with special ernphasís on
eliminating the source of oxygen.
VII. THE OIFFERENCE BETWEEN VERBAL ANO WRITTEN
COMMUNICATIONS.
Written operational plans are much safer because
the muscle of your arm will not allow your brain
and tongue to play tricks on you. Many drilling
foremen give verbal orders that they do not under-
stand. The same orders will not go down on paper
until the man writing them understands the orders.
In other words, sorne of these half-baked ideas must
be shoved back into the oven for further cooking.
Verbal orders are very good for preventing prob-
lems, and written orders are much better for solving
problema, A complete rig supervisor can do both,
VIII. COMMUNICATIONS NECESSARY TO ENABLE A
ORlllING FOREMAN TO OIAGNOSE AND SOLVE
A DRILlING PROBLEM.
When a drilling problem does develop, there are
many questions a drilling foreman should ask a
toolpusher and driller. The general questions are:
A. What trend changes took place that led to the
problem?
B. What had been done sínce the problern developed?
C. Whal ís the present situation?
D. What recomrnendations can be made?
E. What materials/tools are needed in order to help
solve the problem?
F. 15 the well secure (in case of well control or lost
circulation problem)?
IX. HOW TO COMMUNICATE A PROBLEM TO mE
OFFICE ANO FIRST ACTlON.
A. Make sure first action prevents other associated
problems from developíng.
B. Analyze trends and related facts leading up to
problern,
C. Develop general plan to solve problem (1st and 2nd
recornmendations).
D. Report problem & recornmendatíons to solve prob-
lem. Ask for permíssiorr lo carry out plan.
E. Develop detailed operational plan to solve problem,
12 - Introduction
F. Monitor plan carefully and alter plan as neeessary,
based on latest facts. DO not forget that, if good
operational practices are not carried out, other
associated problems can easily develop.
X. COMMUNICATIONS NECESSARY TO ENABLE A
DRILUNG SUPERINTENOENT ro GEr A GENERAL--
QUICK EVALUATION OF A PROBLEM.
The following general questions will help the
drilling superintendent to get a quíck grasp oí the
facts concerníng a drilling problem. Investigative
questioning will also have a positive influence on
the rig foreman, causing him to take a closer look at
the problem before calling it in.
A. What is the present situation on the well?
B. What led to the problem?
C. What plans ha ve been made to salve the problem?
D. What alternate solution is planned, just in case?
E. What materials are needed?
F. What service company help is needed?
G. Is any technical or operational back-up needed?
XI. COMMUNICATlONS NECESSARY TO ENABLE A
ORILUNG SUPERINTENOENT TO HElP A DRllLlNG
FOREMAN EVAlUATE SPECIFIC DRILLlNG PROB-
lEMS.
Many times a rig supervisor is so close to the job
that he may have a hard time seeing the forest for '
the trees, so a drilling superintendent should ask
detailed questions about specific problems to help in
the evaluation process. Once a specific problem has
been isolated, the cure ís easier to implement. Poor
diagnosis, however, leads rig people to ask for the
wrong cure and, even though it may help a situa-
tion índirectly, it is a more expensive approach. One
example oí thís would be a drilling foreman telling
the mud engineer to lower the water loss after a
shale sloughed on bottom irnmediately after drilling
it. The water 1055 has nothing to do with the basic
problem but indirectly wíll help, because water loss
additives build víscosíty, and the viscosity increase
helps salve the problem by unloading the shale. The
cure in this case, however, could have a detrimental
effect on drilling operatíons, and even worse prob-
lems might develop as drilling progresses.
Detailed Questions for Specific Drilling Problems
A. Stuck Pipe. lf the problem is stuck pipe, the follow-
ing questions should be asked:
1. 15 the pipe stuck near bottom?
2. What led to the problem?
 3. What stretch was recorded, and how much
overpull was there?
4. H stuck on bottorn, is pipe differentially stuck?
5. Did it stick when driller engaged pump?
6. H differentialiy stuck, has
a. 0i1 been spotted, or
b. One of the methods to lower overbalance
on bottom been used,
7. If mechanically stuck, is the annulus complete-
ly packed off (no circulatíon), or is there re-
duced circulation but lligh pressure? What síze
and shape cuttings/sloughing are coming from
the well? If there is partial circulation, has a
weighted pill (í.e., 18 ppg) been pumped?
