Real-Time Specific Energy Monitoring
Enhances the Understanding of When To
Pull Worn PDC Bits
Robert J. Waughman, SPE, Woodside Energy Ltd., and John V. Kenner, SPE, and Ross A. Moore, SPE,
Hughes Christensen/Baker Hughes
Summary
Knowing when to change dulled bits can significantly reduce
costs, which can be particularly important in high-cost environ-
ments. However, current techniques are based more on speculation
and hope rather than science.
The concept developed to dramatically improve this inefficient
decision process involved measuring the mechanical energy input
at the drill rig floor, calculating the drilling specific energy (SE),
checking the current formation type with real-time downhole
gamma ray (GR) readings, comparing the SE with the bench-
mark new-bit SE, and then using these values to assess the bit’s
“dull” state.
This method has been proven to work in synthetic-based mud
systems in which balling does not mask the bit’s dull condition. It
was imperative that the operator proved that this process worked in
water-based drilling fluids that had replaced earlier synthetic muds
because of environmental concerns, cost, and improved perfor-
mance in water-based mud (WBM). Recently, the operator estab-
lished that this process worked in water-based mud systems treated
with antiballing chemicals. The case studies in which this meth-
odology was developed are presented and discussed.
Introduction
Drilling performance is commonly analyzed by comparing a given
run to the average of offsets. However, in offshore projects, offsets
are fewer and learning must be accelerated because of the inherent
high cost. To reach a desired performance level, aggressive targets
must be set and plans to achieve those must be developed and
implemented.1 Using real-time drilling efficiency and GR data to
monitor bit dull state is one approach refined and used by this
operator in particularly troublesome areas.
To estimate the bit’s dull state from drilling efficiency data,
understanding how incremental bit wear affects performance for
different drilling conditions had to be improved. Galle2 and
Bourgoyne3 developed early mathematical models for approxi-
mating the effects of bit wear on drilling performance (Figs. 1
and 2). Many performance models exist today, but they typically
fail to capture the dependencies on formation hardness and
balling tendencies vs. the type of drilling tool used—PDC,
Tungsten Carbide Insert, or Mill Tooth (Fig. 3). In a previous
work, we classified performance expectations across a range of
tools and drilling conditions4 (Fig. 4) and now use this information
to interpret a dull state. The following field examples illustrate
when a bit should have been pulled and the consequences on the
performance of subsequent bit runs and estimated cost impact of
not doing so.
Copyright © 2003 Society of Petroleum Engineers
This paper (SPE 81822) was revised for publication from paper SPE 74520, first presented
at the 2002 IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, Dallas, 26−28 February. Original manuscript
received for review 28 March 2002. Revised manuscript received 4 September 2002. Paper
peer approved 27 September 2002.
March 2003 SPE Drilling & Completion
Field Observations
Drilling off the remote North West Shelf of Australia requires the
use of semisubmersible rigs. The discovery of hydrocarbons in
1973 in the Cretaceous sands of the Angel formation led a local
operator to drill an offset well, NWS 1 (Fig. 5), into a deeper
horizon in January 1996 to investigate the possibility of gas-
bearing sands in the early Jurassic and Triassic formations. This
was the deepest well drilled by the operator in more than 5 years,
and offset information for the deeper part of the well was scarce.
The operator chose a low-toxicity oil-based mud (LTOBM) for the
121⁄4- and 81⁄2-in. hole sections to lessen the chances of differential
sticking and bit balling and to improve the chances of complete
core recovery while coring overbalanced in the 121⁄4-in. section.
Eliminating shale hydration with the oil mud also allowed the
operator to use heavy-set PDC bits while still minimizing the risk
of bit balling.
Fig. 6 shows the casing setting points with the pore pressures
and mud weight used in the 1996 well. The majority of the PDC
bits ringed out, and severe gauge wear was also a problem with
two runs, as shown in Table 1. A post-well analysis revealed
the following.
1. All PDC bits were left in the hole too long, adversely af-
fecting the next bit run.
2. Severe gauge wear resulted from excessive reaming with
new PDC bits before reaching bottom. This type of overloading in
the bit shoulder area contributed to poor overall life and rate of
penetration (ROP).
For future high-cost wells, a more precise method had to be
