SPE-173396-MS

Automated Slide Drilling System and Multi-Body Dynamics Aided Slide

Drilling Simulation
N. Wang, State Key Laboratory of Offshore Oil Exploration, Department of Engineering Mechanics in Tsinghua
University; Z. Cheng, State Key Laboratory of Offshore Oil Exploration, CNOOC Research Institute; Y. Lu,
Department of Engineering Mechanics in Tsinghua University; B. He, CNOOC International Limited; G. Ren,
Department of Engineering Mechanics in Tsinghua University

Copyright 2015, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Digital Energy Conference and Exhibition held in The Woodlands, Texas, USA, 35 March 2015.

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

Abstract
Drilling automation can replace manual operation with more predictable and consistent computer-
controlled drilling process, as well as enhance the digital link between well-site and data center and enable
the remote drilling. In this paper, the automation of drilling process is viewed as three hierarchical control
loops: the trajectory control loop, the drilling state control loop, and the motor and actuator control loop.
The drilling state control loop, which controls the bit attitude, weight on bit (WOB), etc., is pivotal to
the trajectory control, and remains a focus of development. The drilling state control loop is composed of
three sub-loops, i.e., the surface loop, the downhole loop and the hybrid loop. The surface loop supervises
the torque, pressure, and hook load, controls the WOB, and takes actions in emergencies. This loop is
being analyzed in auto driller systems, and in managed pressure drilling. The downhole loop controls the
directional drilling tools, and is well realized in rotary steerable systems. The hybrid loop, which connects
the prior two loops and reinforces one loop with the other, however, is not well developed.
A slide drilling system is presented as an example, where no downhole loop holds the bit attitude, and
the hybrid loop faces sharpest challenge to control the drilling direction from surface. A joint control of
top drive and drawworks is developed to perform coupled control of WOB and toolface. The control
system takes into account the desired toolface and WOB. Different operating modes of slide drilling
systems are identified and applied with specific control algorithm. The shift between modes is controlled
by the operator.
The control system is developed and simulated with the aid of multi-body dynamics modelling of the
drill string. This drill string simulation model, based on absolute nodal coordinate formulation, receives
the control commands for the top drive and drawworks, and outputs the sensor data and the well trajectory.
Loads and dynamic response of the drill string are also simulated. Multi-body dynamics method enables
real-time full-hole drill string simulation, and is a powerful tool for automated drilling system develop-
ment.
2 SPE-173396-MS

Figure 1Trajectories in drilling and flying. (a) A well trajectory. (b) A typical flying trajectory of a climbing plane.

Introduction
In the past century, the drilling process has mainly relied on manual operations. Though aided by
numerous newly developed semi-automatic equipment, skilled operators and directional drillers still need
to highly focus their mind on the trajectory control all time on the well site. The well quality and drilling
time are still dominated by the skills, experience, and even emotional state of the human workers. Though
data links are built between the well site and the data center, the human factors still introduces uncertainty
to the drilling process prediction, bringing difficulties to the overall plan of the reservoir development.
As a result, an automated drilling system (ADS) has long been desired to help get more predictable and
consistent drilling process and wellbore. A good ADS can automatically control the drawworks and top
drive/rotary table to get the designed well trajectory. This will free the most experienced drillers to
concentrate on the difficult wells, and leave the easy wells to novices. For developed regions where the
layers have been carefully learned, several directional drillers would be able to control the drilling process
of a dozen wells if they were aided with ADS via a data link. Better well quality decreases complex
situations and accident number, which is a pleasant byproduct of the ADS. A research also shows that the
ADS reacts quicker and better in emergencies (Cayeux et al. 2012).
The drilling equipment and control technique have advanced remarkably since the 1990s. Fully
automated drilling system now has solid technical bases and is about to come.
Automated Drilling System
The automated drilling system has been studied for years (Macpherson et al. 2013). Different approaches
have been proposed which were inspired from other engineering areas (Thorogood et al. 2010), especially
the aviation industry (Thorogood 2013). The drilling process is very similar to the plane flying process.
Figure 1(a) shows a typical well trajectory. The trajectory has straight and bending segments which is
almost the same as the typical flying trajectory of a plane who is climbing to a higher altitude, as shown
in Figure 1(b). A driller controls the drill string against the unpredictable contact load between the drill
string and the wellbore, while a pilot controls his plane against the unpredictable wind load on his plane.
Thus the drillers and the pilots face similar challenges.
Aviation industry has produced autonomous computer pilot systems, which has been widely deployed
in modern planes and made a good example for developing ADS. The autopilot system is based on the
understanding of the plane control loops, as shown in Figure 2. The flight trajectory is usually pre-
designed by the airline company or the pilot. During the flight, the pilot modifies the target flight
trajectory according to the real-time flight state, which cludes the plane position and the wind velocity,
etc. Based on the preset trajectory, the pilot figures out the planes target attitude, which is the work of
the flight trajectory control loop. Should the plane roll to perform a coordinated turn? Or should it pitch
the nose up for a climb? The planned plane attitude is realized by the actions of the planes rudders, and
SPE-173396-MS 3