8. If key seated, has pipe been worked and jarred
downward? Have 1/4 turns been tried to work
through key seat?
9. Have previous drags been seen at this depth
on trips?
10. Have key seat wipers been ron, or has time
been spent reaming this section?
11. Is there a dogleg in the hole at the key seat
depth?
12. Is the overpull below the MOP while working
stuck pipe (usually 100,000 lbs.)?
13. If freepoínt indicator and back-off operations
are to take place, can lubricator be rigged up
either on tool-joint or on swivel (gooseneck)?
14. Are pups available for fishing so that kelly is
kept out of BOPs?
15. If stuck with kelly in, has a mechanical back-off
been evaluated te get kelly out of BOP's?
16. Have the economics oí how long to fish been
considered?
17. Has a fishing plan been developed with dia-
gram of fish, fishing tools, and fishing string
(OO's, ID's, lengths, depth, etc.)?
18. Has the correlation log been checked?
19. In what formatíon is pipe stuck?
20. 15 mud in good condition?
21. If stuck because oí dirty hole, what mud yield
value do you have in hole?
22. How often has hole been swept?
23. Has reducing the pump rate been tried?
24. If stuck on trip because of dirty hole, has hole
been kept filled when working with low over-
balances (unweighted rnuds)?
25. Have weighted sweeps been tried to unIoad
dirty hole?
26. Has hole been over exposed, i.e., 25 days in a
20 day shale (time for shale to lose its stabili-
ty)?
27. If stuck with shale sloughing on bottom, what
other wellcontrol trends have been noted?
28. Have connection gas or background gas chang-
es been seen?
29. Has jarring out been tried?
30. How close is bottom, and is the kelly clear oí
BOPE?
31. Other questions spedñc te area? Has offset well
infonnation been studied?
B. Hale Stability. These questions are covered under
either Stuck Pipe, Lost Circulation, Hale Oeaning,
ot Well Control.
C. Hale Cleaning. If hole problem is due to peor hole
cleaning, but pipe isn't stuck:
1. What trend changes have been noted (torque,
drag, pressure and stroke, etc.)?
2. How often are pills circulated, and what is the
wt & yield value oí pill?
3. What has been recovered over shaker when pill
comes around?
4. Does the drag and torque reduce after the hale
sweep?
5. Have different circulation rates (lower and
higher) been tried to improve hole
cleaning?
6. How long is mud circulated before each con-
nection and before trips?
7. Do you feel BHA is causing the hole cleaníng
problem (hale enlargement)?
8. Can the present mud (or water) be used to
casing point if more hale sweeps are
used?
9. 15 mud-up needed and, if so, must the bit be
pulled to shoe or can mud-up be done while
drilling? Note: lf pits need to be c1eaned com-
pletely, it would probably be better to do it at
the shoe or out oí the hale.
10. Is the hydraulics program causing hale enlarge-
ment and, consequently, a hale cleaning prob-
lem?
D. Lost Circulation. If problem is lost circu1ation, the
questions vary depending on the hole interval, í.e.,
top hale, abnormal pressure or hydrocarbon zone.
Completion objectives aIso influence questions
(deds íons),
1. Top Hole (No hydrocarbons antici.pated) -
Total Losses.
a) Has water been measured into the annu-
lus?
b) What is the hydrostatic balance at the shoe
and at T.D.?
e) How much mud weight reduction is neces-
sary?
r.:·:'\i;~\>:~·:-,1: ;..,":'. :: ', ~ ,..: , :;~;; '; ;;t":~~~~i"\
~ C ~~: ' lo. !
1 'l. ,i ULo' 100) \ Introductíon - 13
'~ ~
~ :" .::....~.::.}~~).:;:::f_~.~.= ~
 d) Would it be more econornical lo make
new mud or water back old mud?
e) How much hole ís required to be drilled
befare running casing?
f) Are retums needed or can it be blind
drilled?
g) lf economics favor spotting an LCM pill
and trying te reach casing point with
present mud, find out if trip is necessary
or whether nozzles are large enough?
h) If losses have to be stoppedr before drilling
ahead or before running casing, find out
what materials are on location and what
needs to be ordered, í.e., LCM-assorted
particle síze, Cement, Soft Plugs (gunk),
Thixotropic plugs (servíce co.), grave!
(gravel pack).
