IADC/SPE 77232

The Use of Self Erecting Tender Rigs for Improving the Economics of Marginal Fields
Anders Leland, Smedvig Asia Ltd.
Copyright 2002, IADC/SPE Asia Pacific Drilling Technology
This paper was prepared for presentation at the IADC/SPE Asia Pacific Drilling Technology
held in Jakarta, Indonesia, 911 September 2002.
This paper was selected for presentation by an IADC/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 International Association of Drilling
Contractors or 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 IADC or
SPE, their officers, or members. Papers presented at the IADC/SPE meetings are subject to
publication review by Editorial Committees of the IADC and SPE. 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
Self-Erecting Tender Rigs (SETRs) have been used in South
East Asia, West Africa and the Middle East for 30 years for
drilling development wells from fixed platforms.
Inherent in the SETR concept is that equipment required to
support the drilling operation such as power, living quarters,
etc, is located on the tender, while only equipment actually
needed for drilling such as the derrick, topdrive, BOP, etc are
installed on the platform. Compared to the use of a platform
rig the design load and required deck area of using an SETR is
thus only about 1/4 of that needed for a platform rig of
comparable capacity.
So far tender rigs have mainly been used for development
drilling in water depths down to 800 ft. And this will most
likely remain their main application also in the near term.
However, with increased focus on use of dry completions
in deep water with the Xmas trees installed on a floating
platform like a TLP or SPAR - the self-erecting tender rig
concept will present many benefits for field development also
in deep water, particularly for marginal field development,
where the field economics may depend on solutions using
small, remote controlled wellhead TLPs.
Introduction
There are many factors involved in determining whether a
field is marginal. For example because of the higher cost of
field development in deep water, a field containing 25 million
bbls might be considered marginal in 3000 ft of water, while
in shallower water this would be considered a good discovery.
Other factors which are of importance are reservoir
complexity, oil and gas quality, what kind of infrastructure
exists nearby, etc.

For a marginal field the cost of drilling the wells normally

make up a sizable portion of the development cost, and
variations in drilling rig dayrate can have significant impact on
whether it is economically viable to develop the field or not.
Considering that most of the other costs have been committed
by the time a bid document to secure a rig is sent out, in many
cases a gas sales contract is also in place, it is easy to
understand that the ability to predict the rig dayrate with
reasonable accuracy can be very important.
But since the lead time between making the decision to
develop the field and contracting for a rig often is 2 to 3 years,
it is also not very easy. Rapid changes to the rig rate like we
have seen over the last 5 years makes predictability very hard.
And if the field development schedule is such that you need to
tender for a rig in a time period when the rig rates are high, it
may result in a marginal field becoming un-economic.
Tender and Jack-up Rate Comparison
In 1997 jack-up rates in South East Asia peaked at around
USD 75,000 per day. 2 years later they were down to less than
US$ 30,000 per day and now they are back in the 70s again.
In the same period peak day rates for self erecting tender
rigs have gone from about USD 45,000 to USD 30,000 and are
now back in the mid 40s again. These rates do not include
semi-tenders which typically are USD 20,000 to USD 25,000
higher due to higher construction cost. But at the same time
the semi tender's larger capacities, higher efficiency and less
weather sensitivity may result in per well costs that are similar
to, or less than the barge type tenders.
Figure 2 shows a comparison of the average and peak
dayrates for 300 ft jack-up and barge tender rigs contracted in
South East Asia in the period 1996 to 2001.
Historically the dayrates for tenders have fluctuated a lot
less than rates for other types of rigs, so they are easier to
predict, and at their peak they have always been significantly
lower than peak jack-up rates.
The number of 300 ft jack-ups in the SEA region is
currently about 24 -25 rigs. The number of self-erecting
tenders is 15 including 4 semi-tenders. If the platform is
designed to be able to use both jackups and tender rigs you
increase the potential rig selection by 60% from 25 to 40 units.
Something which can be important if the rig market is tight. It
will also reduce the chances of getting into a rate squeeze
when you are ready to commit to a drilling rig.

