IADC/SPE 77231
Technical Developments in Modular Rig Design Lowering Operator Costs
Greg J. Carter, SPE, Nautilus Offshore Company, Inc.
Copyright 2002, IADC/SPE Asia Pacific Drilling Technology
Thi s 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
Modular workover and drilling platform rigs have played
an important role in the development of existing oil and
gas fields since the 1960s. The past decade has seen
tremendous design improvements in
both workover and drilling
operations. Improvements range
from effective utilization of top drives
for sidetracking and extended reach
programs to minimizing weight and
space distribution of the rig to
accommodate minimal space
platforms. Case history studies will
illustrate how technological developments in modular rig
design have increased an Operators invested return on
their offshore platforms and hired drilling/workover rigs.
INTRODUCTION
This report describes changes that have taken place in
modular platform rig designs and applications in
response to Operators increased demands for cost
efficiency. The primary elements that influence design
and application are platform space and rig component
changes. These elements will be examined and
supporting case histories discussed.
PLATFORM SPACE
A Modular Platform Rig is a self-contained,
independently powered drilling or workover rig that rests
within or on top of an existing offshore platform structure
and is typically confined to a limited amount of deck
space. The platform bears all the loads of the associated
rig equipment without the use of a tender barge. As the
frontier of oil exploration moves to deeper water,
operators are requiring smaller, more economical
platforms. The size of the platform and rig are critical
issues as to the viability of a play when marginal field
development becomes more significant in the Operators
portfolio. As the platforms shrink to reduce costs,
particularly in water deeper than 100 meters, so must
the equipment that services the wells.
There are roughly 7,200 platforms built worldwide since
1975 according to Offshore Data Services. Roughly
3,200 of these are in the Gulf of Mexico while the
remaining 4,000 are in other parts of the world (1). Many
of these are small single well units are accessible only
by jack-ups. Of the 7,200 post 1975 platforms, an
estimated 60% (4,320) of them can be serviced by
modular platform rigs. With the advent of new
technology and associated cost savings, modular
platform rigs typically utilized in deeper offshore
platforms have become competitive with jack-ups in
relatively shallower waters.
Generalizations about platform sizes can be ascertained
from offshore experience and observations. Through the
1970s and up to the mid 1980s, Operators tended to
build platforms with larger deck space for contracted
remedial and drilling equipment. Operator budgets
tended to allow for larger platform construction in all
water depths. Since the mid-1980s, platform
construction budgets tend to be much tighter. Available
deck space on newer
platforms has decreased
greatly, particularly since
more production equipment
is taking up more top deck
space. Over the past
decade, new platform
concepts such as Minimal
Space Platforms have been
developed. The plan view of a Minimal Space Platform
built in 1998 can be seen in Fig. 1 of page 8 comparing it
to a larger platform built in 1974 in nearly the same
water depth. Although the platform size is often dictated
by the size of the reserve discovery and number of wells
planned, the trend is towards smaller platforms given
2 G. CARTER IADC/SPE 77231

similar well programs. Another examples of pending Figure 3, page 9 (200 ton rig) and Figure 4, page 10
ideas towards smaller platforms are concepts such as (500 ton rig). As shown in these sketches, the design of
the SPP (Slim Production Platform) drilling and the substructure changed as
production system (2) shown to the right in Fig 2 and
discussed further in the Future of Modular Platform
Rigs section. Many Operators are leaning towards
these new ideas.

MODULAR PLATFORM RIGS

Modular platform rigs previously defined can be grouped
into classes according to hoisting capacity and
horsepower. For the purpose of this report, platform rigs
are grouped into four classes as shown in Chart 1, page
12. This report will focus on rig sizes designated as
class B and C, those ranging in capacity of 100 to
550 tons and 600 to 2,000 horsepower. The largest rigs
reach into the 3,000 hp, 750 ton capacity and require
larger components with heavier weights and derrick
barges to erect them on the platform.

Applications of the platform rig, such as workover or

drilling, and water depth are primary determinates as to
what class size of rig to put on the platform. Improved
rig designs have allowed smaller sized rigs to move into
larger capacity work, thus minimizing the required space
and capacity on the platform. Out of the approximately
929 working and non-working offshore rigs in the world,
31 percent (286 rigs) are self-contained modular
platform rigs (see Chart 2, page 12). Out of these 286
rigs, over half are in the North Sea, Northwest Europe,
and the Gulf of Mexico, USA (See Chart 3, page 12) (3).
TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS IN MODULAR
RIG EQUIPMENT
Many changes have taken place within the technological
developments of modular rig design since the mid-
1980s. The primary changes involve rig component
sizes, top drives, cranes, mud processing equipment,
and quarters (4-16). Obviously, the effectiveness of the
modular platform rig is only as good as the design.
RIG COMPONENT SIZES
The first modular platform rig components were large
and bulky and/or mechanically inefficient. Many of these
inefficient rigs are still in operation today. Most of the
components of these rigs require large derrick barges to
erect them instead of relying on the existing cranes on
the platforms. As the modular rig industry becomes
more competitive, advantages have been sought to out-
perform the competition. Individual rig components in
recent years have become smaller, although small
components do not necessarily imply a good rig design.
Some of the most important changes to take place have
been the size and weight of the rig substructure, drillfloor
and mast. Examples of some of the new generation
platform rigs built within the past five years are shown in
Figure 2 Slim Production Platform
innovative ways to direct the loads into the platform
capping beams developed. The substructures have also
evolved to consume less space on platforms. Instead of
spreading out, the rigs have become taller to enclose
more equipment in a given amount of space.
TOP DRIVES:
Top drives have played a large role in the agility of
modular rigs. They are being installed for sidetracking in
not only 300 ton and larger drilling rigs, but also in
smaller 120 ton to 200 ton primary functional workover
rigs. The top drives primary functions are to increase
trip efficiency and drill speed, improve well control, allow
for back-reaming, and improve the safety of the work
environment for the drillfloor workers. With the evolution
of smaller and more muscular top drives, smaller
modular rigs have been able to incorporate the working
efficiency of these units. In the past, the physical size
required of masts to install top drives were too large to
adapt to the slimmer, lighter masts of today. With the
advent of improved technology in the electrical top drive,
modular rigs can perform to their highest capability
IADC/SPE 77231 TECHNICAL DEVELOPMENTS IN MODULAR RIG DESIGN LOWERING OPERATOR COSTS
without sacrificing mobility or component weight. See
Figure 5, page 11, for examples of top drives installed in
newer generation platform rigs.
Patents for top drives have existed since the 1920s, but
actual commercial applications of top drives did not
occur until the mid 1980s with the introduction of 500
ton capacity hydraulic units. Top drives were major
construction upgrades to rigs through the late 1980s
and early 1990s, taking up to two weeks to install and
costing on average $2,000,000 (US). The early top
drives were bulky and heavy, adding about 40 tons to
the weight of a rig. The interfacing of the mechanical
and electrical components of the top drives were time
consuming, invasive and often required adding
extensions to the mast or derrick.
Even from the early 1990s, top drives have come a long
way to assist modular platform rigs with their important
aspect of portability. Today modular platform rigs take
advantage of the many improvements in top drive size,
adaptability and functionality. Whereas in the early
1990s only 500 ton units were available, now anywhere
from 150 to 750 ton top drives can be found. Important
features found in todays electric top drives which add to
the speed, compactability and safety of modular rigs are
described in table 5.1 on page 13. (17-18):
CRANES
Two observed trends have taken place with cranes in
the offshore oil and gas industry - platform cranes have
become smaller and rig cranes have become larger.
Operators tend to keep the size of cranes on their
platforms to a minimum to keep costs associated with
platform construction down. This often puts the burden
of installing rigs with adequately sized cranes on the
contractor. Obviously, smaller rig component sizes as
mentioned earlier have contributed most to adapting to
smaller platform cranes. But in addition, contractors
owning newer high-tech modular rigs have adapted to
smaller platform cranes by changing the design of
cranes they own and operate the rig with. Many of the
smaller 120 ton to 250-ton capacity high tech modular
rigs do not require more than the typical 15-ton cranes
seen on many offshore platforms. The larger class high-
tech modular rigs in the 250 ton to 550 ton capacity
require larger 25 to 60 ton capacity cranes. These larger
cranes associated with the newer high-tech modular
platform rigs have been designed with lighter individual
components to allow the small platform crane to erect
these larger cranes. The newer cranes have also been
designed with a minimum number of components for
speed and ease of installation.
3
MUD PROCESSING EQUIPMENT
Designing compact and effective mud processing
equipment such as mud pumps and processing tanks
can be a difficult task. Design criteria for this equipment
will vary depending on rig size. Larger, 500 ton platform
rigs usually incorporate the pumps and processing
equipment into the structure of the rig. Smaller,
sidetracking/drilling platform rigs cannot always support
the addition of these components in their structures and
must be placed alongside the rig. Pump manufacturers
and fabricators have become very creative with the
weights and sizes of their equipment in order to
accommodate the down-sizing of rig components.