í) Where is the 1055 zone?
j) Is it a natural fracture?
k) Is it a yugular formation?
2. Top Hole (partíal returns),
a) Has pump been slowed down to mini-
mum circulation rate for dríllíng, (30
gprn/Inch)?
b) Has a hole sweep been circulated to un-
load hole?
e) Has mud weight (solids) increased?
d) Can the mud weight be lowered to pro-
grammed weight?
e) Has water meter trend gone up?
f) Have losses been monítored while only
circulating across well head? lf losses are
drastically reduced, calculate estimated
ECO, and lower mud weight by this
arnount.
g) Wauld it be better to drill ahead to casing
point and do nothing about losses?
3. Abnormal Pressure (Heavy Mud) Zone •
Partial Losses,
a) Has the driller been instructed to have
fluid going in annulus before total Iosses
develop?
b) What led up to losses?
e) How long has the bit been on bottom
sínce the trip (or any pipe movement)?
d) Has the effect of reduced circulating rate
been evaluated? How much reduction in
losses was observed?
e) Can mud be mixed fast enough to keep up
with losses?
f) When do you feel you will pull to the
shoe?
14 - lntroduction
g) Is this a good application of the ECD
drilling technique?
h) How much overba1ance is there, and how
much can mud weight be reduced?
í) lf POH lo shoe have plans been made to
spot pills on bottom and near shoe?
j) Are plans made lo circulate across well-
head while POH? Haw much losses do
you have while circulating only across the
wellhead?
k) Do pwnp pressure/stroke trends indícate
restrictions in annulus (hydraulic system)?
l} Did losses tie ínto any change in ROP?
Where do you feel loss zone is?
m) Did driller spud pipe to unplug bit, etc.?
n) What do mud properties look like, i.e.,
yie1d value, gels, etc.?
o) Has a pressurized check on mud weight in
suction tank been ron te make sure air or
gas (which will compress down the hole
and create a gain in mud weight) is not
being recirculated back into hole?
p) With present losses, what is the cost per
hour for mud?
q) Are plenty of materials on location? On
arder?
r) How long do you anticipate waiting at
shoe to let zone heal?
s) Are you going to break circulation on the
way in the hole?
t) What is the leak off mud weight at shoe?
4. Abnormal Pressure « Total Losses.
a) Does fue hale fill up when circulating
across the wellhead only?
b) Has the hale been kept full or fluid going
in the annulus?
c) What consíderation has been given to how
long to stay on bottom or when to pull to
the shoe?
d) Have preparations been made for a possí-
ble kick related to losses?
e) Have preparations to spot pills on bottom
and near shoe?
f) How much time should be allowed at shoe
to allow hale to heal?
g) What is leak off mud weight?
h) Has driller been instructed to circulate
across wellhead at a1l times (to prevent
kick)?
i) Are sufficient mud and/or cement materí-
als available?
j) Is pipe free? Has drag increased?
 k) Has driller been ínstructed to keep pipe
movíng at all times to prevent possible
differential sticking?
1) 15 a hydraulic valve installed on kill side
of BOP Manifold so that driller can start
fluid in annulus thraugh kill line without
sending a roughneck dawn to open manu-
al val ve?
m) 15 a bit float installed or on location?
n) Is a separate mixing tank available for
mixing new volume?
o) In case bit has to be pulled under heavy
losses and kick conditions, have stripping
operations (BOPE, fluid measurement,
pressure monitoríng) been considered?
p) Has analysis been done as to where the
loss zone might be? Such things as offset
well records and present drilling pararne-
ters should be used. Temperature or flow
surveys can be ron on well íf situation
calls for it,
5. Hydrocarbon andlor Gas Cap Zone-Partial
andlor Total Losses. Completion Zone
a) Has the hole been kept full by putting
fluid in annulus?
b) Was the fluid level allowed to drop in the
annulus?
e) he you rígged-up to put large arnounts
of fluid in annulus?
d) he there lost circulation materíals Con
location) that can be acidized away?
e) ls it necessary to get a service company
truck and one of the non-forrnation darn-
aging materials to stop losses?
O Have preparations been made to strip out
in case completion operations begin in thís
zone? Spiral collars cannot be stripped out
under pressure. 15 there a float or BP valve
available?
g) Is there enough mud available to POH
safely?
