PDCBit Performance Under
Simulated Borehole Conditions
E.E. Andersen, SPE, Conoco Inc., and ...... Azar, SPE, U. of Tulsa
Summary. Laboratory drilling tests were used to investigate the effects of pressure on polycrystalline-diamond-compact (PDq drill-
bit performance. Catoosa shale core samples were drilled with PDC and roller-cone bits at up to 1, 750-psi confining pressure. All
tests were conducted in a controlled environment with a full-scale laboratory drilling system. Test results indicate. that under similar
operating conditions, increases in confining pressure reduce PDC-bit performance as much as or more than conventional-rock-bit per-
formance. Specific energy calculations indicate that a combination of rock strength, chip hold-down, and bit balling may have reduced
performance. Quantifying the degree to which pressure reduces PDC-bit performance will help researchers interpret test results and
improve bit designs and will help drilling engineers run PDC bits more effectively in the field.
Introduction
Since their introduction in the mid-1970's, PDC bits have been used
in an ever-widening array of drilling situations. Research and field
experience have helped operators learn to use PDC bits correctly
in ways that save time and money. To date, PDC-bit research has
focused primarily on bit design and hydraulics, which have im-
proved cutter and matrix materials and inventive fluid jet/cutter com-
binations. Innovative operating techniques also have helped expand
the use of PDC bits to previously unimagined applications.
Even with these improvements and successes, PDC bits are far
from successful on every bit run, and many areas of PDC-bit tech-
nology still need to be examined. One area that has not been inves-
tigated is the effect of downhole pressure on PDC-bit performance.
Several industry studies in the late 1950's l -4 with roller-cone bits
first documented the effect of pressure on drilling performance.
These research efforts concluded that pressure detrimentally affects
rock-bit performance and that overbalanced drilling conditions
should be limited as much as is safely possible.
PDC bits use a shearing action very different from the indenting
action used by conventional roller-cone bits to break rock. Despite
this contrast in cutting mechanisms, increases in downhole pres-
sure cause lower rates of penetration (ROP's) when PDC bits are
used. Because no field or laboratory data have been documented
to quantify the magnitude of these effects, the research described
in this paper was conducted.
Problem Background
Pressure Effects. During the 1950's and 1960's, research 1-6 was
conducted to learn why ROP's were so much higher in the labora-
tory than in the field. Most of the experiments were conducted in
high-pressure drilling machines with small ( ... llA to 4 in. in di-
ameter) drag. diamond. and roller-cone bits. Roller-cone bits were
tested the most thoroughly.
One of the earliest pressure srudies 1 showed that laboratory ap-
plication of confining pressure reduced drilling rates in approxi-
mately the same way that mud-column pressure decreased drilling
rates in the field. This new understanding prompted researchers2.3
to determine the differences in the effects of three downhole pres-
sures: hydrostatic (mud-column), terrastatic (overburden), and for-
mation pore pressures. The main research finding was that the
difference between hydrostatic pressure and formation pore pres-
sure (differential pressure) was the only thing that affected drilling
rate substantially.
With the knowledge that overbalanced drilling conditions reduced
drilling rates significantly. investigators began studies to determine