A. LELAND

Storage Capacities
Table 1 gives a comparison of storage capacities for two of
Smedvigs tenders the SETR being the barge type tender and
the SSETR being the semi tender - to that of a typical
300 ft jackup.
As a result of being able to store more tubulars, mud and fuel,
etc on the tender; the frequency of supply vessel runs can
be reduced.
Safety
Inherently, the personnel exposure in an emergency situation
is limited in the case of a self erecting tender rig due to the
concept itself, since only personnel directly involved in the
drilling operation are on the platform.
Personnel required for mud mixing, power generation,
catering, etc all have their workplace on the tender.
This means that only about 8 10 people need be on the
platform, the rest are on the tender.
Furthermore, the primary means of evacuation is the tender.
In case of a fire or well control situation requiring evacuation,
personnel would go from the platform to the tender, and the
tender would then pull away to a safe distance of 200 300 ft
by slacking the forward mooring lines.
For a jack-up personnel exposure is higher and in many cases
the only choice for evacuation is to launch the lifeboats.
Effect on Platform Cost
If both alternatives, jack-up and tender rigs are taken into
consideration at the platform design stage, the resulting
additional construction cost for building the wellhead platform
to be able to use both types of rigs is relatively small.
The platform deck may need to be made somewhat larger
to allow support of the master skid from the tender rig drilling
package when the rig is on the outer most row of wells.
Unocal in Thailand and Talisman in Malaysia have solved this
by including a removable deck section in their wellhead
platform design.
Since the platform has to support the additional operating
weight of the tender drilling rig package, the deck structure,
jacket and piles may also have to be strengthened.
Table 2 shows a comparison of steel weight and resulting
cost increase for a three - legged wellhead platform in 70
meters (230ft) of water depth in South East Asia to go from a
case where the wells are only drillable with a jack-up in
cantilever mode, to a case where the wells can be drilled by
both rig types jack-up and tender rig.
Based on the cost per ton of fabricated steel listed in the
table the construction cost increase is estimated to around US$
800,000. If the dayrate difference is US$ 25,000-30,000,
payback is achieved in 30 days.
Tenders in Deep Water
Traditionally the mooring systems on the self-erecting tender
rigs (SETR) have been sized for water depths of 400-500 ft for
the barge type SETR and 800-900 ft for the semi type SSETR.
Advances in the use of lightweight mooring ropes such as
Dyneema (high modular polyethylene) and polyester

IADC/SPE 77232

combined with a pre-laid mooring system may allow tender

rigs to be used for development drilling on TLP or SPAR type
wellhead platforms for water depths down to 6,000 ft
or deeper.
The first company to employ this concept to our
knowledge is Unocal Indonesia, which has selected the SETR
concept for development drilling on its West Seno TLP in
3,000 ft of water offshore Kalimantan. This project is
scheduled to start drilling 1 Q 2003 and comprises two TLP
wellhead platforms producing to an FPU.
Smedvig Asia recently completed three projects aimed at
investigating the feasibility of using self-erecting tender rigs
for deep-water drilling from TLP and SPAR type platforms in
Angola. The evaluation was done in co-operation with three of
the leading contractors in the market today, based on their
respective wellhead platform designs in combination with a
semi submersible tender rig (SSETR) - MODEC for the TLP,
Kvaerner Oil & Gas for the Wellhead TLP and Aker Maritime
for the SPAR design.
Drilling Rigs
Two main rig types are available for drilling and completing
wells with dry trees - a self-erecting tender rig, or a selfcontained platform rig.
The tender rig carries the drilling equipment on deck
during transit and uses its own large onboard crane to erect the
equipment on the platform prior to start of drilling and remove
it when the planned drilling program is finished.
Figure 1 shows the two types of self-erecting tender rigs the type with a barge shaped hull (SETR) and the semisubmersible type (SSETR). Characteristic for both types is
that the mud tanks, mud pumps, power generation, living
quarters, etc is all located on the tender and only the
equipment actually involved in drilling the well is installed on
the platform. This means that the area requirement and
operating weight seen by the wellhead platform is
significantly less than for a platform rig.
The operating load imposed on the wellhead platform by
the drilling package from the tender rig is about 1500 tons and
the footprint is typically 32 ft x 48 ft (for 45 ft centerline skid
beams). Including the cantilevers that are installed at the
master skid and drill floor level the area requirement is
approximately 64 ft (20m) x 65 ft (20 m) equal to 4200 sq. ft
(400 m2).
For a self contained platform rig with the capacities
required for drilling these deep water wells the required
footprint would be about 170 ft (52 m) x 90 ft (27 m) equal to
15,300 sq. ft (1400 m2) and the operating load seen by the
platform would be around 6000 tons.
This adds significantly to the required size and
displacement of the platform, which for a floating structure
usually translates into significant added cost.
In addition comes the construction cost of the platform rig
itself and the added degree of complexity to the project
compared to a simple wellhead platform, by incorporating a
full drilling rig, with the associated power requirement,