devised and used in deciding when to pull bits. Speculation rather
than science was the determining factor in whether to change
a bit on the NWS-1 well or leave it in the hole. This decision-
making process was extremely inefficient and did not further
the operator’s philosophy of continuous improvement.1 The pro-
cedure developed by analyzing drilling performance for NWS 1
was then established.
• Check the current formation type with a downhole GR reading.
• Calculate the drilling SE5 [the amount of mechanical energy
input at the rig floor per unit volume of material removed (Ap-
pendix A)].
• Establish a “new bit” shale benchmark SE for every run
when possible.
• Compare the real-time SE to the benchmark new-bit SE.
• Estimate the wear by comparing the real-time SE with the
benchmark value.6
The results of this procedure can be verified by a post-well
calculation of mechanical efficiency. The method’s foundation
was based on the following principles.
• No rock is 200,000 psi strong, and, in fact, most rocks drilled
in the oil field are much less than 50,000 psi, with shales less than
20,000 psi (unconfined).
• SE levels in the field are often observed to be more than
1,000,000 psi.
• High-pressure laboratory drilling tests in shale have revealed
drilling efficiencies with balled bits as low as 1% and optimized
efficiencies approaching 50%.7
59
Fig. 1—Common mathematical wear models. (1) Galle and
Woods,2 and (2) Bourgoyne and Young.3
• Therefore, when accounting for drag losses in the wellbore,
we established the target real-time drilling efficiency for shale
as 25%.
Field Discussion
In Well NWS 1, Bit B was the only one pulled without a ring out
(Fig. 7 and Table 1), and, therefore, this bit was used as a datum
point for evaluating when a PDC bit was worn. It was agreed that
for future wells, improved drilling efficiencies, although not en-
tirely quantifiable, were possible by pulling bits before they suf-
fered this amount of wear. Formation evaluation while drilling
(FEWD) tools were already in use and proved valuable in access-
ing real-time drilling performance. Toward the end of the section,
Bit B encountered a relatively homogeneous, dense shale section
with the following properties.
• Depth range: 3475 to 3485 m.
• GR range: 115 to 140 API units (FEWD real-time data).
• Sonic: (compression) 213 to 223 ms/m (not known in real time).
Well NWS 1
Formation logs for the interval are shown in Fig. 8, with a more
focused graph highlighting the change in SE relative to GR ap-
pearing in Fig. 9. The rock strength algorithm was used to compute
the average strength of the formation and the drilling efficiency.
The efficiency of the dull bit in this section varied between 2.5 and
4%. Note that the SE trend increases from 3450 m and jumps
dramatically as the shale content increases.
Fig. 3—Sample models. The linear model represents common,
field-level understanding.
60
Fig. 2—Galle and Woods mathematical wear model for K-1.2
Bit B was replaced with an identical bit, C. The first 7 m drilled
by the new bit was weak shale with less strength than the forma-
tion finished with the previous dull bit. Despite these differences in
the rock strength, the efficiency levels of the new bit vary between
50% initially and 7%. Very little weight on bit (WOB) is required
to achieve these efficiency levels, and ROPs range from 10 to 25
m/hr compared to 3 m/hr for the dull bit. The benefits of putting a
new bit in the hole are obvious.
Therefore, the challenge arises in picking the optimum point at
which a worn bit should be pulled. The lithologies encountered in
the deep North West Shelf area consist of interbedded sands and
shales. Experience in the area has shown that drilling shale with a
dull bit, such as Bit B, leads to SE values in excess of 300,000 psi
and that energy levels for new bits in similar formations generally
average 100,000 psi. This three-fold increase in SE for the same
formation was the key to assessing the level of wear on a bit.
Consider now that Bit C was left in the hole until it reached a depth
of 3767 m. All high SE values from the start of the run until 3667
m are associated with hard sand stringers. Post-well analysis of the
ROP and efficiency logs reveals an alarming trend in the rise of the
SE (from 3600 to 3683 m) through this consistently shale-rich
section. Fig. 8 shows that at 3682 m, SE jumped to more than the
350,000-psi level and the ROP dropped to approximately 3.5m/hr.
This interval had an unconfined compressive strength (UCS) of
approximately 6,000 psi. From the condition of Bit B, it would be
Fig. 4—Qualitative description of formation and drilling
tool dependencies.
March 2003 SPE Drilling & Completion
 Fig. 5—General location map.