Figure 2Plane control loops.

Figure 3Directional drilling system control loops.

the plane attitude control loop calculates the needed rudder action. The rudder action commands are then
executed by the motors and actuators, which makes the rudder control loop. The rudder actions directly
change the aerodynamic shape of the plane and changes the aerodynamic load on the plane. The onboard
sensors measure the planes position and attitude, and report to the pilot. All these three control loops can
be realized in a set of onboard computers to replace the pilot and take over the plane control. The pilots
in modern commercial flights can just sit and supervise the autopilot do its job.
Inspired by the plane control system, we designed the control loops of the directional drilling system,
as shown in Figure 3. The directional driller follows the designed target well trajectory and decides the
needed drilling state, including the WOB, the rotary speed, the toolface for the slide steerable system or
the directional parameters for the rotary steerable system, the downhole pressure, etc. In the drilling state
control loop, the driller operates the drawworks and the top drive/rotary table according to the directional
drillers instruction, and operates the mud pump according to the mud engineers instruction. The motor
and actuator control loop includes the drawworks, the top drive/rotary table, the mud pump, etc., which
acts on the command and operation from the driller. Sensors which are distributed on the drilling rigs
measure the drilling parameters and give feedback to the control cabin.
At the moment, the drilling state control loop is a research focus of the ADS. This loop is composed
of three sub-loops, which are the surface loop, the downhole loop and the hybrid loop.
The surface loop controls the drilling parameters measured and controlled by the surface equipment.
The WOB, which is calculated from the drop in hook load (DIHL), is the first thing to control in the
surface loop. A lot of auto driller systems have been built to manipulate the block height decent rate
(BHDR) to maintain a hook load set point. The mud pressure, which is another key parameter in drilling,
is under deep investigation in managed pressure drilling systems. When there is no downhole pressure
sensors, the downhole pressure is modeled and estimated from the stand pipe pressure and the motion of
the drill string, and is controlled by the surface loop.
The downhole loop controls the downhole equipment with locally measured data. The rotary steerable
system (RSS) is a good example of the downhole loop. A RSS controls the pointing direction of the bit
or controls the direction of the direction and magnitude of the lateral force on the bit according to the
attitude data measured by the MWD/LWD. Once the RSS receives a work command from the operator,
it starts to work continuously until receiving stop commands.
4 SPE-173396-MS

Figure 4 Slide drilling system.

The hybrid loop controls the downhole parameters with surface equipment. In slide drilling systems,
the toolface of the downhole motor with bent housing is controlled from the surface with the drawworks
and the top drive. Current researches focus on developing independent control systems for the WOB and
the toolface [5-8]. If real-time data from downhole pressure sensors is available, the managed pressure
drilling system can also adopt the hybrid loop.
The above three sub-loops jointly control the drilling parameters and the bit attitude, and thus control
the rate of penetration (ROP) and the rock penetration direction. In rotary steerable drilling process, the
RSS automatically controls the bit attitude, and there is little need for the hybrid loop. However, in the
slide drilling system, the hybrid control loop takes over the bit attitude control since there is no downhole
loop. In this paper, a hybrid control model is presented.
The well trajectory control loop is still open to develop, while the motor actuator control loop has been
well realized in the modern drilling rigs.