what mechanisms acrually caused this phenomenon. A 1959 srudy4
defined two types of differential-pressure effects: dynamic and stat-
ic. Increasing static differential pressure increases frictional forces
between a generated chip and a crater. 5 Dynamic differential-
pressure effects result primarily when bit hydraulics and drilling-
fluid properties are inadequate. For example. a 1967 srudy 6
showed that drilling fluids exhibiting higher API-fluid-loss prop-
Copyright 1993 Society of Petroleum Engineers
)84
SPE20412
erties resulted in higher ROP's because they equalized the pres-
sure across the cutting zone.
Although their mechanisms are different, both static and dynamic
differential-pressure effects result in the .. chip hold-down" phe-
nomenon. Chip hold-down occurs when a pressure difference across
generated chips holds the cuttings tightly in the craters. This phe-
nomenon is detrimental to the drilling rate when roller-cone bits
are used because the bit recrushes generated cuttings instead of cut-
ting virgin rock.
Bit Type Effect. Roller-cone bits break rock with an indenting ac-
tion (Fig. 1).7 Although this mechanism generates cuttings effec-
tively, indenting presses the chips into the craters instead of
removing them. This cutting action tends to aggravate the effects
of chip hold-down, which is one reason roller-cone-bit perform-
ance is reduced so dramatically by overbalanced drilling conditions.
Roller-cone bits rely primarily on adequate bit hydraulics to re-
move chips. .
PDC bits break rock with a shearing action (see Fig. 1) so that
the cutters not only create the chips but also help remove them.
Shearing differs greatly from the indenting/crushing action of roller-
cone bits. This difference has caused some to assume that the im-
pact of pressure is mitigated, thus allowing operators to be less con-
cerned about overbalanced drilling conditions when drilling with
PDC bits.
Studies 8 9 on individual PDC cutters have shown that, when
drilling shale, cutting forces increase proportionally as bottomhole
pressure increases. However, no studies have been conducted to
determine whether the shearing action of full-scale PDC bits can
reduce the detrimental effects of overbalanced drilling conditions.
Test Facility .nd Experiment Description
Laboratory Drilling System. Fig. 2 shows the laboratory drilling
system at The U. of Tulsa North Campus facilities. This drilling
system can test full-scale drill bits under simulated downhole pres-
sure conditions.
Fig. 3 is a schematic of the pressure cell and associated equip-
ment. The maximum working pressure of the cell is 2,500 psi. Core
samples up to 48 in. long by 14 in. in diameter can be accommo-
dated. During drilling tests, cuttings are transported from the pres-
sure cell and collected in a high-pressure screen assembly. The
drilling fluid (which is free of cuttings) then flows through a back-
pressure choke to the mud reservoir. Pressure is applied in the cell
by varying the size of the choke orifice and is monitored by use
of pressure gauges on the choke control panel. The choke, rated
to 10,000 psi, is a standard, hydraulically activated well-control
choke.
Weight on bit (WOB) and rotary speed are applied by use of a
hydraulic system controlled by a programmable logic controller
(PLC). The PLC automatically maintains WOB and rotary speed
at magnirudes selected by the operator. Bit torque is measured with
a strain-gauge/slip-ring assembly that is an integral part of the lab-
oratory drillstring.
SPE Drilling & Completion. September 1993
 TABLE 1-COMPARISON OF CATOOSA AND PIERRE SHALE'