Fig. 6—General lithology with casing and mud program.

March 2003 SPE Drilling & Completion 61


Fig. 7—Dull bit pictures from Well NWS 1.
a fair assumption (based on the SE and UCS levels) that Bit C was
in a similar condition as Bit B at 3683 m and that the bit should
have been replaced. Fig. 10 shows that Bit C broke through the
shale cap into a sand (significantly softer than the sands drilled
earlier) at 3686 m, consequently improving the ROP dramatically,
as evident in Fig. 8. At 3764 m, the ROP dropped dramatically in
a shale, the WOB increased to more than 40 thousand lb (klb) in
an attempt to maintain the ROP, and the SE jumped to more than
500,000 psi and continued to rise. The bit was then pulled to
surface (Fig. 7).
With the benefit of hindsight, it would have been better to put
a new bit in the hole at approximately 3683 m, where the ROP and
SE had decreased and increased, respectively, on Bit C. Bit D was
run in hole and reamed for 6 hours to bring the undergauge hole
back to gauge before drilling could commence. After 53 m of
drilling with Bit D, SE again reached a level higher than 350,000
psi in a shale-rich formation (Fig. 11). Because of the highly
interbedded nature of the formation, the bit eventually broke
through into a more drillable sand and was left in the hole because
of acceptable progress. After another SE spike of greater than
400,000 psi, the bit continued on, and at 3866 m, the SE again
began to rise as the bit drilled into a shale-rich section. Parameters
were altered to try to regain the ROP; however, this was unsuc-
cessful (SE was now greater than 700,000 psi). At 3881 m, the
ROP had dropped to less than 2 m/hr, with SE peaking at 1,350,000
psi, and a twist-off occurred in the drilling collars. The fished
62
bottomhole assembly (BHA) and bit were retrieved, and all were
found to be under gauge.
Again, with the benefit of hindsight, it would have been better
to put a new bit in the hole at 3867 m, where Bit D showed clear
signs of being worn. This action would potentially have added a
new bit to the program with the associated cost of an extra trip and
bit; however, the overall ROP would have increased as well as
removing the amount of time spent reaming, fishing the BHA, and
changing BHA components.
Well NWS 2
Post-well analysis of the relationship between high SE levels in
shale-rich formations with dull PDC bits led to monitoring real-
time SE and formation evaluation data from the measurement
while drilling (MWD) tool for the next well in the program, NWS
2. This method had considerable potential because the GR sub on
the MWD tool was only 4 m behind the bit face. A new bit design
with the same IADC class as Bits B and C was used, and pore
pressures, casing setting point, mud system, and drillstring were
similar to NWS 1.
Fig. 12 presents the electric and mud log data for the interval
drilled, with Fig. 13 highlighting the relationship between SE and
GR. Note that the first significant rise in SE occurred at 3579 m.
This coincided with a hard sand stringer, and further monitoring of
the real-time GR and SE beyond this point revealed that the bit was
achieving an acceptable ROP. At 3647 m, the SE again began to
rise and peaked at approximately 500,000 psi at 3652 m, which
coincided with a shale-rich formation. The bit was not pulled at
this time because of an acceptable jump in the ROP immediately
after receiving the MWD data; however, inspection of the log
showed a gradual demise in the ROP and an increase in the SE
during the next 40 m. A delay in receiving the real-time MWD data
delayed deciding to pull the bit. However, the run was eventually
terminated at 3699 m when the SE exceeded 370,000 psi. A picture
of the dull bit is shown in Fig. 14. Hindsight again leads to the
conclusion that pulling the bit at approximately 3655 m would
have been the best form of optimization.
Well NWS 3
The benefits of monitoring real-time SE is also highlighted in Well
NWS 3. This well was drilled with a WBM system with an anti-
balling additive that allowed the same relationship to apply be-
tween SE and wear. This bit run was of a similar design to those
run in Wells NWS 1 and NWS 2.
The bit run in NWS 3 initially drilled through a long shale
sequence that allowed for a good baseline SE value of 100,000 psi
to be obtained when the bit was in a new condition (Figs. 15
and 16). There were two events between 3890 and 3906 m
that increased SE to values greater than 240,000 psi that could
have indicated the bit was in a dull state. On both occasions,
however, the SE level quickly dropped to or lower than the base-
line level and remained constant through the shale interval. These
intervals also had low GR readings, indicating that the higher SE
value had more to do with the formation type (i.e., hard, silty sand)
than bit wear. There was a gradual and extended increase in SE
between 3970 and 3988 m, with a maximum of 332,000 psi at
3986 m (GR at this depth was 147 API units). The bit was not
pulled during this interval because the GR sub on the FEWD was
∼9 m from the bit. This resulted in the bit breaking through to the
sandier section at 3988 m, with the ROP increasing to more than
30 m/hr between 3988 and 4000 m. With such a large increase in
