When oilfield suppliers make outsized claims regarding a new technology or design, we, like many in the industry, can be skeptical.
Looking good on paper doesn’t always produce repeatable results for customers. Over-promoted offerings spawn the kinds of high expectations that lead to low customer ratings.
While drill bits earn strong ratings in EnergyPoint studies, we’ve thrown a wary eye toward claims of advances in computer-aided bit design and simulation. That is, until now.
It’s well-known that operators will pay up for better bits—i.e., those that lead to faster, more efficient drilling. In their more recent quest for performance, suppliers are pursuing a more holistic approach.
The approach involves pre-modeling a bit’s impact on bottom-hole assemblies (BHA). In some cases, drive systems are modeled as well. The results are higher rates of penetration (ROPs) and directional control, less vibration, and higher quality wellbores.
Sounds good. But what do customers say?
In short, they approve. In 2008, ratings for bits rose from already healthy levels. The gains ratings were noteworthy given the moribund scores registered for other oilfield products over the same period. The gathering applause from independents is particularly encouraging.
Smith International enjoys the top marks in the category. Grant Prideco’s Reed Hycalog (now part of National Oilwell Varco) was runner-up. Baker Hughes’ Hughes Christensen and Halliburton’s Security DBS follow. Halliburton’s showed the most improvement over the period.
When downhole motors and rotary steerable systems are included, Smith, Scientific Drilling, and Baker Hughes emerge as leaders.
* Guide to EnergyPoint’s ratings and ratings trends.