Automated Slide Drilling System

For the slide drilling system, there is no downhole loop in the drilling state control loop to hold the bit
attitude, and this task has to be fulfilled by the hybrid loop. In this paper, an automated slide drilling
system is presented. The drilling state control loop is realized, while the well trajectory control loop is still
controlled by a directional driller.
The slide drilling system includes two sub-systems: the surface system and the downhole system, as
shown in Figure 4. The surface system includes the top drive, the drawworks, and the mud pump. The
downhole system includes the MWD, the downhole motor, and the bit. The downhole motor has a bent
housing or a bent sub for directional drilling. The drawworks control the translational motion of the drill
string via the drill line. The top drive rotates and controls the rotational motion of the drill string. The drill
string bends and twists, and collides with the wellbore. On the lower end of the drill string, the bit
penetrates the layer at the well bottom.
SPE-173396-MS 5

Figure 5Slide drilling system composition.

The slide drilling system composition is illustrated in Figure 5. The central control computer receives
data from sensors planted in the surface system and the sensors in MWD, receives the user command from
the human machine interface (HMI), and sends action commands to the surfaces motors including the top
drive/rotary table, the drawworks, and the mud pump. The central control computer also sends the sensor
data and the motor action commands to the user interface for human supervision. The top drive, the
drawworks and the mud pump all have independent embedded control computers to gather the sensor data,
monitor the equipment state, and perform feedback control according to the action commands. The central
control computer, the local embedded computers, and the HMI work asynchronously.
The central control computer is linked to the other systems and equipments via net cables. The
communication protocol is based on TCP/IP. The control command includes the rate of penetration, the
mud pump stroke rate, and the top drive rotation speed or the top drive angular position. A variety of
sensor data may be available at well sites (Ashok et al. 2013). Though more detailed data like BHA
parameters may help model based control algorithms better identify the system and do their job, some
additional information should be inputted by the drillers, making it less convenient in field operations. In
this paper, only a selected set of sensor is applied, as listed in Table 1.
Since downhole WOB is rarely used in drilling practice, the so-called WOB at well sites indeed refers
to the change in the hook load. When lowering the drill string, the operator sets a hook load as the original
hook load. After the bit hits the well bottom, the hook load drops sharply, and the DIHL is an
approximation of WOB. Though this approximation is very rough and is impacted by the friction, it is in
most cases the only available evaluation of the downhole WOB, and is adopted to approximate WOB in
this paper. Additionally, the BHDR is used to approximate the ROP.
The drilling system works in different drilling modes to drill the designed well trajectory, as shown in
Table 2. The driller selects the drilling mode and switches the drilling mode from one to another when
needed. The slide drilling mode is the major working mode to make turns in the well trajectory. In the slide
drilling mode, the WOB (more specificly, the DIHL), and the bit attitude should be carefully controlled,
which calls for the joint control of the drawworks and the top drive. The rotary drilling mode is for drilling
straight well section, and is used to decrease the dogleg rate. The top drive rotates at a selected speed, and
only the DIHL is controlled. The tripping modes move the drill string up or down. The reaming modes
mend the wellbore. These latter four working modes need little control.
The slide drilling mode is the most complicated and significant working mode. Its detailed control
strategy and algorithm is presented as follows. Control algorithms for other working modes can be easily
developed based on this algorithm.
6 SPE-173396-MS

Table 1Sensor Data Transmitted.

Data Name Sensor Sensor Position Description

Drawworks State drawworks local computer drawworks Running, stop, or fault.

