Physics-Based Instruction Leads to Success for Geothermal Drilling

Dupriest began teaching a physics-based drilling course at Texas A&M, the first of its kind, around 2013. Now taught by Noynaert, the course remains the only one where students are taught the physics behind drilling and how to identify and reduce performance limiters. Noynaert and Dupriest have also spearheaded an extremely successful Advanced Drilling Research Program helping large integrated operators and smaller independent companies improve drilling performance through physics-based practices and workflows.

In October 2020, Noynaert and Dupriest began working with and teaching the drilling team while preparing a well for the DOE Frontier Observatory for Research in Geothermal Energy (FORGE). FORGE, a project in Milford, Utah, is a dedicated site for testing, developing and advancing geothermal systems. From crew to management, all team members received instruction on the actual physics, or physical processes, involved in drilling.

“We taught them to understand how everything worked, so when we said, ‘Now here’s how you can be doing that, and you will get this much different result.’ It made sense to them,” Noynaert said. “The whole point of teaching drilling physics is so that it makes sense. You can’t improve what you don’t understand.”

Noynaert and Dupriest’s course included drill bit specifics, optimum drill speeds and how much force to use. Most importantly, they showed how drilling limiters worked and what the appropriate identification and response should be. Once drilling started, this critical training helped the drilling team understand how to identify and reduce performance limiters. Improvements relied only on what the team did and how they did it, not on any special equipment.

Most geothermal wells are vertical, but this one was rotated to 65 degrees of inclination as a test case for geothermal practices. Since Noynaert and Dupriest are both experts in horizontal drilling, they were also able to advise in that area. Every success or obstacle encountered during the operation drove home what the team had learned during the instruction phase, and they gained confidence as the drilling progressed.

“If I tell you how to drive a car and you just go get in it and drive off, you’re going to have troubles,” Dupriest said. “If I tell you how to drive a car and I sit there with you every day, it’s going to work a lot better. You’re going to be more comfortable.”

Because the well was part of a scientific project, the team collected data during drilling and while processes were temporarily halted. Information gathered helped Noynaert, Dupriest and the team review equipment performance daily, assess in-hole conditions and monitor the subsurface environment. Even with these frequent stops and reviews, the well was completed in about half the time the DOE had budgeted.

According to Noynaert, the DOE was “extremely happy” with the huge cost savings.

The next phase of the project occurs when the drilling team returns to the FORGE site and drills their next well in June 2021. The time gap, usually the biggest problem in geothermal drilling practices, will benefit Noynaert and Dupriest. The break allows them to review the data and results from the first drilling session and write up their business model. They’ve already identified a few more physics limitations to overcome. The information could speed up the drilling completion rate even more, but field trial results are needed to verify their theories.

In the meantime, Noynaert and Dupriest look forward to working with the FORGE team again. Both researchers mentioned that improvements happened because the crew was willing to learn and embrace new information and methods.

“If you want to create change, understand that you’re trying to change how a person works, and work backward from there,” Dupriest said. “You don’t start with the science you think everyone should do; you start with what’s limiting the person from doing better. It’s so much a human dynamic and so little science.”