SPE 71053
Development and Application of a New Roller Cone Bit with Optimized Tooth Orientation
S.L Chen, SPE, Jim Dahlem, SPE, and John Dennis, Security DBS, A Halliburton Company
Copyright 2001, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.
This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Rocky Mountain Petroleum Technology
Conference held in Keystone, Colorado, 2123 May 2001.
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, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
for commercial purposes 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 where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O.
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.
Abstract
Based on computer drilling simulation results, a new, unique
roller cone bit has been developed1. All the teeth on this new
bit are oriented optimally such that the leading face of the
elongated crest of a tooth is perpendicular to its trajectory
during interaction with a formation. This paper describes the
computer model, the calculation procedure for determining the
trajectories of the teeth, and the method for designing the new
bit. Laboratory and field tests have shown that the new bits
drill up to 25% faster and longer than the same type of bits
with conventional tooth design.
Introduction
It is well known that, for the teeth on roller cone bits, there are
two kinds of motion: the crushing motion along the bit drilling
direction and the scraping motion perpendicular to the drilling
direction. The tooth scraping motion can be further divided
into two directions: tangential and radial. The scraping motion
along the tangential direction is mainly due to the profile of the
cone. On the other hand, the scraping motion along the radial
direction is mainly due to the bit offset. Therefore, both cone
profile and bit offset are major factors that determine the
action on the bottom of a tooth 2.
The degree of action is determined by the formation
drilled. For bits designed for hard formation drilling, the
crushing motion along the bit drilling direction is more
important than the scraping motion. In this case, cone profile is
close to a straight line while bit offset is minimal or close to
zero. For bits designed for soft formation drilling, the scraping
motion is more important than the crushing motion. In this
case, cone profile is more curved while bit offset may take
maximal value.
The design of a roller cone bit which drills faster
without a reduction in bit life due to breaking/losing teeth
and/or bearing/seal failure has always been a major goal of
bit manufacturers. Obviously, there is an optimal solution of
choosing cone profile and bit offset for a specific formation
type. Field experience and bit investigations play a significant
role in determining this optimal solution.
It is assumed in this paper that cone profile and bit offset
have been well determined for a given bit type. In other words,
a bit has been already designed and its performance has been
proven in the field. Such a bit will be called the base bit. Also,
when we refer to any specific cutting element, either steel
tooth or tungsten carbide insert, we will refer to it in the
generic sense as a tooth.
This paper describes how the scraping motion of any tooth
of a roller cone bit can be maximized without changing the
basic geometric parameters such as cone profile or cone offset
of the base bit.
First, a computer program (drilling simulator) was
developed to simulate the scraping motion of any tooth.
Analysis showed that the scraping motion is a function of bit
geometric parameters and the bit operational parameters
weight on bit and revolutions per minute (WOB and RPM) as
well as the formation type. It was also found that the direction
and magnitude of the scraping motion of a tooth on a row are
different from that of a tooth on another row on the same cone.
In order to increase the rock removal capacity of each tooth,
the leading side of the elongated tooth should follow the
scraping trajectory. This orientation is especially important for
steel tooth bits or insert bits using elongated tungsten carbide
insert in soft to medium formation applications. In other
words, the leading face of the elongated crest of the tooth
should be at an angle with the cone rotation axis. The detail
theory will be described in the following sections.
Tooth Scraping Motion
Scraping Motion Simulation. Fig. 1 shows the definition of
the scraping motion of a single tooth during its contact with
the formation. As stated above, the direction and magnitude of
the scraping motion of a tooth on a roller cone bit is a function
of bit geometric parameters (cone profile, bit offset, tooth row
2 S.L. CHEN, JIM DAHLEM, AND JOHN DENNIS