Hook Position optical encoder drawworks
Hook Velocity drawworks local computer drawworks
Hook Load / Weight on Hook load pins / load cell drawworks / deadline anchor
Top Drive State top drive local computer top drive Running mode, stop, or fault.
Top Drive Angular Position optical encoder top drive
Top Drive Rotation Speed top drive local computer top drive
Surface Torque strain gauge top drive The output torque of the top drive.
Mud Pump State mud pump local computer mud pump Running, stop, or fault.
Mud Pump Stroke Rate
Inlet Flow Rate electromagnetic flow meter / mud mud pump or stand pipe Directly measured or calculated
pump local computer with pump stroke rate.
Stand Pipe Pressure pressure gauge stand pipe
MWD State MWD surface computer surface system of MWD Running, stop, or fault.
Toolface MWD MWD Measured with fluxgate and
Inclination MWD MWD accelerometer, calculated with
embedded computer.
Azimuth MWD MWD
Bottom Hole Temperature temperature gauge MWD
Bottom Hole Pressure pressure gauge BHA

Table 2Drilling Modes.

Drilling Mode Drawworks Control Top Drive Control Description

Slide Drilling loosening drill line locating mode Major woking mode.
Rotary Drilling loosening drill line rotary speed mode Decrease the dogleg.
Tripping In loosening drill line stop Put the drill string inside the bore hole.
Tripping Out pulling drill line stop Put the drill string out of the bore hole.
Reaming loosening drill line rotary speed mode Enlarge the bore hole and make the
Back Reaming pulling drill line rotary speed mode wellbore smoother.

For an automated slide drilling system without the well trajectory control loop, a typical scenario of the
slide drilling process is as follows:
1. The directional driller calculates and sets the target toolface, the original hook load, and the desired
DIHL (an approximation of WOB) via the HMI.
2. The central control computer controls the top drive to rotate until the toolface is at the preset
position. An estimated total twist angle of the drill string can be plused to the preset position of
the toolface.
3. The central control computer controls the drawworks to move down the drill string until the bit hits
the well bottom.
4. The central control computer controls the drawworks to manipulate the block decent reate to
control the DIHL to the preset region.
5. The central control computer controls the drawworks and the top drive to rotate the toolface to the
preset position, while keeping the WOB in the preset region.
6. The directional driller sends a termination command via the HMI.
7. The central control computer terminates the logic controlling the toolface.
8. The central control computer controls drawworks to decelerate and stop.
SPE-173396-MS 7

The initializing phase of slide drilling is composed of process 1, 2, 3, and 4. Process 5 is the cruise slide
drilling process. The termination phase includes process 6, 7, and 8. The slide drilling process is
commonly followed with back reaming.
If the axial friction went very large, the hook load and the ROP would drop remarkably. The central
control computer pauses the logic controlling the toolface, and manipulates the top drive to rotate a preset
number of rounds. Then the central control computer continues to hold the toolface.
Though the drillers tend to control the DIHL by manipulating the BHDR to stabilize the toolface in the
drilling process, current ADS studies and products use the surface torque (the output torque of the top
drive / rotary table) as the manipulated variable (Maidla and Haci 2004, Gillan et al. 2011). However, to
manipulate the surface torque to control the toolface is not easy and sometimes unnecessary. Since the
surface torque is applied on the upper end of the long drill string, it takes time for the torque to drag the
whole drill string to rotate before finally rotate the toolface to the needed position. The drillers control
strategy is much swifter. Since the WOB directly determines the torque on bit, and the torque on bit rotates
the drill string from the lower end, the motion phase of the toolface is prior to the most part of the drill
string. When the WOB goes too large (or too small), the hook load decreases (or increases). The control
system decelerates (or accelerates) the ROP and counter-clockwisely (or clock-wisely) rotates the top
drive. The rotation angle of the top drive is calculated to make sure the toolface return to the target
position after this operation. The newest top drives have position mode, so the central control computer
can just send the needed rotation angle to the top drive. The top drive local embedded computer will
calculate the needed rotation velocity and output torque and rotate the top drive.
A feedback control algorithm based on proportional integral derivative (PID) control is applied to
control the toolface by manipulating the BHDR. The toolface error at the ith control period is

where tft,i is the target toolface, and tfm,i is the current measured toolface.
The target DIHL under a PID control algorithm is

where is the user set target DIHL. kP,WOB, ki,WOB kD,WOB are parameters of the PID controller.
kP,WOB e TF,i is theproportional item is the integral item and represents the historical toolface error.
differential item and represents the prediction of the coming toolface error.
Since the toolface vibrates much quicker than the measuring frequency, the prediction of the coming
toolface will certainly fail and should be omitted. In other words PID controller is replaced by a PI
controller. So the needed change in BHDR is

