Luck, Skill, and How We Drill Marc Willerth, H&P Technologies

Playing the Best Poker Player in the World Source: WizardOfOdds.com

Better to be Lucky or Good? My strategy: Look at the first 2 cards If they are above average, bet everything If they are below average, fold No trust in my poker skills Gives me at least a 1 in 6 chance Source: WizardOfOdds.com

Bad Beats: When Luck Overwhelms Skill My strategy minimized impact of skill, maximized luck Even perfect decision-making can lose Winning strategy for the unskilled player How to make this more likely? Reduce quantity of information Reduce quality of information Minimize number of decision points

What Our Advertising Says: Excerpts from the IADD Directory: “Industry leading experience” “Extensive drilling knowledge” “Trusted expert” “Over 100 years of experience” “Knowledgeable, industry experienced professionals” We use skill to succeed!

Decisions that rely on luck to succeed! What Do Our Choices Say? Cut back on non-magnetic spacing Use long survey course lengths Neglect proper survey quality procedures Decisions that rely on luck to succeed!

Drillstring Interference for >10,000 bit runs Median magnitude: 377 nT 95th percentile Error model: ±440 nT Real data: ±1903 nT Uncertainty >4x error model Spacing has reduced by half

Drillstring Interference for >10,000 bit runs Median magnitude: 377 nT 95th percentile Error model: ±440 nT Real data: ±1903 nT Uncertainty >4x error model Spacing has reduced by half MWD Error Model distribution

Course Length, Slide–Rotate, and Positional Error Reported Position Survey 2 Survey 1 Error Rotate True Position Slide How the well was drilled For short slides and 100’ course lengths large errors can accumulate

Cutting Corners on Survey Quality Gravity and Magnetic Field data Often reported with low resolution – unhelpful for QC Trying to save time and telemetry

What have we done to ourselves?

Bad Beat #:1 Lateral Spacing Real-time data: Even Spacing After correction: Large variations Lateral spacing: Corrected well paths Wellpath 1 vs 2 320' Wellpath 2 vs 3 289' Wellpath 3 vs 4 395' Wellpath 4 vs 5 102' Wellpath 5 vs 6 172' Lateral spacing: Reported well paths Wellpath 1 vs 2 229' Wellpath 2 vs 3 265' Wellpath 3 vs 4 208' Wellpath 4 vs 5 232' Wellpath 5 vs 6 246' No way to succeed in RT with those constraints!

Bad Beat #2: Vertical Well Placement Two survey sets in the same well show a 40’ TVD difference How can geosteering be expected to succeed if we survey only every 100ft?

Bad Beat #3: Impossible Troubleshooting Is this a collision risk, failed tool, or just bad decodes? Do you want to trip multiple times to find out?

Many Targets are Already Unreasonable Driller’s Window 20ft MWD Survey Accuracy 160ft 400ft 50ft Only 1 in 20 actually hit, even if everything goes right For a 10k lateral with the “Standard MWD” we claim

If We Properly Modelled Uncertainty… Driller’s Window 20ft MWD Survey Accuracy 180ft 700ft 50ft Might as well switch to poker For a 10k lateral with common practices accounted for

What Would a Skilled DD Want? More accurate surveys at greater density Robust QC data in real-time Procedures for instrument validation

Technical Solutions Exist IFR1 & Multi-station Analysis Improve magnetic survey accuracy Digital slidesheets and continuous inclination Enable augmentation of survey density & curvature mapping These are not cure-alls, they still require good practices Getting the right data at the right time Making sure that data is of quality

What Do We Really Need to Do? Have a serious conversation about what directional drillers can deliver Properly align incentives for true well placement (not reported well placement) Design workflows where skill can succeed

Thank You