distribution, tooth shape), bit operational parameters (WOB,
RPM) and formation type (rock strength, brittleness and
plasticity). A computer simulator to replicate the scraping
motion of all the teeth on a roller cone bit includes the
following models.
3D Tooth Force Model. In this model, the 3D tooth is
divided into elements. The forces acting on an element are
expressed as a function of cutting depth and rock compressive
strength. The forces of a tooth are then summarized from all
the elements.
Cone Rotational Speed Model. At a given time step, the
kinematics model can determine which teeth are actually
cutting. Therefore, the forces acting on specific rows of teeth
on a cone can be calculated. The cone forces include the cone
torque. The balance condition of cone torque can be used to
calculate the rotational speed of the cone 3.
Bit Kinematics Model. This model determines the
geometric positions of all teeth on the bit coordinate system at
specific point in time.
Tooth/Formation Interaction Model. An optimization
procedure is applied at each specific time interval to balance
the applied WOB.
Fig. 2 shows the computerized drilling simulator output of the
scraping motion of each row of teeth on a specific cone. This
figure shows that:
The direction and magnitude of the scraping motion
are different from row to row on the same cone.
The direction of gauge row teeth is usually opposite
to that of the second row teeth.
Lab Test of Direction of Tooth Scraping Motion
Fig. 3 shows the lab test setup to measure the forces from
outer and inner rows of teeth on a specific cone. The rock
sample is divided into two parts: inner cylinder and outer
cylinder. The outer row drills the outer cylinder, and the inner
row drills the inner rock cylinder. The instrumentation
measures the vertical force, Fv, bending moment (for radial
force), and torque of the inner and outer rock samples,
respectively. The tooth radial force, Fs, can be calculated from
the bending moment; and the tooth tangent force, Ft, can be
calculated from the torque. In this way, the 3D forces acting on
a tooth are obtained.
Fig. 4 shows the tangent forces acting on the outer row
and inner row of a cone. This figure shows that the tangent
force on the inner row is of opposite sign to that of the outer
row. This difference reflects the fact that the teeth on the inner
row are generally gouging backwards as the bit drills. In other
words, the scraping direction of the inner row is opposite to
that of the outer row.
Fig. 4 also shows the radial forces on inner and outer
rows. The radial motion of the tooth generates the radial force.
The direction of the radial motion is always toward the hole
SPE 71053
center. As a result, the radial forces acting on the inner and
outer rows have the same direction.
Based on the tangent and radial forces, the resultant force
angles are calculated and expressed in cone local coordinates.
Table 1 lists the scraping motion angles from the computer
model and from the lab test, respectively. The difference
between the calculated and the measured angles may be
explained as follows. First, the measured angle is the average
angle calculated from the radial and tangent forces that are
dynamic forces in nature. Second, the cone rotational speed
used in the calculation may be different from that in the test
because cone rotational speed is also a function of time. But
the angles shown in Table 1 have confirmed again that the
directions of the scraping motion of teeth on the outer row and
on the inner row are opposite.
The results shown in Fig. 4 and Table 1 have confirmed
that the results from computer model are reasonable.
Teeth Orientation
It has been observed that the scraping motion created by bit
offset and cone profile can significantly increase the rate of
penetration (ROP). This statement is particularly true for soft
to medium roller cone bits. However, the increase of cone
offset, and therefore the tooth scraping motion, is limited by
tooth strength, bearing capability, bit vibration, and other
issues.
The effects of scraping motion can be maximized by tooth
orientation. From the computer simulation and test
verification, we have seen that the direction of scraping motion
is different from row to row. If all rows of teeth are oriented in
such a way that the scraping direction is perpendicular to the
tooth crest length, the rock volume removed by the tooth can
be maximized. As shown in Fig. 5, there are several
advantages of teeth orientation:
The rock volume removed by the oriented tooth can
be maximized. As a result, ROP will be increased.
The torsional loading on a tooth is minimized. This
torsional loading is partly responsible for the loss of
inserts in some applications. Therefore, the
probability of tooth loss will be reduced.