the ROP, it was extremely difficult to justify pulling the bit, and,
hence, it was left in the hole. Once the bit entered the next shale
sequence, the SE once again gradually climbed and was eventually
pulled at 4017 m when the SE value was 626,000 psi (Fig. 17).
Hindsight once again leads to the conclusion that the bit should
have been pulled after the first increase in SE while drilling
through a shale interval.
March 2003 SPE Drilling & Completion
 Fig. 8—Formation logs of interval for Well NWS 1.
Results
Monitoring real-time SE has been shown to benefit the decision to
pull a bit. It has also shown that it would have been more eco-
nomical to have pulled the bit as soon as the SE level increased to
a predetermined cut-off level, in this case 300,000 psi in shale
formations, instead of left in the hole to continue drilling ahead.
These findings were confirmed by post-well analysis of the drilling
efficiency that showed values lower than 4% through intervals
where the bits should have been or were pulled.
To evaluate the resulting cost of the last example (NWS-3) by
not pulling the bit when SE first rose to more than 300,000 psi,
an average of the ROP was taken for the interval from 3975
to 4017 m, including the fast ROP sand section, to determine
the cost of drilling this section. Based on the real-time GR
data received at surface from the interval at 3975 m, it is reason-
able to assume that the earliest the bit could have been pulled was
at 3988 m. Assuming a new bit has been run from 3988 m, a
conservative ROP estimate would have led to a savings of approxi-
mately U.S. $40,000. Fortunately, this bit did not go under gauge
after drilling the sand section (from 3989 to 3998 m), as occurred
when Bit C was left in hole with NWS 1.
March 2003 SPE Drilling & Completion
When applying this method in the field, it was observed that a
better understanding of the affect of a dull condition on SE values
was obtained with average meter-based data rather than instanta-
neous values. This is caused by one event, such as pipe squat,
skewing the data.
In conjunction with these findings, one of the main hurdles that
must be overcome is the perception that a bit must be pulled in a
badly worn state to ensure best performance. It is clear from the
values obtained in this field that a bit may continue drilling at an
acceptable ROP but far less than the achievable maximum in com-
parison to a new bit.
Conclusions
In the absence of catastrophic failure events, if a drilling operator
is regularly pulling bits graded T4 to T8 and then running a new
bit, it is likely adversely impacting the section drilling cost through
a poor ROP. An acceptable drilling practice is to finish a hard
stringer before pulling out of the hole to start a new bit in a softer
formation. However, to continue drilling with a bit as the ROP
drops substantially will cost the operator accordingly and risk the
associated reaming cost of an undergauge hole (e.g., the ROP
63
 Fig. 9—Focused graph of SE relative to GR for Well NWS 1.
falling from 60 to 3 m/hr means that if the first meter cost U.S.
$2,000, then the last meter cost $40,000). Historically, we have
reduced the section cost by eliminating bit runs. Today, however,
improved understanding of the effects of incremental bit wear and
the high ROP potential of new bit designs incites us to consider
adding a bit back into the plan to minimize the total well cost.
It is well known that all bits have a floundering point. However,
we now realize that this point moves dramatically with a bit dull
state. Monitoring real-time SE data in combination with MWD
data enhances deciding when to pull a bit. Having the GR sub
closer to the bit face in combination with accurate real-time sonic
data could further enhance this process. Bits that have sufficient
wear to be inefficient in shale-rich formations can still drill me-
dium-strength sands (UCS of less than 9,000 psi) with acceptable
efficiencies. However, caution must be exercised to avoid an un-
dergauge hole. A guide on applying this monitoring technique to
the field is attached in Appendix B along with a worked example.
Shale drilling performance can be used to gauge a bit’s dull
condition. The best procedure is to establish a benchmark when the
Fig. 10—Illustration of Bit C breaking through shale cap into sand with an increasing ROP.
64
first shale is encountered and use deviations from this value as an
indication of relative bit wear. To drill most efficiently, bit changes
should be made where possible to maximize the shale drilled with
a sharp, new bit at higher WOB and moderate rpm. The SE values
discussed herein are only relevant for this particular application—
formations, oil-based or nonballing muds, or PDC bits drilling on
conventional rotary drilling systems in vertical wells. To obtain
valuable results, benchmark specific applications when the bit goes
in the hole and observe trends away from the initial value.
Nomenclature
a1 ⳱ exponent fit to observed field data
ABIT ⳱ bit cross-sectional area, in.2
DBIT ⳱ bit diameter, in.
DG ⳱ IADC dull grade
Ef ⳱ mechanical efficiency, %
Es ⳱ specific energy, psi
Esmin ⳱ minimum specific energy, psi
March 2003 SPE Drilling & Completion
 Fig. 11—Drilling with Bit D resulted in SE exceeding 350,000 psi.