The change in the DIHL is approximately linearly dependent on the change in BHDR. Thus the change
in BHDR should be

The minus sign in the formula is from the fact that, in general drilling practice, an increase in the DIHL
which results from an increase in BHDR would cause the toolface rotate counterclockwise, vice versa.
Virtual Prototype Experiment Realization
Virtual prototype technology is a gift for all the control systems, including the drilling system. Virtual
prototype experiment is much cheaper than the prolonged dangerous field experiment, and it supplies
8 SPE-173396-MS

Figure 6 Virtual Prototype Experiment Framework.

much more detailed results. For example, it is impractical to measure the motion and stress all along the
drill string in field drilling practice, while these data can be easily acquired in virtual prototype
experiments. These additional data offers significant supplementary information of the drill string
dynamic characteristics and reinforces the automatic control system development and the control algo-
rithm design. In the control system development process, the virtual prototype experiment helps testify the
algorithm and debug the software. The parametric sensitivity analysis can also be performed in the virtual
prototype experiment. For a single well, the virtual prototype experiment can help optimize the control
parameters in the control system and get a better drilling process.
A virtual prototype is a computer simulation of the investigated electromechanical system and has a
numerical model (Wang 2002). For a slide drilling system, the virtual prototype of the whole drilling
system is built for system dynamic characteristics analysis and control system development. The virtual
prototype experiment framework is shown in Figure 6.
The virtual prototype experiment framework illustrated in Figure 6 is very similar to the real slide
drilling system in Figure 5. A time generator is added to synchronize the control computer and the
simulation model. If the communication protocol of the virtual prototype experiment were the same as the
real system, the control software deployed on the central control computer would need no modification
at all.
The virtual prototype experiment system in Figure 6 is realized in Figure 7. A communication protocol
transform software is planted between the central control computer and the numerical simulation core to
deliver data packages between the control software and the virtual prototype model of the drilling system.
The numerical simulation core, commonly called a solver, simulates the drilling system response to the
control command from the control software. Different numerical models are available for the drilling
system virtual prototype experiment.
Multi-Body Dynamics Modeling
Numerous modeling technologies have been developed for the drilling system in the past decades.
Conventional models include the finite element method (FEM) model [11-13], and the differential
equation method model and other analytical solutions [14-18]. Among them, analytical treatments are
concise but over simplified to model the stochastic collision between drill string and wellbore, and
sometimes the collision is even omitted. FEM, though plays an important role in drilling process analysis,
is not suitable to model and simulate large deformation, large displacement and rotation of the drill string.
SPE-173396-MS 9

Figure 7The realization methodology that performs virtual prototype experiment on central control software.

Figure 8 Multi-body dynamics virtual prototype model of slide drilling system.

The great number of FEM elements needed and the slow calculation speed also undermines the
application base of FEM.
Multi-body dynamics method is an advanced modeling and simulation method which is extraordinarily
effective for complex mechanical system analysis and virtual prototype experiment (Gerstmayr and
Shabana 2006, Reinhart and Weissenberger 1999). In recent years, the multi-body dynamics method has
been introduced to the rotary drilling system modeling and simulation, and has performed satisfactory
results (Yang 2010, Cheng et al. 2013).
In this paper, a multi-body dynamics approach is applied. An absolute nodal coordinate formulation
(ANCF) beam element is used to model the flexible drill string, which enables direct simulation of the
large deformation, large displacement and rotation of the drill string with complicated stochastic contact
boundaries and a slenderness ratio up to over 103.
The slide drilling system shown in Figure 4 is modeled as a rigid-flexible coupling system based on
multibody dynamics method, as shown in Figure 8. In this paper, the traveling block, the top drive and
10 SPE-173396-MS