The stress acting on an oriented tooth will be
distributed more uniformly than that of the un-
oriented tooth. An oriented tooth will reduce the
probability of tooth chipping or tooth breakage.
Fig. 6 shows an example of a specific roller cone with
oriented teeth. Please note the arrows indicating scraping
direction.
Laboratory Test of Bit ROP
In order to know how much the ROP of a bit with oriented
teeth is increased, an ROP test was performed in a drilling
simulator that can simulate down hole drilling conditions. Two
SPE 71053 DEVELOPMENT AND APPLICATON OF A NEW ROLLER CONE BIT WITH OPTIMIZED TOOTH ORIENTATION
IADC 517 bits, size 8 -in., were first built. Bit A1 is a new
design with tooth orientation. Bit B1 is a conventional design.
The rotary speed was fixed to 120 rpm, and weight on bit was
varied from 5 to 40 klbs. The rock sample used in the test is
shale 4.
As we expected, bit A1 drills consistently 20-25% faster
than the bit B1 under the same drilling conditions (see Fig. 7).
Bit Field Performance
To evaluate bit performance, there are two basic aspects: rate
of penetration and bit durability. The lab test results confirmed
that the bit with oriented teeth drills faster. In order to test its
durability, a series of field tests have also been performed.
Fig. 8 shows a new roller cone bit, designed and
manufactured by applying the tooth orientation concepts
described above. The bit size is 8 -in., and its IADC code is
537X. The cutting structure of this bit has the following
features:
The orientation angle is different from row to row in
order to keep the scraping direction perpendicular to
the tooth crest length.
On each row, the orientation angle is also different
from tooth to tooth (about 10 degrees difference) in
order to partly avoid tracking.
Six bits have been tested in the Williston Basin, in the
north-central area of USA. The major considerations in
choosing this area as a test area are that drilling conditions are
very similar from well to well and that this basin has a great
amount of drilling data. The bits were tested under salt and oil
base mud conditions.
All six tests were for rotary drilling applications in
vertical wells. Five of six tests were carefully chosen in order
to make sure that at least one comparable offset bit run was
available. (The 5th run of bit E is an exception.) Table 2 lists
the bit performance for all six, field-test runs. All these six
cases are reviewed in more detail below.
In the following case studies, the offset wells are located
very close to the subject wells. Close proximity ensures the
formation is fairly comparable. In addition, the drilling rig for
subject well and offset well are the same. The operational
conditions, such as WOB, RPM, depth-in, and mud weights,
are also comparable.
Case Study of Bit A. Table 3 provides statistics on the
performance of bit A and the performance of an offset bit. The
two test wells are only about 50 feet away. Both bits drilled
essentially the same formation section, at the same depth, and
under almost the same drilling conditions. Therefore,
performance of these two bits can be compared directly.
The ROP shown in Fig. 9 is the average value for each
Kelly length (about 31 ft long).
3
Table 3 shows that bit A drilled 11.2% faster than its
offset bit for the whole section. Fig. 9 shows that bit A drilled
19.8% faster than the offset bit in the section from 6023 to
6675 ft (total 652 ft). Most of the formation in this section is
shale and sandstone with rock compressive strengths of 16000
to 32000 psi according to rock strength analysis. The condition
of bit A, i.e., its dull condition is better than that of the
offset. Bit A drilled a shorter distance than the offset bit
because bit A was pulled out earlier due to borehole assembly
(BHA) problem.
Case Study of Bit B. Bit B drilled 1027 feet in 93.5 hours
with average ROP of 10.98 ft/h (see Table 4). The formation
in this section is interbedded sandstone, shale, and dolomite. In
a comparable offset well located in the same legal area, two
offset bits were used to drill the same section. The condition of
bit B is better than that of the two offset bits. In this case, bit B
replaced two offset bits and drilled 10.46% faster and 19.42%
longer than the combination of these two offset bits.
Case Study of Bit C. Offset well #1 was first drilled. In
addition, four offsets were drilled, and well # 3 is only 30 feet
away from offset well # (see Table 5). 1. This package of
wells gave the drilling company a good chance to compare the
performance of bits from different manufacturers.
From Table 5, it is seen that
Bit C drilled 2295 feet in 119 hours with average
ROP of 19.29 ft/h. It is the best bit in all respects
including ROP, drilling distance, and dull condition.