K ⳱ constant set to fit field data References

N- ⳱ rotary speed, rpm 1. Bond, D.F., Scott, P.W., and Windham, T.M.: “Step Change Improve-
R- ⳱ ROP, ft/hr [m/hr] ment and High Rate Learning are Delivered by Targeting Technical
T ⳱ torque, ft·lb Limits on Subsea Wells,” paper SPE 35077 presented at the 1996
U ⳱ unconfined compressive strength IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, New Orleans, 12−15 March
W ⳱ WOB, lb 2. Galle, E.M. and Woods, H.B.: “Best Constant Weight and Rotary
␮ ⳱ coefficient of friction Speed for Rotary Rock Bits,” API paper 801-39J presented at the 1963
Spring Meeting of the Production Division of the American Petroleum
Inst., 21−23 May.
Acknowledgments
3. Bourgoyne, A.T and Young, F.S. Jr.: “A Multiple Regression Ap-
The authors wish to thank the management of Woodside Energy proach to Optimal Drilling and Abnormal Pressure Detection,” SPEJ
Ltd. and Hughes Christensen for permission to present this paper. (August 1974) 371.
4. Kenner, J.V., Waughman, R.J., and Windham, T.: “Alliance Yields
New Understanding of Bit Wear—Drilling Performance Relationship,”
paper presented at the 1998 Drilling Technology Symposium, Houston,
3 February.
5. Pessier, R.C. and Fear, M.J.: “Quantifying Common Drilling Problems
with Mechanical Specific Energy and a Bit-Specific Coefficient of
Sliding Friction,” paper SPE 24584 presented at the 1992 SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition, Washington, DC, 4−7 October.
6. Spaar, J.R. et al.: “Formation Compressive Strength Estimates for Pre-
dicting Drillability and PDC Bit Selection,” paper SPE 29397 presented
at the 1995 SPE/IADC Conference, Amsterdam, 28 February−2 March.
7. Pessier, R.C., Fear, M.J., and Wells, M.R.: “Different Shales Dictate
Fundamentally Different Strategies in Hydraulics, Bit Selection, and
Operating Parameters,” paper SPE 28322 presented at the 1994 SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, 25−
28 September.

SI Metric Conversion Factors

°API 141.5/(131.5+°API) ⳱ g/cm3
ft × 3.048* E−01 ⳱ m
gal × 3.785 412 E−03 ⳱ m3
in. × 2.54* E+00 ⳱ cm
in.2 × 6.451 6* E+00 ⳱ cm2
lbm × 4.535 924 E−01 ⳱ kg
psi × 6.894 757 E+00 ⳱ kPa
*Conversion factor is exact.