IADC/SPE 77232

THE USE OF SELF ERECTING TENDER RIGS FOR IMPROVING THE ECONOMICS OF MARGINAL FIELDS

drilling
equipment,
storage
tanks
and
additional accommodation.
Under the assumptions shown in table 3, the use of a
tender rig on a mini-TLP can save the operator in the order of
USD 120 million in net present value compared to the
alternative of a platform rig.
Environmental criteria
The environmental design criteria used in the studies are based
on the 100-year storm conditions for Angola block 17.
Water depth:
SPAR
TLP

6,000 ft (1,800m)
4,000 ft (1,200 m)

Significant wave
height (Hs)

13 ft (4.2 m)

1 minute wind

43 knots (22 m/s)

Surface current

3 knots (1.5 m/s)

Mooring system
Two types of mooring systems were investigated in the
studies. For the Moses TLP a semi taut wire mooring system
was used on the SSETR. This concept further includes two
pre-tensioned stretcher ropes installed between the tender
and the TLP. The stretcher ropes are made of 3 1/4 nylon
rope pre-tensioned to a relatively low value (in our study we
used 25 tons) and are introduced to further limit the relative
excursion between the tender and the TLP. By always keeping
positive tension in the stretcher it is ensured that a minimum
verifiable distance is maintained to the TLP.
For the SPAR and SSETR solution a semi taut mooring
system consisting of 2 1/2 wire combined with polyester rope
of 3 different diameters: 3, 4 and 5 was investigated.
The mooring leg composition used in the studies is shown
in table 4.
Results
Resulting motions are shown in table 5. These motions are
calculated for the 100-year storm intact condition. They are
considered to be within the operating limits of the SSETR and
will not require disconnection between the SSETR and TLP
or SPAR.
The one line broken condition may require slacking of the
leeward lines to maintain the required safety factor of the
remaining lines. If the direction of the weather is towards the
TLP reducing tension in the leeward lines this will also have
the effect of increasing the distance between the tender and the
TLP reducing the risk of contact.
In the case of the TLP/SSETR combination in 4,000 ft of
water the maximum relative distance between the SSETR and
the TLP was 84 ft. The minimum distance was 50 ft.

The maximum horizontal acceleration of the TLP deck

was found to be 0.06G. This is comparable to fixed platforms
and will not cause any additional dynamic load on the
drilling equipment.
In the case of the SPAR/SSETR combination in 6,000 ft of
water the maximum relative distance was 92 ft when using 2
1/2 wire combined with 5 polyester rope. The minimum
distance was 36 ft.
The heave acceleration of the SPAR deck was calculated
to be 0.02G and the surge acceleration was 0.1G. The dynamic
forces on the drilling equipment caused by the motions of the
SPAR while still reasonably small, will require some
modification to the master skid and drill floor skid base as
well as modifications to the derrick to allow for the increased
dynamic conditions.
References
1. Modec International LLC. June 2000. Smedvig Moses TLP
Tender Drilling Study.
2. Stig Botker, Terje Karp and Thomas B. Johannessen, Kvaerner
Oil & Gas a.s and Marcus Chew, Smedvig Asia Ltd. OTC 12988
Kvaerner Oil & Gas for Wellhead TLP with Tender
Assisted Drilling
3. Aker Marine. Relative Motions Between a SPAR and a Semisubmersible Self-Erecting Tender Rig for Deep Water
Drilling Operation.
4. Amanda Battersby. Unocal blazes an Indonesian trail. Upstream,
29 October 2000.
5. Amanda Battersby. Unocals new lease of life at West Seno.
Upstream, 1 June 2000.
6. Peter Dove, Helge Roraas. Aker Marine Contractors. Experience
with installation of deepwater polyester moorings, new generation
anchors. Offshore, February 2000.
7. Marlow Ropes, UK. Deep water tether technology.
8. www.chunkee.com/product/wirerope/wroge.htm.
Galvanized
Marine Cables
9. Vryhof Ankers bv, 1990 edition. Anchor manual.
10. Rune Dahlberg. Design procedures for deepwater fluke anchors,
drag-in plate anchors. Offshore, April 2000.
11. Peter Dove, Helge Roraas. Aker Marine Contractors. Trial
results from deepwater anchors, Offshore, March 2000.
12. Dan Hayes. Dry completions dominate. Harts E&P, 1 July 2000.
13. ODS-Petrodata Group - World Rig Forecast (1996-2001).
F:\Marketing\Presentations\marginalfield\spe\77232 for SPE Jakarta Sept 2002.doc