Figure 5, page 11, shows examples of a compact 1,000
horsepower mud pump and 335 barrel mud processing
equipment used with a smaller 200 ton modular drilling
rig. Figure 5 shows how these components are tied into
larger, new generation platform rigs. Other mud
processing equipment used to reduce component size
and add efficiencies to the rig system are linear flow
shakers and continuous well servicing mud pumps.
QUARTERS
Although quarters are not technically part of the modular
rig, many platforms require additional housing to
accommodate more workers. The contractor has been
put in the competitive position to find innovative ways to
bring lightweight and space efficient accommodations for
the rig crew and Operator personnel. Cantilevering off
the edge of the platform is always a simple solution, but
not always the safest or the most efficient method.
Adapting quarters to existing space on the platform
requires analysis of each individual platform
characteristic. Many times additional quarters can be
stacked on existing helidecks and buildings, or hung
from safe structures. New material is now available to
build lighter quarters for weight consideration.
TIME AND MOTION STUDIES
Time and motion studies pertain to utilizing people and
machines to their maximum possible efficiency. The
most significant cost savings gained by the Operator
from a platform rig is the efficiency in which the rig
moves and operates. How well the modular platform rig
is designed determines how efficiently it can be moved.
Since there are larger scales of costs associated with
offshore work than onshore, a great amount of money
can be saved by even the smallest time saving process.
The primary functions to consider when analyzing the
efficiency of a platform rig are: rig moves, day-to-day
operations and use of expendables. For instance, in a
rig move the objective is to move from one location to
another in as short a time as possible. During this move,
the rig and associated overhead are no longer directly
working to find or increase oil and gas production. The
4 G. CARTER IADC/SPE 77231

cost is even greater to the Operator when the platform Average time on platform = 1,335 hours
must be shut-in during any part of the rig move. All (55.6 days)
efforts must be made to minimize the number of lifts that Average of 4 wells are worked per platform.
must be put on or taken off a boat, the time it takes to Assumptions:
assemble or disassemble the rig components, and 7 rig moves per year (365 / 55.6days
reduce, if not eliminate, platform shut-in time. per platform)
Rig B = 120 hours (5 days) to move rig
CASE HISTORIES between platforms.
The following case histories of recent modular platform Two boats used to move the rig for both rig A
rig programs are used to prove estimated cost savings to &B
the operator. These examples are of varying rig size, Production rate on platform = 2,000 bbls /day
program work, and geographical location. Assumptions Operator requires platform to be shut-in during
are used in a comparative estimate to the cost of rig move.
alternative, less technologically evolved rig equipment.
Operator cost per hour during rig move =
Average day rates within the time frame of each case
US$1,875/hour
will be used as base cost estimates. As much
($3,000/day x2 boats)+($7,000/day rig
information as possible has been gathered from the
rate)+($20,000/day overhead & admin.) +
operator in each case. Sensitive well related information
($15,000 for shut-in 12 hours @US$15/bbl
is often protected by the Exploration and Production
@2,000 bpd) = $45,000/day = US$1,875
companies and not accessible.
/hour
Weather does not adversely effect the move.
A. GULF OF MEXICO - Case History
Calculations:
Operator Shell Offshore Inc.
Rig A rig move cost = (37 hours) x ($1,875/hour) =
Time Frame: April, 1989 through February,
$69,375
1992
Rig B rig move cost = (120 hours) x ($1,875/hour) =
Rig Class - 120 ton hook, 650 hp, electric rig
$225,000
Location 11 platforms (see table 6-1 page 13)
Difference = $225,000 - $69,375 = $155,625
Wells 65 total wells
Operator cost savings = ($155,625) x (7 rig moves
Program - Workover program.
per year) = US$1,089,375 / year
Information for table 6-1 was gathered from daily IADC
Results:
reports. Weather and platform crane mechanical failures
Comparing rig move times of Rig A (1.5 days) and
were included in the total hours required to move the rig.
Rig B (5 days), both 120 ton capacity rigs, and
A comparison to older, similar class rigs can be made
assuming all other variables listed above are the
assuming a 5 day rig move time for unimproved rigs.
same, results in an average savings of $1,089,375
From experience, moving older, unimproved modular
per year to the Operator (roughly $3,000/day). Not
workover rigs in the 120 ton range can add at least 3.5
only does the Operator save in rig associated costs,
days to a rig move. The increases in rig move times are
but it also gains by increasing its production level
due to heavier component lifts which require an
quicker by working over more wells in a shorter
additional crane to be installed on the platform,
period of time. This makes an even larger difference
inefficient component connections which require more
in present value terms.
time to assemble the rig, extra components that require
more time to install the rig and poor mechanical
B. ADRIATIC SEA Case History
assembly connections resulting in lost time from
mechanical malfunctions. The new technologically
Operator AGIP
advanced platform rigs overcome these problems by
Rig Class - 200 ton hook, 1,000 hp, electric rig
utilizing many of the improvements described in the
Location nine various platforms ( table 6-2 , page
Technological Developments in Modular Rig
14)
Equipment section. The results for this case history
Wells 41 wells
analysis are derived as follows.