Shale
(%)
Mineral Catoosa Pierre
---
Quartz 47 57
Feldspar 9 6
Calcite Trace 1
Dolomite 0 5
Diamond Compact Bit Diamond Bit Roller Cone Bit
(Sh ring) (Plowing and Grinding) (Crushingl Chlorite 15 6
"lite/mica 29 10
Smectite 0 15
Fig. 1-Rock-blt cutting mechanisms.

Test Bits. An American Coldset PDC drill bit , 6:)4 in. in diameter
with four "J2-in. fixed nozzles, was used for this study . The IADC
bit classification code for this bit is M555, indicating a matrix-body
PDC bit with a medium taper and cone , ribbed flow distribution,
fixed nozzles, and medium-sized cutters of medium cutter density .
To compare the relative effect of borehole pressure on PDC and
roller-cone bits, a Hughes Tool 7Yl!-in . OWV three-cone roller bit
was used .
Core Preparation and Experimental Procedure. A Catoosa shale
formation type was used for the experimental study . Catoosa shale
is not highly reactive but will deteriorate mechanically when enough
pressure is applied to it. Previous studies 10 show that, when drilled
improperly, Catoosa shale can ball up the drill bit. Table 1 com-
pares Catoosa and Pierre shale properties. 10 Fig. 4 is a graph of
Catoosa shale compressive strength vs. borehole pressure. No other
data are available to delineate the properties of Catoosa shale further.
Twenty-four Catoosa shale core samples were used to complete
the experimental work. Each sample used is sealed with an imperme-
able wrap as soon as it is cored and removed from the ground to
preserve the shale in its native state. Just before each drilling test.
the top of the core sample is cut off to expose the rock. The core
then is placed in a metal sheath (used solely to lift the core) and
loaded into the pressure cell .
The impermeable wrapping around each core protects the shale
sample from drilling-fluid infiltration . Only the top of the core and
the bore created by the drill bit are exposed to the drilling fluid .
However. the entire core sample is exposed to the backpressure
created by the choke. This means that overburden , confining. and
borehole pressures all are equal to the pressure at the choke.
Table 2 shows various drilling conditions simulated during the
experimental work. Rotary speed. flow rate. drilling-fluid proper-
ties, and the roller-cone- or PDC-bit type used were held constant
during testing so that only the effect of pressure on bit perform-
ance would be observed. Each core was drilled with five different
WOB's at one constant pressure . Drilling always started at the lowest
WOB and increased incrementally as the bit drilled through the
shale. Each level ofWOB was maintained until an equilibrium drill-
ing condition was achieved .
T.st R.sults and Analysis
ROP's. The test results displayed in Fig. 5 show that roller-cone
bit performance is influenced significantly by changes in borehole
pressure. These results were anticipated because previous ex-
perimental work already has demonstrated the reduction in roller-
cone-bit performance when operating with overbalanced pressure .
Fig. 6 shows that increasing the pressure reduces the ROP with
the PDC bit, even though the cutting mechanism is now a shearing
instead of an indenting action. The ROP decreases dramatically .
particularly when the 250- and 1.750-psi confining-pressure curves
are compared. Results for the PDC bit at8.000-lbf WOB show that
ROP decreased from nearly 60 ft/hr at 250 psi confining pressure
to about 5 ft/hr at 1,750-psi confining pressure. This was not an

, . C - . - I M..........
.... AID c:.-..r

Diolt.1
'--_ _ _ _- j ... n.1
Met._

--

Fig. 2-Laboratory drilling system.

SPE Drilling & Completion, September 1993 185

 IDr-----------r----------------------------,
Diff...ntill ..........
., -ZIO,.

+100'"
~ .710",
~ 40 .1210,.
!II
a::
l . Drllc..r
2 . ..............
, . MiIf'''--t.I

.4. .....,w...
c..s......
. s.. . ........,
J . . . . ,....".c....
e. c.... c.tNII c..-
',"""""UN
to............
...
o
~
1:'"

2D '"
I:
J? 10 ...

Fig. 3-Hlghpressure cell and associated equipment.

'2

Weight On Bit IIbs} !Thousands}

~~r------------------------------------' Fig. 5-ROP va. WOB for a roller-cone bit at a 250-gallmln

flow rate.
! -- ............ .
-5CJI

...
I:

u;
~ a..oao . ..
IDr-----------r----------------------------,
Difterantill PNSI.....I

'
~ ..., ... -JIO,.
50 +100,.;
II
Q. .E .710'"

E 2JIOO
.., 125Opei

u
o !II JiE1710";
a::
I: '" ..

...
~~----------------------------------~
2.... ...... .g
~ 3D .
Confining Presaure Ipsi} II
I:
J?
Fig. 4-Comprasslve strength of catOO8ll shIIle at various con- ~ .
fining pressures after Warren and Armagost. 10
o~~------------------------------------~
o .0

Waight On Bit IIbs) IThousands}

"
TABLE 2-TEST MATRIX
Fig. 6-ROP vs. WOB for a poe bit at a 180-gal/mln flow rat.
Formation type Catoosa shale
Bit type American Coldset POC
Hughes Tool OWV roller-cone
Rotary speed, rev/min 100
,~r---------------------------------._----,
Flow rale, gal/min 180
250
WOB, lbf 1,000
2,000
i
:: '
w
4,000 !u
~
6,000
8,000 ....
lu
~ifferenlial pressure, psi 100
250 !i u . .. .. . . . .. .. ..... . . . . .. . . . .. .... . . . .
500
750 ~u
i5 ...... . .. . . ... . . . . ......... . . ...... . .
1,250
1,750
o~------------------