A. LELAND

IADC/SPE 77232

Figure 1 - Tender Rigs

80
70
60

USD '000

50
40
30
20
10
0
1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

Jackup (Av e rage 300ft) 1)

T e nde r (Av e rage S me dv ig T e nde rs)

T e nde rs P e ak

Jackups P e ak 1)

1) Source: ODS-Petrodata Group - World Rig Forecast (1996-2001)

Figure 2 - SETR vs JACKUP - Dayrate Comparison

IADC/SPE 77232

THE USE OF SELF ERECTING TENDER RIGS FOR IMPROVING THE ECONOMICS OF MARGINAL FIELDS

TABLE 1 - SETR vs JACKUP - CAPACITY COMPARISON

300 FT JACKUP

SETR

SSETR

LIQUID MUD (bbl)

2,000 - 2,200

4,000

6,000 - 8,000

DRILL WATER (bbl)

5,000 - 5,500

8,000

8,000

BULK MUD (cu ft)

7,500 - 9,000

12,000

14,000

HOOK LOAD (kips)

1,000

750 - 1,000

1,000

QUARTERS (pax)

90 - 100

110 - 120

120

TABLE 2 - COMPARISON OF JACKUP ONLY DRILLABLE WH JACKET TO

TENDER AND JACKUP DRILLABLE WH JACKET

Jackup
drillable
only
Jackup and
Tender
drillable
Cost of steel as fabricated

Deck Weight

Jacket Weight

Pile Weight

Incremental Cost

450 tons

300 tons

250 tons

Basis

550 tons

400 tons

400 tons

US$ 820,000

US$ 4,000/ton

US$ 2,400/ton

US$ 1,200/ton

Basis:
1. Water depth: 70 m.
2. Both are minimum facilities remote controlled wellhead jackets.
3. No accommodation or helideck.

TABLE 3 - TENDER ASSISTED DRILLING VS PLATFORM RIG ON TLP

TAD OPEX US$45,000/Day
TLP OPEX US$25,000/Day

TAD OPEX US$75,000/day

TLP OPEX US$25,000/Day

Net Present Value

(OPEX + CAPEX)

Net Present Value

(OPEX + CAPEX)

TLP Drilling 12 Wells

145 million

145 million

Tender Assisted Drilling

20 million

28 million

Cost Saving (TLP-TAD)

125 million

117 million

For assumptions see footnote.

Assumptions:
- Investments are distributed evenly for the first 24 months.
- OPEX is distributed evenly from month 25 onwards.
- Discount rate is 12%.
- Inflation for OPEX purposes 2% pa.
- Drilling duration 30 days per well
- Additional investment cost (NPV) for TLP with drilling rig and integrated platform $160 million.
- Cost of prelaid mooring for tender vessel $10 million.

ANDERS LELAND

IADC/SPE 77232

TABLE 4 - 8 LEG MOORING LINE CONFIGURATION FOR SSETR

Type

Diameter

Length

SSETR moored in 4,000 ft (1,200 m) alongside TLP

Steel Wire

2.5

(64 mm)

300 - 500 ft (90 m 150 m)

Chain

2.75

(70 mm)

100 ft (30 m)

Steel Wire

2.5

(64 mm)

7,000 ft (2,150 m)

Chain

2.75

(70 mm)

300 ft (90 m)

Nylon Stretcher Line

3.25

(80 mm)

350 ft (110 m)

SSETR moored in 6,000 ft (1,800 m) alongside SPAR

Steel Wire

2.5

(64 mm)

Polyester

5.0

(125 mm)

Chain

2.5

(64 mm)

300 - 400 ft (60 m - 180 m)

9,000 ft (2,750 m)
300 ft (90 m)

TABLE 5 - RESULTING MOTIONS

Type

Length

SSETR moored in 4,000 ft (1,200 m) alongside TLP

Minimum relative distance

50 ft (15 m)

Maximum relative distance

84 ft (25 m)

Horizontal acceleration of TLP deck

0.06 G (0.6 m/s2)

SSETR moored in 6,000 ft (1,800 m) alongside SPAR

Minimum relative distance
5 polyester rope
Maximum relative distance
5 polyester rope

36 ft (11 m)
92 ft (28 m)

Heave acceleration of SPAR deck

0.02 G

Surge acceleration of SPAR deck

0.11 G