Compare well #3 with offset well #1. Four offset bits
were used to drill the same section in offset well #1.
In other words, bit C replaced four bits for drilling the
same section and drilled 22.4% faster than the
average ROP of the four offset bits.
Compare well #3 with another offset well #2. These
two wells re located in the same legal area. The offset
bit was considered the best bit in that area before bit
C was run. Bit C drilled 236 feet longer (about 11.5%
longer) than the offset bit. The average ROP of bit C
was almost the same as that of the offset bit.
However, if bit C drilled a similar shorter interval
from 5515 to 7603 (2080 feet in 102.5 hours) as did
the offset bit, then the average ROP of bit C would be
20.37 ft/h. This is about 7.32% faster than the offset
bit. In addition, the cutting structure dull condition of
bit C is better than that of the offset bit.
Case Study of Bit D. From Table 6, it is seen that
Bit D drilled 1233 feet in 98 hours with average ROP
of 12.6 ft/h. The offset bit drilled 899 feet in 84 hours
with average ROP of 10.7 ft/h.
4 S.L. CHEN, JIM DAHLEM, AND JOHN DENNIS
Bit D drilled 17.6 % faster and 37% longer than the
offset bit.
Case Study of Bit E. The performance of bit E and its offset
run are summarized in Table 7. This bit has an average
performance in the area. It is noted that the run conditions of
these two bits may not directly comparable because the two
wells are not in the same legal area. As a result, the formation
may be different. Inspection showed that bit E lost many
inserts. Bit E is the only bit among all the test bits that the loss
of insert becomes an issue. The initial bit investigation has
found that too much input energy (WOB as high as 75 klbs
and RPM as high as 150 rpm) may be one of the reasons for
this kind of peformance. Further investigation is needed.
Case Study of Bit F. The performance of bit F and its offset
run are summarized in Table 8. The ROP of the two bits are
almost the same. However, the condition of bit F is much
better than that of the offset bit. After bit F was pulled out,
inspection showed that the remaining life of the bit was greater
than for the offset and that it might be used again.
Conclusions
Computer drilling simulation has found that the direction and
magnitude of the tooth scraping motion is different from row
to row. The scraping motion is a function of bit geometry,
operational parameters, and rock properties.
The lab tests have verified the correctness of the computer
models used for the simulation of tooth scraping motion.
The bit ROP can be improved by orienting the teeth in
such a way that the leading face of the elongated crest of a
tooth is perpendicular to its trajectory. Lab tests showed that
the bit with optimally oriented teeth can drill 20-25% faster
than a bit without optimum tooth orientation.
SPE 71053
The field test runs of the new bits have shown significant
improvement of bit performance including bit ROP and/or bit
life. Except bit E, which drilled a little slower with worse dull
condition than that of its offset bit, all other five bits drilled
faster and/or with better dull conditions.
References
1. Chen, Shilin: Roller Cone Bits, Systems, Drilling Methods,
and Design Methods with Optimization of Tooth Orientation,
U.S. Patent No. 6,095,262 (Aug. 1, 2000).
2. D. K. Ma, J.J. Azar: A new way to characterize the gouging-
scraping action of roller cone bits, paper SPE 19448, 1989.
3. M.C. Sheppard, M. Lesage, The forces at the teeth of a drilling
roller cone bit: theory and experiment, SPE 18042, presented
at the 1988 Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition of
SPE held in Houston, TX, Oct., 1988.
4. S.L.Chen, K. Blackwood, E. Lamine, Field investigation of the
effects of stick-slip, lateral, and whirl vibrations on roller cone
bit performance, SPE 56439, presented at the 1999 Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition of SPE held in Houston,
TX, Oct., 1999.
Acknowledgement
The list of the people who have been involved in this project is
too long to name them all. However we would like to express
our gratitude to the management team of Security DBS,
especially to Randy Young for his encouragement, to Kent
Blackwood, Mark Willimas and Keith Terry for their full
support and interest. Many thanks to Rick Rowland, Pat
Streich and Larry Wilson for their time on the rig and for their
efforts to collect all the offset information that has helped to
validate lab test results. Many thanks to Harry Campos,
Dewayne Fuller, Linda Morgan, Mark Blackman, Mike
Crawford, Robin Funakura and Monty Pflum for their
contributions to this project.
SPE 71053 DEVELOPMENT AND APPLICATON OF A NEW ROLLER CONE BIT WITH OPTIMIZED TOOTH ORIENTATION 5