6. None-completion zone, (Hydrocarbon Zone)
a) Has the hole been kept fuIl through annu-
lus fill line and, at the same time, has an
LCM pill been spotted on bottom?
b) What are the losses while circulating
across the wellhead?
e) Have preparations been made to set ce-
rnent plug for lost drculation (not bal-
anced plug)?
d) 15 it safe to POH (eíther to shoe or all the
way) to go· in with míxíng sub for ·plug
setting?
e) Has the driller been instructed te keep
pipe moving?
O Have the reduced pump rate losses been
checked?
E. Well ControL
1. Not Related lo Lost Circulation.
a) What is the present situation?
1) SIDPP?
2) SICP?
3) Well Secure?
4) Any Losses?
b) Has the drill pipe pressure been kept con-
stant to maintain constant BHP during
percolatian? (Fluid has to be bled off
through choke to keep d .p, constant.)
e) Has a kili plan been developed?
d) How big a kick was taken, and does the
influx gradient check out to be a hydrocar-
bon?
e) How much warking pressure is avaílable
with:
1) Consideration oí losses at shoe with
bubble in open hole? Leak off mud?
2) Cansideration for casing burst (&
BOP /WH rating) when bubble is at
top?
f) Is the pressure too lúgh to wark pipe
(more than 1000 psi)?
g) Are enough materials available to kili
well?
h) ls mud in gaod condition?
i) Have surface lines, roud-gas separators,
and fiare lines been checked?
j) Have pressureís) been checked with an
accurate pressure gauge?
k) Have there been any indications of H 2S? If
H~ has been detected, specíal precautions
(and preparatíons) need to be eonsidered.
1) When will the kili operation begin?
ro) Have plans been made to put M.W. trip
margin in on second circu1ation?
n) Have any mechanical problems been expe-
rienced with the rig? Is a purop UIÚt need-
ed from service company?
o) ls a pressurized. mud balance on location
to make SUTe mud weight ís corred going
in and not full of air/ gas that cause exces-
sive down hale mud weights and, conse-
quently, lost circulation?
p) he there spark arrestors or water on
exhausts?
,,' Jo! ~ .. ~' • • -
t- ..-~_·-. · ·"" ....
Murchison Drilling Schools, Ine.
a) What ís the present situation7
1) SIDPP? Are pressures erratic?
2) Slo>?
3) ls well secure?
b) Was an accurate DP pressure taken before
breaking down the wel1 (losses began)?
e) If an accurate DP pressure was taken
(unaffected by losses) what mud weight
would be needed from ro to shoe to be
able to reduce mud weight from casing
shoe to surface topríor mud weight before
kick?
d) Was the mud engineer asked to ron barite
plug pilot tests for settling?
e) Has LCM: been tried in kili mud?
f) ls the pipe free?
g) If necessary to strip out of barite plug, is
there a back pressure float valve in string
or a BP sub for a BP valve to land in?
h) Is the stack rigged up to use a combina-
tion oí BOPs for stripping?
i) What is the rate of loss, and how was the
rate measured? Circu1ating7 Circulating
across WH? Going through choke?
j) What is recommended to stabilize the
losses and control the kick?
k) Could the control result in losing bottom
part oí the hole and possíbly the BHA?
1) Are BOPs in good working order (date oí
last test and what was tested)?
m) What was formation capability from drill-
out test?
1) Was leak-off reached?
2) Was it necessary to squeeze?
3) Was retesting done after squeeze?
n) Did ROP trend (or other trends) indicate
losses may be near bottom, or are losses
considered lo be somewhere other than
shoe?
o) Do you need someone to help you?
XII. SUPERVISING BY THE TREND METHOO TO PREVENT
HOlEPROBLEMS. TO DIAGNOSE HOLE PROBLEMS,
ANO TO SOLVE HOLE PROBLEMS
1 once had a contractor drilling superintendent tell
me that, when he was pushing tools, a stray dog
wandered onto the ríg. The crews started íeeding
the dog, and it hung around the ríg floor and dog
house. He went on to say that, on a number oí
wells they had a 10t oí hole problerns and, after the
dog arrived at the ríg, the problems stopped. The
dog was considered to be good luck for the rig. But
the superintendent went on to saythat, looking
back at the situation, what was really happening
16 - Introduction
was that the drillers started watehing the dog and
the dog, having very sensitive ears, would detect a
motor sound change, a rotary torquíng-up, and
these trend changes would prompt the drillers to
start looking for the problem that was developing.