D _
__________________
1ADO UGD
-J

isolated occurrence; all five curves in Fig . 6 show that borehole
pressure detrimentally affected PDC-bit performance.
Normalized Pressure Effects. ROP's produced by the roller-cone
bit were much lower than those from the PDC bit. Thus, the pres-
sure effect was normalized to compare reductions in drilling per-
formance for PDC and roller-cone bits directly. Figs. 7 and 8 show
normalized pressure effects . Under the drilling conditions exam-
ined, the proportional performance reductions are similar for these
two drill bits . Although the data show that pressure has a slightly
greater effect on roller-cone-bit performance, the difference is smaIl
enough to indicate that, for this set of drilling conditions, pressure
effects are proportionally the same for the PDC and roller-eone bits.
When the actual magnitude of ROP reduction is analyzed, the
data show that pressure clearly affected PDC-bit performance more
than roUer-cone-bit performance. The PDC bit drilled Catoosa shale
Differential Pressure Ipli)
Fig. 7-0Ifferentlalpressure effect va. differential pressure
for a poe bit at a 18o-gal/mln flow rate.
at almost double the ROP recorded with the roller-cone bit. Thus,
an 80% reduction in drilling performance caused PDC-bit ROP's
to decrease twice as much as roller-cone-bit ROP's .
Specific Energy. Figs. 9 through 11 show the change in specific
energy as pressure increases . Eq. III was used to calculate spe-
cific energy.
E=4(Whrd2 ) +480(llTld 2 R) . ... .... . ..... ...... . . . . . .. (I)
Specific energy was analyzed to determine what reduced PDC-bit
performance as pressure increased. This parameter is a good indi-

186 SPE Drilling & Completion, September 1993

 1.2.------------------,-----, ~ .... ,.--------------------,
WOB

oII , *4000lb
c
' ; 2OO,OCO , "
ffi

~
! 0.'
.
~

0.
..
~
.0
:. 150.000

>
.Iii., !:!'
~ WOB
i 0.4 w
l00.0c0 ....
l0001b
to ~ +2000 ..
:;
0 0 .2 .
'0
a.
en
~
.......
* .... 1>
OL---...---.oo---800---800---'-.OOO=--~'~."'=--~'~.400 *.000 ..
0,000 oL--':":--"'---'~----::-:-:---:-2.::000::---2~.""'=----:3-:'.OOO
Differential Pressure (psi)
Differential Pressure (psi)

Fig. 8-Dlfferential-pressure effect vs. differential pressure

for a roller-cone bit at a 250-gallmln flow rate. Fig. 9-Speclfic energy for a poe bit at a 1801Jallmin flow rate.