the bit are modeled as rigid bodies. The drill line system is modeled as a variable-length variable-stiffness
spring. The actions of the drawworks are modeled as the undeformed length change of the extension
spring. The contact between the drill string and the wellbore is modeled as contact force.
The wellbore is modeled as an extending diameter-variable tubular rigid surface. The Hermite
interpolation is applied to describe the well trajectory. The contact detection points are planted on the drill
string at possible contact locations on the drill string, thus the contact points slide along the wellbore as
the drill string moves inside the bore hole. Contact forces are loaded on the contact detection points.
In multi-body dynamics method, connections between different parts and bodies of the system are
usually realized by adding constraints. The constraints in the drilling system model are shown in Figure
8. The motion and deformation of the derrick is omitted, and the inertia of the blocks and the drill line
is omitted. So the crown block is modeled as a rigid body fixed directly to the ground, and the motion of
the traveling block along the rail is modeled as a translational joint with the ground. The drill pipes, drill
collars, downhole motor, and other drill string components are all modeled with ANCF beam element and
are naturally connected because the adjacent beams share a common beam node.
In this paper, the wellbore is described using a set of nodes on the well trajectory. Each wellbore node
has nine parameters, which are the material coordinate (the measured depth), the three dimension position
vector, the three dimension tangent direction vector of the well trajectory, the radius and the coefficient
of sliding friction of the wellbore. All these parameters are functions of the material coordinate.
Assume the wellbore has m nodes. The material coordinate at the ith wellbore node is Li. The
three-dimension position vector at the ith wellbore node is

The three-dimension tangent direction vector of the well trajectory at the ith wellbore node is

The radius of the wellbore at the ith wellbore node is

The coefficient of sliding friction of the wellbore at the ith wellbore node is

So the wellbore is modeled using the material coordinate L, the three dimension position vector X, the
three dimension tangent direction vector V the radius p and the coefficient of sliding friction at all nodes
of the wellbore:

The Hertz contact model is applied to calculate the contact force between a contact detection point on
the drill string and the wellbore. A Coulomb friction model is adopted to calculate the friction.
The bit-well contact force is also acquired from the Hertz contact model. The instantaneous penetrating
velocity uB is calculated from the 3D drilling velocity equation.
SPE-173396-MS 11

Figure 9 The Horizontal Section and the Vertical Section of the Well Trajectory.

The governing equation of the above drill system model is as follows:

(1)

(2)

(3)

Equation (1) is the dynamics equation of the beams and the rigid bodies. q is the generalized
coordinate. M is the generalized mass matrix. P is a generalized force with explicit general velocity. Q
is the generalized external force, including the contact force and the spring force. Cj is the equation of the
jth constraint. C j,q is the partial derivative of Cj for the generalized coordinate q. j is the Lagrange
multiplier for Cj. Equation (2) is the constraint equation, which describes the constraints shown in Figure
8. Equation (3) is the wellbore extension equation.
Assume the wellbore initially has m nodes. L, x, v, p, are the parameters of a new node in the well
trajectory. QB_R is the generalized contact force on the bit from the wellbore. The system governing
equation is an integro-differential algebraic equation, and is solved with integration in the time domain,
based on the backward differentiate formula method. A well trajectory correction algorithm is applied to
correct the rock penetration direction and the wellbore bottom direction.
12 SPE-173396-MS

Figure 10 Virtual Prototype Experiment Result. Time I is the moment when the bit hits the well bottom. Time II is the moment when the DIHL
and the toolface reaches desired value and the initializing phase ends. Time III is the moment when user renews the target DIHL. Time IV is the
moment when the termination command is set. Period 1 is the initializing phase of slide drilling before the bit hits the well bottom. Period 2 is the
initializing phase after the hit. Period 3 and 4 are the cruise slide drilling phase. Period 5 is the termination phase.