I'm not saying that what we need en the rig is more
dogs, but 1 am saying we must train drillers to start
using trends to ctiagnose what is taking place below
the rotary tableo Good down hale drillers become
good down hale toolpushers, drilling superinten-
dents, and drilling managers. The time has passed
when we can afford to be conununicating on two
different levels. Office and ríg personnel must speak
and understand the sarne language.
To bridge thís conununication gap, people on the rig
need to record trends, and people in the office, as
well as peopIe on the rig, need to understand what
the trends are indieating.
Trends: Drilling people should record drilling
trends so that changing drilling parameters are
properly ctiagnosed to prevent problerns and, if a
problem does develop, a rig supervisor should be
able to implement the proper operational plan lo
correct the probJern.
A. Basic Drilling Parameters for the Driller to Monitor
and Record
1. Pressure
a) Indicares hale restrictions.
b) lndicates hale loading up.
e) Indicates stríng washout.
d) Indicates well control problem.
2. Strokes
a) Indicates hole restrictions.
b) Indicates hale loading up,
e) Indicates string washout.
d) Indicates well control problem.
3. ~p (Pressure to kick float open)
a) Indicates hole loading up.
b) Drill Pipe pressure for wel1 control.
4. Torque
a) Indicates formation changes.
b) Indicates bit Iockíng-up,
e) Indicates transition zone (well control flag).
5. Drag (ÓW)
a) lndicates possíble transition zone (well
control flag).
b) Indicates hale loading up.
 Murchison Drllling Schools, Ine.

e) Indicates tight hale. 5. Pipe handling

d) Indicates hale stability changes. a) setting slips.
e) Used in cementing related to recíprocatíng b) bending pipe (rotary Imouse hole)
of casing (drag trends). c) use of tongs.
f) Used on trips to indicate possible key-
seating zone. E. Mud
g) Used to establish normal drag trends. The diagnostic trends for the derrickrnan to check
h) Trends related to BRA changes. are: rnud weight, funnel viscosity, water loss and
chloride. The treating trends for the rnud engineer
B. WeH Control Trends to check are: Pv, Yp, gels, test temperature, chernis-
1. Flow line temperature by, MBT, solids, HPHT, (all properties).
2. Trip trends (mud requirement comparison 1. Waterrequirements to maíntaín mud wt (taken
actual vs. calcula ted & bottoms-up) from water meter or gauged)