Robert J. Waughman is currently a drilling engineer for Intl. Drill-

ing Team, Woodside Energy. He has worked as a field/district
engineer for Hughes Christensen, working in Asia, west Africa,
Fig. 12—Electric and mud logs of interval drilled for Well NWS 2. and the Middle East. He later transferred to Australia to take an

March 2003 SPE Drilling & Completion 65

 Fig. 13—Focused graph of SE relative to GR for Well NWS 2.

OASIS position with Woodside Energy as a drilling engineer
working on exploration and appraisal well designs throughout
Australia, later transferring to Intl. Drilling Team to work on the
Mauritania exploration project design and execution. Waugh-
man holds a BS degree in mechanical engineering from Pais-
ley U., Scotland. John V. Kenner is Director of Marketing Sys-
tems for Hughes Christensen Co., The Woodlands, Texas. He
joined HCC’s research department in 1991, returning to Hous-
ton 4 years ago, after serving a 2-year term as District Manager
for HCC’s Australasia operations. Upon returning, he worked
another 2-year hitch in marketing as Roller Cone Product Man-
ager and then assumed responsibility for the business software/
systems efforts of HCC. His interests include product develop-
ment, drilling economics, and drilling mechanics. Before join-
ing HCC, he was a damage tolerance engineer for LTV Aircraft
Products Group, Dallas. Kenner holds a BS degree in aeronau-
Christensen based in Dubai, UAE. He joined HCC in 1995 as a
sales representative. After 5 years in sales covering Australia,
New Zealand, and PNG, he became district engineer for the
Australasian and South Asia district, including Indonesia and
the Philippines. He held this position for 2 years before transfer-
ring to his current role in Dubai. Moore holds a BS in engineering
in manufacturing systems and a BA in marketing from the
Queensland U. of Technology in Australia.
Appendix A—Energy Input Into System via
Torsional and Axial Effort
Specific Energy

冉 冊
tical engineering from Texas A&M U. and an MS degree in W NT 1 13.33 ␮N
mechanical engineering from the U. of Texas at Austin. Ross A. Es = + 120␲ =W + . . . . . . (A-1)
Moore is a district engineer for the Middle East with Hughes ABIT ABIT * R ABIT DBIT * R

Coefficient of Friction

T T共ft − lb兲
␮=3 = 36 , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (A-2)
DBIT * W DBIT共in.兲 * W共lb兲

where Eq. A-2 is simplified per Imperial units.

Mechanical Efficiency

Es min ≈ U
U
Ef = * 100. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (A-3)
Es
Fig. 14—IADC 432—2:4:WT:S:X:I:CT:PR.

66 March 2003 SPE Drilling & Completion

 Fig. 15—Electric and mud logs of interval drilled in Well NWS 3.

Fig. 16—Focused graph of SE relative to GR for Well NWS 3.

March 2003 SPE Drilling & Completion 67

Appendix B—Predicting PDC Bit Wear With Real-Time SE

Worked Example
a) Specific Energy

Es =
W
ABIT
+ 120␲
NT
ABIT * R
=W
1
冉+
13.33 ␮N
ABIT DBIT * R 冊
. . . . . . (B-1)

b) The mud loggers were able to calculate the SE instantaneously,

and it was averaged over meter intervals. An example of the cal-
culation is shown later for Well NWS 2 at 3652 m.
28,000 81 * 10,500
Es = + 120␲ = 532,816 psi. . . . . . . (B-2)
56.716 56.716 * 10.62
c) A line was spliced into the mud logging data by MWD person-
nel to enable real-time GR data to be viewed simultaneously with
the SE data.
d) When the PDC was in a new state and drilling a shale, SE values
would be averaged for a 5-m interval to obtain a baseline SE reading.
e) The GR data was interpreted to determine what type of forma-
tion was being drilled (shale or nonshale), and if a shale, the SE
value was compared to the baseline value previously agreed upon,
in this case 100,000 psi.
f) If the SE value increased by more than 200% greater than this
baseline value, the PDC was deemed to be in a worn state. At this
stage, consideration was given to pulling the bit based total well
cost savings. The factors considered include:
• Remaining section length.
• Expected ROP of the new PDC.
• Trip cost.
• Expected geology.
Fig. 17—Dull photograph of Bit E graded 2:4WT:S:X:I:CT:PR.

68 March 2003 SPE Drilling & Completion