Table 1Measured and calculated tooth orientation angle (degrees).

Test Cone Outer Row Angle Outer Row Angle Inner Row Angle Inner Row Angle
(Measured) (Calculated) (Measured) (Calculated)
2 A 132 150 50 28
3 B 137 157 52 61
4 C 142 111 52 10
5 D 138 154 58 27
6 E 142 129 50 12

Table 2Bit performance of field tests (IADC 537X).

Bit Well # IADC Depth-out Feet Drilled Hours ROP (ft/h) Dull Condition
(ft)
A 1 537X 6986 1303 62 21.02 5-6-BT-G-E-E-F-2-CT-BHA

B 2 537X 8697 1027 93.5 10.98 3-2-BT-M-E-E-E-2-FC-KOP

C 3 537X 7810 2295 119 19.29 2-3-FC-A-E-F-F-2-CT-PR

D 4 537X 8660 1233 98 12.6 4-8-BT-G-E-E-E-4-FC-KOP

E 5 537X 7078 1700 73.5 23.13 4-4-LT-N-E-E-E-2-BT-PR

F 6 537X 8557 1420 92.5 15.4 3-2-WT-A-E-E-E-0-BT-HP

Average 7965 1496 89.8 16.65

Table 3Case study of bit A (all bits IADC 537X).

Well Bit Depth-In-out (ft) Drilled Feet (ft) Hours ROP (ft/h) Dull Condition
Well # 1 (*) A 5683 6986 5-6-BT-E-E-F-2-CT-BHA
1303 62.0 21.01
Offset Well (**) Offset Bit 5699 -7281 7-7-BT-F-F-F-8-CT-TQ
1582 83.6 18.9
*: Bit was pull out due to BHA
**: Offset well locates about 50 feet away from Well # 1.

Table 4Case study of bit B (all bits IADC 537X).

Well Bit Depth-In-out (ft) Drilled Feet (ft) Hours ROP (ft/h) Dull Condition
Well # 2 3-2-BT-M-E-E-E-
B 7670 1027 93.5 10.98 2-FC-KOP
8697
4-8-BT-A-F-F-F-2-
Offset # 1 7808 - 8322 514 49.0 10.5 WT-PR
Offset Well
*
Offset # 2 8322 - 8668 346 37.5 9.2 3-5-BT-A-E-E-E-
1-WT-KOP
All 2 bits 860 86.5 9.94
*: Offset well locates in the same legal as Well # 2.
6 S.L. CHEN, JIM DAHLEM, AND JOHN DENNIS SPE 71053

Table 5Case study of Bit C (all bits IADC 537X).

Well Bit Depth-In-out (ft) Drilled Feet Hours ROP (ft/h) Dull Condition
Well # 3 C 5515 - 7810 2295 119 19.29 2-3-FC-A-E-F-F-2-PR
Offset 1 5698 - 6435 737 42.5 17.3 8-8-BT-A-E-E-E-?-PR
Offset Offset 2 6435 - 6535 100 12.8 7.8 8-8-BT-A-E-E-E-?-PR
Well # 1 Offset 3 6535 - 7234 699 36.0 19.4 N/A
* Offset 4 7234 - 7965 731 52.5 13.9 N/A
All 4 Offsets 2267 143.8 15.76

Offset
Well # 2 Offset 5637-7696 2059 108.5 18.98 4-8-BT-H-E-E-E-2WT-PR
** bit

*: Offset well #1 is only 30 feet away from well #3

**: Offset well # 2 is in the same legal area as well # 3

Table 6Case study of Bit D (all bits IADC 537X).