3. ROP trends 2. Weight-in
4. Background gas 3. We íght-out
5. Connection gas 4. Viscos íties/ gels-ín (Pv, Yp, gels)
6. Shale density 5. Viscositíes/ geIs-out (Pv, Yp, gels)
7. d'exponent 6. MBT
8. Size and shape oí cuttings (shale shaker) 7. Solids
9. Mud (all properties) 8. Water loss
10. Pit gain 9. Chernistry (pH , O, Ca....., Mg ....., C031 HC031 pf,
11. F10w increase Pm, and possibly others)
12. Pressure/stroke changes 10. Treatment
13. Logs (soníc and resistívity) 11. Maintenance cost
14. Drag 12. General mud practices
15. Torque 13. Hole stability (what mud treatment should be
16. Fill on connectíon based on)
14. Solids control equipment running time
C. Tripping Trends 15. Drilling parameters befare and after any mud
1. Mud requírernent to fi11 hole while POH. Was treatment.
mud weight correct (not watered back) and
was pipe slugged? What was weight of slug F. Pump
and how long was it pumped? 1. Weekly volumetric check
2. Mud gained when pipe is Rlli. 2. Maintenance cost
3. Comparison of actual vs. theoretical mud 3. Valve/seat repair (related to corrosión)
requirernents 4. Lost time due to repaír
4. Drag trends (partícularly at one depth and 5. Pressure and stroke fluctuation
change since previous tríp)
5. Hole fill and bridges. Give depth and time to G. ROP
clean out. 1. Cuttings
6. Trip gas 2. Drag
7. Lost círculation (índuced), Compare metal 3. Torque
displacernent, 4. Lost circulation
8. Drill string failures related to pipe handling on 5. Well control
trips 6. Gas cut mud control
9. Key-seatíng 7. Gumbo control
10. Bridges 8. Incremental cost/ft. on bit during the dulling of
11. Mud weight and condition off bottom. bit (when it starts up the bit has reached its
econornícal limit)
D. Connections 9. Mud weight overbalance
1. Fill on connection 10. Solids/Pv
2. Bottoms-up from connection (well control) 11. Bit type
3. Bit plugging 12. Bit weight and RPM
4. Pump engagement related to Lost Circulation 13. Hydraulics
and Pipe Sticking 14. ROP (faster/slower)

Introduction - 17
Murchlson Drilling SclIools, Inc,

a Lost drculation K. Pipe StickinglStuck Pipe

1. Operation when losses start 1. ROP
2. Depth 2. Hydros~ticoV&~
3. Formation 3. Deviation (look for posslble doglegs)
4. Mud weight 4. Mud solids HPHT water loss (permeable zones)
5. Viscosities/gels 5. Drag (normal vs, trend change)
6. ROP 6. Torque (normal vs. trend ehange)
7. Visual observation of shaker 7. Pressure/strokes (norma! vs, trend change)
8. Hole Loading-up (sweeps) 8. Stuck in drill collar?
9. Solids increasing 9. Stuck In drill pipe? (are the BOPs open?)
10. Hydraulics 10. Drilling operation when pipe is stuck
11. ECO 11. Was lost c1rculation assodate with stuck pipe?
12. Overbalance 12. Was we11 control assodated with stuck pipe?
13. Loss rate c1rculating through bit 13. Was pump engagement assodated with stuck
14. Loss rate when pump slowed down pipe?
15. Loss rate when drculating aeross wellhead 14. Is key-seating a possibility (trip drag trends)?
16. Los. while tripping
17. How soon after trip did loss start? L. Hole S~blUty
18. Hole restrictions bridging (pump pressure/- 1. How many days has formation been exposed?
stroke) (days sínce last casing)?
19. PressW'ized mud balance check in pump suc- 2. How many lrips have been made through
tion compared lo regular mud balance interval? (The hole wil1 only take so many
20. Water to fi11 hole (1ow weight muds), and tríps.)
corresponding hydrostatic balance 3. What do trip trends indicate?
21. Is blind driliing possible? 4. Is hole stabílíty assccíated with wel1 control?
S. 15hole stability assodated with lost cIrculation?
L GeolographfI'otcolPVflFlow RecordersIMWD 6. Is hale stability assodated with differential
1. ROP sticking?
2. Mud 1055/gain trends 7. ls hole stability associated with mechanical
3. Torque sticking?
4. Depth 8. Is hole stabílity associated with time sensitive
S. Hook load/drag shales? --'
6. Flowrate 9. 15 hole stability assodated with transition zone
7. Trip trends shales?
8. Inclination 10. 15 hole s~bility associated with shale cavings?
9. Weight on bit (actual) 11. 15 shale caving associated with hole enlarge-
10. Temperature at bit ment?
11. Gamma ray 12. Is hole enIargement associated with hydraulics
12. Resistivity or time sensitive shales?
13. Has hole deaning been evaIuated?
J. Deviation 14. Does shale lhat sloughed have a low or high
1. From vertical MBT?
2. Direction changes 15. Have there been bridges off bottom and how
3. Dogleg severity long does it take lo ream bridges?
4. Drag/key-seating 16. Have hole fill and hole sweeps been used prior
5. Torque to tripping?
6. Pipe sticking 17. Have the number, slze, and type cuttings
7. Casing wear (possible we11 control problem) changed over the past few days?
8. Drill pipe wear 18. Have the basic driliing parameters (pressure,
9. Target (controlled) strokes, drago torque) changed over the last few
10. Weight/RPM program hours?
11. BHA program 19. What hole problem is diagnosed?
12. Surface location
13. Hydraulics M. Hydraullcs

18 - Introduction

1. Are the basic elements baIanced (flowrate,
pereent pressure at bit, HH/in.2 jet velocityl?
2. Have the influencing factors been anaIyzed (bit
and hale deaning,lost circulation, hole stabili-
ty?
3. Has ROP changed? How does this hole com-
pare with control well?
4. What is the ECO?
5. Has a log been run, and does it indicate hole
enlargement?
6. Has the shaker been observed for the past
several hours (or days)? Are the euttings
(arnount, síze, type) the same?