Virtual Prototype Experiment Results

An automated slide drilling control software is developed based on the above methodology. This control
software is tested in virtual prototype experiments in different operating conditions on several different
wells. In this section, the result from a virtual prototype model of an offshore well on Bohai Sea is
presented, and the well trajectory is shown in Figure 9.
In Figure 9, the origin of coordinates is at the rotary table. The initial measured depth is 730m, and the
initial inclination at the well bottom is about 52. The virtual prototype experiment result is shown in
Figure 10.
SPE-173396-MS 13

Figure 10 shows the measured toolface, the top drive angular position, the BHDR, and the DIHL during
the experiment slide drilling process. In real drilling process, the toolface sensor data is discrete and
hysteretic, because of the low bit rate of the MWD data transmission in the drilling mud. This
phenomenon is modeled and simulated, and caused the discontinuity and the phase lag in the toolface, as
shown in Figure 10.
The target toolface is 50 3, and the initial user set target DIHL is 3.5 0.5T.
At the beginning of this drilling process, the driller sends the command, and the drawworks begin to
lower the drill string. In period 1, the bit is above the well bottom, and the drawworks keeps a user set
velocity.
At time I, the bit hits the well bottom. This causes the DIHL to quickly rise and leads to a sharp turn
in the toolface. An algorithm is applied to identify the hit and initiate the control software to stabilize the
DIHL. In period 2, the DIHL is controlled to 3.5 0.5T, and the toolface is stabilized to 50 3.
At time II, the initializing phase ends, and the cruise slide drilling phase begins. In period 3, the DIHL
drops to stabilize the toolface.
At time III, the user set target WOB is changed to 5.5 0.5T. The control software immediately
increases the BHDR to raise the DIHL, and rotates the top drive to stabilize the toolface. The cruise slide
drilling in period 4 shows that, by manipulating the BHDR, both the DIHL and the toolface are
successfully controlled to the desired value.
At time IV, the termination command is set. The following period 5 is the termination phase of the slide
drilling process.

Conclusions
The objectives of this paper include introducing a new view scope of drilling control system analysis,
presenting an automated slide drilling system, and promoting an advanced virtual prototype experiment
tool for drilling simulation.
The automated drilling control system is decomposed into three hierarchy control loops. Each loop is
currently controlled by different staff or equipments, and can be automated separately. The drilling state
control loop is further decomposed and studied. Rotary directional drilling, slide directional drilling and
managed pressure drilling need different sub-loop assemblies of the drilling state control loop. An
automated slide drilling system is presented, with details in system composition and control strategy. This
system manipulates both the drawworks and the top drive to simultaneously control the drop in hook load
and the toolface. A virtual prototype experiment framework for the automated drilling control system is
presented to perform tests without special modification of the control software. A multi-body dynamics
model of the whole drilling system for joint simulation with the control software is established and applied
in the virtual prototype experiment. The virtual prototype experiment result shows that, the control
strategy is practical and effective.
Future work will be focused on the field test of the current drilling control software and the study into
the well trajectory control loop.

Acknowledgments
This work is supported by the Open Fund Project of the State Key Laboratory of Offshore Oil Exploration
(Grant No. 2013- YXZHKY-020).

Reference
1. Cayeux, E. Daireaux, B. Dvergsnes, E. et al 2012. Early Symptom Detection on the Basis of
Real-Time Evaluation of Downhole Conditions: Principles and Results From Several North Sea
Drilling Operations. SPE Drilling & Completion 27(4): 546 558. SPE-150422-PA
14 SPE-173396-MS