Well Bit Name Depth-In-out (ft) Drilled Feet (ft) Hours ROP (ft/h) Dull Condition

Well # 4 D 7427-8660 1233 98 12.6 4-8-BT-G-E-E-E-4-KOP

Offset Well # 4 Offset bit 7696-8595 899 84 10.7 2-6-BT-G-E-E-E-3-KOP

Table 7Case study of Bit E (all bits IADC 537X).

Well Bit Name Depth-In-out (ft) Drilled Feet (ft) Hours ROP (ft/h) Dull Condition

Well # 5 E 5378-7078 1700 73.5 23.13 4-4-LT-N-E-E-E-2-BT-PR

Offset Well # 5 Offset bit 5394-7184 1790 72.0 24.9 2-3-WT-A-E-E-E-1-CT-PR

*: The two wells are not in the same legal area and the drilling condition of the two bits may be different.

Table 8Case study of Bit F (all bits IADC 537X).

Well Bit Name Depth-In-out (ft) Drilled Feet (ft) Hours ROP (ft/h) Dull Condition

Well # 6 F 7137-8557 1420 92.5 15.4 3-2-WT-A-E-E-E-0-BT-HP

Offset Well # 6 Offset bit 7525-8716 1191 79.5 15.0 8-8-WT-A-F-F-F-5-BT-PR

SPE 71053 DEVELOPMENT AND APPLICATON OF A NEW ROLLER CONE BIT WITH OPTIMIZED TOOTH ORIENTATION 7

Yh
Bit Rotation
dr
B ds
A
Xh

Fig. 1Demonstration of tooth scraping motion on hole bottom.

8 S.L. CHEN, JIM DAHLEM, AND JOHN DENNIS SPE 71053

Fig. 2Scraping motion of each row of teeth on a specific cone.

SPE 71053 DEVELOPMENT AND APPLICATON OF A NEW ROLLER CONE BIT WITH OPTIMIZED TOOTH ORIENTATION 9

Cone
Outer Row
Inner Row Teeth
Teeth
Outer Rock
Inner Rock

Inner Outer
Instrumentation Instrumentation

Fig. 3Lab test setup to measure the forces from outer and inner rows of teeth on a specific cone.
10 S.L. CHEN, JIM DAHLEM, AND JOHN DENNIS SPE 71053

Fig. 4Radial forces and tangent forces of outer and inner row teeth.
SPE 71053 DEVELOPMENT AND APPLICATON OF A NEW ROLLER CONE BIT WITH OPTIMIZED TOOTH ORIENTATION 11

(1) Maximized ROP

max medium min

(2) Reduced Torque

on Insert
Torque = 0 Torque = 0

(3) Reduced tooth

Chipping
and Breakage Uniform Stress Non-uniform stress

Fig. 5Advantages of teeth orientation.

12 S.L. CHEN, JIM DAHLEM, AND JOHN DENNIS SPE 71053

Scraping direction

20
30

90 70

140

Fig. 6Example of roller cone with oriented teeth.

SPE 71053 DEVELOPMENT AND APPLICATON OF A NEW ROLLER CONE BIT WITH OPTIMIZED TOOTH ORIENTATION 13

50

45

40 Bit A1
35

30
ROP (ft/h)

25

20
Bit B1
15

10

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
WOB (klbs)

Fig. 7Comparison of ROP of bit with orientation (A1) to bit without orientation (B1).
14 S.L. CHEN, JIM DAHLEM, AND JOHN DENNIS SPE 71053

Fig. 8Roller cone bit with oriented teeth (Bit size 8 -in., IADC 537X).
SPE 71053 DEVELOPMENT AND APPLICATON OF A NEW ROLLER CONE BIT WITH OPTIMIZED TOOTH ORIENTATION 15

80
Bit A drills 19.8%
70
faster in this section
60
ROP (ft/h)

50
Bit
Bit AA
40
30
20
10 Offset bit
0
5700 5900 6100 6300 6500 6700 6900
Drilling Depth (ft)

Fig. 9Comparison of ROP of bit A and its offset.