7. What is the mud being used designed lo do
with reference lo shales and hole stability?
8. Is the mud a shear tlúnning fluid?
9. Does the mud change when it goes from turbu-
lence to 1aminar flow (1ike an increase in Yp)?
10. Is a higher Yp being used to suppress the mud
out oE turbulence (smaller síze holes)?
11. Is mud mixed with a hopper outlet in the
suction tank (aeration)?
12. Have pump suctíons been checked for leaks or
barite restrictions?
13. Have weekiy volumetric checks been run on
the pump holding a litlie back pressure (say
500 psil?
14. Have high ñowrates and high jet velocities
been consídered as a cause of interference with
bit cleaning? 15 the hole balling because of
overbalance and/or nozz1es?
15. Has fiowrate been optimized before selecting
the bit nozz1es?
N. Corrosion
1. Are the basíc three steps in corrosion control
being followed?
a) Good driIl string design
b) Good maintenance
1) Tool joint maintenance (buildup t.j. at
the right time, particularly Grade "E")
2) Coating and recoating
3) Inspections (supervise the inspector)
4) Rig practíces (proper torque make-up
with proper air selting on rnake-up
cathead)
5) Are good and complete reports being
received on drill pipe?
6) Is training constanlly going on?
e) Corrosion control
1) Corrosion control monitoring and
2) Controlling environment with proper
scavengers-inhibitors (mud treatment)
[ ~:~~'~'~;:::~;""~'~
\" ,. Z 1 J UI ZG05
, !
L~~~~=~:,·--
Murchison Drllling Schools, Ine.
2. 15 mud being mixed with hopper oullets in
pump suction? Have the effects of oxygen on
pump seats and valves been observed?
3. Has a fincher-galvanic probe been run to moni-
tor oxygen in mud at the standpipe?
4. Have corrosion rings been run in kelly saver
sub and above OC's? (Compare the difference.)
5. Has !he type mud been considered? Sorne
muds have built-in oxygen scavengers (tannates
- Iignosulfonates) &: do not require ZnSO, and
ammoníum bisu1fite.
6. Are trips supervise<! lo make sure that good
bushings, slips, tongs, slip setting practices are
being followed?
7. Do the toolpusher and company roan have a
copy of RP-7G, and are they familiar with
practices discussed in the book?
8. 15 the H,5 environmenl controlled so lhat
higher grades ("X', "G" and "S") d.p. can be
used in drill string design?
9. Are good storage practices being used? (Chemi-
caIs used fer spraying are designed lor both
short and long term storage.)
10. Is bent pipe being kepl out uf !he string?
11. Have string washouts been caught and mini-
mized? (Washouts upset oplimized drilling
programs more than anything e1se.)
12. Has consideratian been given to using 5-1/2
FH connections in the 17-1/2 & 26" hole ínter-
vals? The 5-1/2 FH connection is a better
balanced 'IJ compared lo 5", XH (7" OD com-
pared lo 6-3/8). Remember lhat 5", 19.5 Ib/ft,
XH, grade "E" has weak tool joints and requires
maintenance (build-up) when wom down.
O. Hale Cleaning
1. Have lhe trends been checked on the basíc (6)
drilling paramelers?
a) Pressure/stroke trends
b) Torque trends
e) Drag trends
d) ~ (when using bit float) trends
e) ROP trends
f) Mud wt <in-out-water requírements)
2. Has !he pipe been trying to stick?
3. Have hydraulics been checked? (Remember lhat
pump maximwns are not a1ways best.)
4. Has good use been made oE hole sweeps?
5. Has the mud-viscosity been consídered, partic-
u1arly the Yp?
6. Has the hydraulics created hole enlargement,
which many times makes hole c1eaning ímpos-
síble, particularly with water or very low
weight muds.
1-<'.
'",,,
., '1
,~"~
,
1 Introduction - 19
Muzchi&on DrU1ing Schoo1s, Ine.
7. Has viscous mud been left In the hale lo be
used for tripplng when clrilling with watér?
8. Has the hale been kept eompletely fu)) (drcu-
la.tlng acmss WHl when working with low
overbalances?
P. Operating Practlces
1. Are the operating practices dear and In the
hands of the cIriller?
2. If !he operating praetiees require driIIs and
training. is this belng -done?