2. Macpherson, J.D. de Wardt, J.P. Florence, F. et al 2013. Drilling-Systems Automation: Current

State, Initiatives, and Potential Impact. SPE drilling & completion 28(4): 296 308. SPE-
166263-PA
3. Thorogood, J. Aldred, W.D. Florence, F. et al 2010. Drilling Automation: Technologies, Termi-
nology, and Parallels With Other Industries. SPE drilling & completion 25(4): 419 425. SPE-
119884-PA
4. Thorogood, J. 2013. Automation in Drilling: Future Evolution and Lessons From Aviation, SPE
Drilling & Completion. 28(2): 194 202, SPE-151257-PA
5. Maidla, E. and Haci, M. 2004. Understanding Torque: The Key to Slide-Drilling Directional
Wells. Presented at the IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, Dallas, Texas, 2-4 March. SPE-
87162-MS
6. Iversen, F.P. Cayeux, E. Dvergsnes, E.W. et al 2009. Offshore Field Test of a New System for
Model Integrated Closed-Loop Drilling Control. SPE drilling & completion 24(4): 518 530.
SPE-112744-PA
7. Gillan, C. Boone, S.G. Leblanc, M.G. et al 2011. Applying Computer Based Precision Drill Pipe
Rotation and Oscillation to Automate Slide Drilling Steering Control. Presented at the Canadian
Unconventional Resources Conference, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 15-17 November. SPE-
148192-MS
8. Martins, A.L. Gandelman, R.A. Folsta, M. G. et al 2013. On The Path For Offshore Drilling
Automation. Presented at the SPE/IADC Drilling Conference and Exhibition, Amsterdam, The
Netherlands, 5-7 March, SPE-163453-MS
9. Ashok, P. van Oort, E. and Ambrus, A. 2013. Automatic Sensor Data Validation: Improving the
Quality and Reliability of Rig Data. Presented at the SPE Digital Energy Conference, Woodlands,
Texas, USA, 5-7 March. SPE-163726-MS
10. Wang, G.G. 2002. Definition and review of virtual prototyping. Journal of Computing and
Information Science in engineering 2(3): 232236
11. Spanos, P.D. Chevallier, A.M. and Politis, N.P. 2002. Nonlinear Stochastic Drill-String Vibra-
tions. Journal of Vibration and Acoustics 124(4): 512518
12. Khulief, Y.A. and Al-Naser, H. 2005. Finite element dynamic analysis of drillstrings. Finite
Elements in Analysis and Design 41(13): 1270 1288
13. Khulief, Y.A. Al-Sulaiman, F.A. and Bashmal, S. 2007. Vibration analysis of drillstrings with
self-excited stickslip oscillations. Journal of Sound and Vibration 299(3): 540 558
14. Tucker, W.R. and Wang, C. 1999. An Integrated Model for Drill-String Dynamics. Journal of
Sound and Vibration 224(1): 123165
15. Menand, S. Sellami, H. Tijani, M. et al 2006. Advancements in 3D Drillstring mechanics: From
the Bit to the Topdrive. Presented at the IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, Miami, Florida, USA,
21-23 February, SPE-98965-MS
16. Liao, C.M. Balachandran, B. Karkoub, M. et al 2011. Drill-String Dynamics: Reduced-Order
Models and Experimental Studies. Journal of Vibration and Acoustics 133(4). http://dx.doi.org/
10.1115/1.4003406
17. Kamel, J.M. and Yigit, A.S. 2014. Modeling and analysis of stick-slip and bit bounce in oil well
drillstrings equipped with drag bits. Journal of Sound and Vibration 333(25): 68856899
18. Tikhonov, V. Valiullin, K. Nurgaleev, A. et al 2014. Dynamic Model for Stiff-String Torque and
Drag. SPE drilling & completion 29(3): 279 294. SPE-163566-PA
19. Gerstmayr, J. and Shabana, A.A. 2006. Analysis of Thin Beams and Cables Using the Absolute
Nodal Co-ordinate Formulation. Nonlinear Dynamics 45(1-2): 109 130
SPE-173396-MS 15

20. Reinhart, G. and Weissenberger, M. 1999. Multibody simulation of machine tools as mechatronic
systems for optimization of motion dynamics in the design process. Presented at the IEEE/ASME
International Conference on Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics, Atlanta, USA, 19-23 September:
605610
21. Yang, C. 2010. Multibody Dynamics Modeling and Simulation for Full-Hole Drilling System.
PhD Dissertation, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China (September 2010)
22. Cheng, Z.B. Jiang, W. Ren, G.X. et al 2013. A Multibody Dynamical Model for Full Hole
Drillstring Dynamics. Applied Mechanics and Materials 378: 9196. http://dx.doi.org/10.4028/
www.scientific.net/AMM.378.91