cator of how efficiently a drill bit cuts rock. As specific energy
increases, the cutting efficiency of the bit decreases. . tion of WOB will affect cutting efficiency detrimentally and may
As Fig . 4 shows, the compressive strength of Catoosa shale m-
creases linearly as confining pressure increases. For this reason,
the specific energy necessary to cut the shale was expected to in-
crease linearly as confining pressure increased. If chip hold-down,
bit balling, or any other detrimental mechanism inhibits t.he cut-
ting efficiency ofthe bit, specific energy will change at a dIfferent
rate, deviating from its linear trend.
Fig. 9 shows that, as pressure increases from 250 to "" 1,250
psi, the specific energy required by the POC bit generally increases
linearly as a result of the increase in compressive strength of the
Catoosa shale rock sample. Beyond 1,250 psi, the slope of the
specific-energy curve increases dramatically. This could indicate
chip hold-down or bit balling because some cuttings were plastere~
to the POC bit when it was pulled after the 1,250- and 1, 750-pSI
tests. However, it was not possible to substantiate which mecha-
nism actually increased the required specific energy.
No evidence of bit balling was visible when POC-bit drilling tests
were performed at a flow rate of 250 gal/min. The specific energy
curves in Fig. \0 appear to confirm this observation because they
increase linearly, showing only an effect apparently caused by the
increase in Catoosa shale strength.
Fig. 11 shows the roller-cone-bit specific-energy trend, which
appears linear as pressure increases, again indicating the effect of
rock strengthening. Because the data are linear in nature and be-
cause of the significant volume of cuttings plastered on the gauge
rows when the bit was examined, we speculate that the roller-cone
bit balled up as soon as drilling began .
A general observation from the data is that specific energy ca.n
be used to detect a drill bit's optimum operating parameters. OptI-
mum WOB for a given set of drilling conditions is found when the
magnitude of specific energy begins to rise. Any further applica-
reduce ROP.
Conclusions
1. Increases in pressure caused ROP to decrease when a POC
bit was used. Under the drilling conditions in this study, a 1,500-
psi pressure increase caused ROP to drop from nearly 60 to only
5 ft/hr.
2. The effect of pressure on bit performance was more
pronounced with the POC bit than with the roller-cone bit. Under
the set of drilling conditions tested, confining pressure decreased
the performance of both bit types by approximately 80% . How-
ever, the POC bit drilled nearly twice as fast as did the roller-cone
bit. Consequently, the absolute reduction in ROP was much great-
er with the POC bit.
3. At pressures < 1,000 psi, the effect of overbalanced drilling
conditions on POC-bit performance may be attributed to rock
strengthening. The specific energy required by the POC bit to drill
Catoosa shale increased in a linear fashion similar to the shale's
increase in compressive strength as confining pressure increased.
4. At pressures > 1,000 psi, the effect of pressure on POC-bit
performance is thought to be attributable to continued ~ock stren~
ening, chip hold-down, and bit balling, although thiS hypotheSIS
could not be substantiated. The specific energy required by the POC
bit increased exponentially, indicating influences other than rock
strengthening on drilling performance.
Nomenclature
d = bit diameter, L, in.
E = specific energy, mL2/t 2

~.OOO"--------------------'
~ ... . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ,
~
:s=i =i :zco,OOO

~
..
2OO,IXID
~
.
:!?
:f! g
g 150,000 .. . ... . .. ....... ... . . .. . . ....
150,000 .

>
>
..
Ol
~ CD
c:: 100,000
t: l00,CXIO WOB W

P
W WOB
(,)
(,)
-1ooolb
+20001>
;;::
* .... 10

~~
'0

.......
'0 . ...... .. .. . -80001b
c% ...... ... ....... .. * ...... Q)
a.
en
SO,OOO

* ......
.100001>
*""1> o.oooL~:.....-------------~:----:-:
0~0L-~--
...---,~---,-....
---2.~OOO~--2~....
~-~3~.OOO o 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,50) 3,000

Differential Pressure (psi)

Differential Pressure (psi)

Fig. 11-Specific energy for a roller-cone bit at a 2S0-gal/min

Fig. 10-Specific energy for a poe bit at a 2So-gallmin flow rate. flow rate.