3. Do !he operating practices include the follow-
ing?
a) Pipe movexrent
bl Pump engagement &; connection making
practices
el Mud mixing practices
dl Tripping practices
e) What lo do when losses occur
f) How to monitor the well &; catch kicks
quicldy
gl Hydraulie praetices &; pump efficiency
checks
hl Pre-Spud meetings
i) Pre-dríll-out meetings (drilling Inlo abnor-
mal pressure zones)
j) Pre-drill-out drills on the closíng-ín proce-
dures &; use of hydraulic choke. This
should be done on top of F.e. before drill-
out.
kl H,5 and other contíngencíes
1) MMS regula.tion compliance
4. Are the objectives of contractor and operator
the same? Suecessful cIrillingoperations require
that both parties be moving Ioward a eommon
objective.
S. 15 supervision dear (people and responsibility)?
6. Are chaín-oí-command and communication
channels dear?
7. Are moming meetings required on the rig lo
discuss !he previous and upoornlng 24 haurs?
Q. Washouts and Twisl-offs
1. Have the pressure and stroke relationship been
monilored dosely? What change has taken
place?
2. 15 the washout high (near surfaeel or low (near
bit)?
3. 5hould further circu1ation be rninimized to
prevent a Iarger washoul, &; should pipe be
chained out?
4. Have the driIIers been informed about what
their MOP is?
S. Have the basíc drilling parameters changed?
20 - lntroduction
6. Have pipe hand1ing &; tripplng practices been
examined?
7. Has corrosion control (basic three stepsl been
eonsidered?
8. Has the driller been lnformed lo measure his
kelJy if he does twist off ?
Ro Key·Seating
1. Have!he trip drag trends changed?
2. 18 there a dogleg índícated by deviation Sur-
veys? (angle & direction).
3. Has stabiJization &; BHA stiffness changed?
4. Has weight/RPM program changed?
S. Has the formation dri1lability changed?
6. Have any key-seat wipers been run? Did they
help?
7. How long does it Ia.ke lo work through
key seat?
8. After running casing through key seat,
how many days can drilling be done
before wearing a hole in the casing?
9. Have mechanica1 or electronie ca1iper
surveys been programmed lo monitor
casing wear?
10. Are hale brldges responsible for kiek
off and key seat,
S. Water Meter
1. Has a water meter or other measuring device
been rlgged up lo monitor water added lo
mud?
2. Have crews been dísdplíned to keep up with --.../
water added lo mud?
3. Have the water requirements changed lo maín-
tain same mud weight?
4. Did ehanging shaker screen or improving
desilting equipment ehange the water require-
ment trend?
5. Has an anaIysis been made from the water
requiremenl trend on the effectiveness of the
solids control equipmenl?
6. Has the ROP changed, and how did thal affect
the water requirement trend?
T. People
1. Whal is the tumover rate?
al For roughnecks
b) Fordrillers
el For toolpushers
dl For company men
2. Did lhe recent problern develop because
of personnel changes, turnover, poor
eommunication?
3. ls trainlng required (frorn a good school)?
4. ls training followed up by:
,-'
 Murchison Drilling Schools, Ine.

a) Defining training objectives before school? 9. H tumover has increased, what can be done to
b) Asking if training objectives were met? reverse !he trend?
e) Ability to use the training on the rig? a) Would ranking people and compensaling
d) Observing performance of recentIy trained by rank help keep lhe good people?
person to see if bis job approach and (l) job performance
performance have improved? (2) altitude
5. Has the trained person been compensated for (3) test (technícal and job knowledge)
having and applying better teclmiques? (Or b) Would supervisory training help in deal-
does he make the same as the untraíned per- ing wilh people7
son?) c) Would better job screening be helpful7
6. Has the training cut down en the rig's lost time 10. Would cIear operating policies have eliminated
operalions? necessity oí corrective aclion (and possible
7. Has the percent lime on bottom drilling ím- quilling oí person being corrected)?
proved? (Jf it has, define and note basíc reasons 11. Would clear chaín-of-eommand poliey have
or improvements made.) eliminated recent personne1 problem?
8. Has training•.•. 12. IS COMMUNICATIONS THE I<EY ro PRE-
a) Cut down on tumover? VENTING ANO SOLVING DRILLlNG PROB-
b) Increased tumover? LEMS?
e) Reduced accidents?

lntroduclion - 21