SPE Drilling & Completion, September 1993 187

 3. Cunningham, R.A. and Eenink, J.G.: "Laboratory Study of Effect of
Authors Overburden, Formation, and Mud Column Pressures on Drilling Rate
of Permeable Formations," Trans., AIME (1959) 216, 6.
E.E. Andersen is 4. Garnier, A.J. and van Lingen, N.H.: "Phenomena Affecting Drilling
an engineer at Rates at Depth," Trans., AIME (1959) 216, 232-39.
Co no co Drilling 5. Maurer, W.C.: "Bit-Tooth Penetration Under Simulated Borehole Con-
Technology Devel- ditions," Drilling, Reprint Series, SPE, Richardson, TX (1973) 6a, 127.
opment Group in 6. Young, F.S. and Gray, K.E.: "Dynamic Filtration During Microbit
Ponca City, OK. He Drilling," JPT (Sept. 1967) 1209.
currently is per-
7. Gill, C.W., Martin, J.L., and Maunder, T.E.: "Matrix Body Poly-
forming technology
crystalline Diamond Compact Bits Prove Most Cost Effective in the
development work
Powder River Basin, " paper SPE/IADC 13462 presented at the 1985
in the areas of cut-
SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, New Orleans, March 6-8.
tings injection and
8. Cheatham, J.B. and Daniels, W.H.: "A Study of Factors Influencing
Andersen Azar lost-circulation
the Drillability of Shales: Single-Cutter Experiments With Stratapax
prevention and is
Drill Blanks," J. Energy Resources Technology (Sept. 1979) 101,189.
involved in other drilling-mechanics research projects.
Andersen holds as and MS degrees in petroleum engineer- 9. Zijsling, D.H.: "Single Cutter Testing-A Key for PDC Bit Develop-
ing, both from the U. of Tulsa. J.J. Azar is a professor of ment," paper SPE 16529 presented at the 1987 SPE Offshore Europe
petroleum engineering and director of the U. of Tulsa Drill- Conference, Aberdeen, Sept. 8-11.
ing Research Projects (TUDRP). Affiliated with the U. of Tul- 10. Warren, T.M. and Armagost, W.K.: "Laboratory Drilling Perform-
sa since 1965, he is a lecturer and drilling consultant with ance of PDC Bits," SPEDE (June 1988) 125; Trans., AIME, 285.
extensive experience in applied industrial drilling research. 11. Farrelly, M. and Rabia, H.: "Bit Performance and Selection: A Novel
Azar received a PhD degree in mechanical engineering from Approach," paper SPE/IADC 16163 presented at the 1987 SPE/IADC
the U. of Oklahoma in 1964. He is a member of the Career Drilling Conference, New Orleans, March 15-18.
Guidance Committee and was a Student Chapter Faculty
Sponsor and a member of the Educational/Professional Tech- General References
nical Committee. . Cheatham, C.A., Nahn, J.J., and Heitkamp, N.D.: "Effects of Selected
Mud Properties on Rate of Penetration in Full-Scale Shale Drilling Simu-
R = ROP, Lit, ftlhr lations, " paper SPE/IADC 13465 presented at the 1985 SPE/IADC Drill-
T = torque, mLlt 2 , ft-Ibf ing Conference, New Orleans, March 6-8.
Cooper, G.A. and Peltier, B.P.: "Advanced Techniques for Laboratory
W = WOB, mLlt 2 , Ibf Full-Scale Drilling Tests," paper IADC/SPE 14783 presented at the 1986
n= rotary speed, rev/min IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, Dallas, Feb. 10-12.

Acknowledgments SI Metric Conversion Factors

We thank the members of the U. of Tulsa Drilling Research Pro- ft x 3.048* E-Ol m
grams for supporting our research. Special thanks go to Amoco gal x 3.785 412 E-03 m3
Production Co. Research Center in Tulsa for donating the core sam- in. x 2.54* E+OO m
ples and to Conoco Research in Ponca City, OK, for donating the in. 3 x 1.638706 E+Ol cm 3
equipment and time to automate the laboratory drilling system. Ibf x 4.448222 E+OO N
psi x 6.894757 E+OO kPa
References
* Conversion factor is exact. SPEDC
1. Murray, A.S. and Cunningham, R.A.: "Effect of Mud Column Pres-
Original SPE manuscript received for review Oct. 23, 1990. Revised manuscript received
sure on Drilling Rates," Trans., AIME (1955) 204, 196. Dec. 2, 1992. Paper accepted for publication June 10, 1993. Paper (SPE 20412) first present-
2. Eckel, J.R.: "Effect of Pressure on Rock Drillability," Trans., AIME ed at the 1990 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition held in New Orleans,
(1958) 213, 1. Sept. 23-26.

188 SPE Drilling & Completion, September 1993