Program - Workover program
Statistics:
The 200 ton modular platform rig in this case study has
Rig A = 37 hours (1.5 days) to move rig
been working in the Adriatic Sea for AGIP for over five
between platform.
years. It has made nine rig moves to platforms with a
relatively small amount of available deck space. As
IADC/SPE 77231 TECHNICAL DEVELOPMENTS IN MODULAR RIG DESIGN LOWERING OPERATOR COSTS
compared to the earlier Gulf of Mexico case history of
the 120 ton rig, this 200 ton rig had more associated rig
equipment to match the needs of the Operator and the
work performed on the wells. Extra mud tankage,
generator, piperack structure, diesel tank, taller mast
and no rig moving after dark, lengthen rig move time
relative to the similarly designed 120 ton rig.
Prior to 1993 AGIP utilized the H525 Saipem Ideco
model rig to perform workovers in the Adriatic. Although
this platform rig had excellent qualities, it was essentially
a modular rig welded together to be moved by a crane
barge because the modular aspects were deemed to be
inferior to the presumed ease of a one-lift rig move. The
resulting rig was a half done effort where part of the rig
was a single-lift, while the rest still had to be moved in
little pieces. Also, this rig had several cumbersome
systems to meet local regulatory requirements. The
introduction of the fast moving 200 ton rig brought AGIP
cost effective rig moves and eliminated the need for
expensive crane barges, while it was designed to meet
the regulatory requirements of the times with systems
integrated in the design.
C. TRINIDAD Case History
Operator Amoco
Rig Class - 500 ton hook, 2000 hp electric rig
Location Trinidad
Wells 17 wells
Program Drilling and Workover
This 500 ton modular platform rig shown in figure 4 is
built with the same quick modular assembly concept
design as the previous 120 ton and 200 ton rigs. The
500 ton rig does not require a derrick barge, sets up on a
very small footprint, has 148 lifts, requires no welding,
and is easy to assemble. It performs the same work as
a standard 2000 hp API platform rig, yet can move
from one platform to another in roughly a quarter of the
time as the API rig. Most importantly, it saves money
by not requiring a derrick barge. As shown in the data of
table 6.3, page 14, this modern 500 ton modular rig can
move from one platform to another in about 8.5 days,
where-as the average 2000 hp API rig can take about 4
days to move but requires an expensive derrick barge
and welding. Approximate cost savings to the operator
can be found making the following assumptions
and conclusions.
The standard API 2,000 hp rated platform rig requires a
derrick barge. Assume $160,000 (US) per day for the
derrick barge and rig, which equals $640,000 (US) for a
four day period to mobilize the rig onto the platform. Add
another four days of rig time at $25,000 per day to prep
the rig for working the well. This amounts to roughly
$740,000 for the derrick barge assisted rig. The modern
5
500 ton platform rig requires two boats for 8.5 days at
$8,000 per day per boat to move the rig from one
platform to another. Assume a rig mobilization day rate
of $25,000 per day. The mobilization cost to the
operator for the 500 ton rig comes out to roughly
$350,000. This can save the operator over $390,000
(US) ($740,000 - $350,000) over the use of an API rig
with a derrick barge for one move. Assuming there are
four moves in a year the average yearly savings would
be more than $1,500,000 (US). This does not take into
account the costs saved by the operator by having less,
if any, platform shut-in time due to lack of
welding required.
7 - ENRICHING THE VALUE OF THE EXPLORATION
AND PRODUCTION COMPANY
An important aspect in the development of modular rig
technology is that it has immense enriching value for the
Exploration and Production Company. By bringing on-
line more wells in a shorter period of time the greater the
net present value of oil and gas becomes. In other
words, if in a one year time frame an exploration
company drills or works-over 20% more wells than they
would have otherwise drilled without improved
technology, the company gains 20% more production for
revenue generation in current dollars instead of future
dollars. Current revenue has a greater impact on the
value of the company than future revenue primarily due
to Net Present Value (NPV) and compounding.
8 - THE FUTURE OF MODULAR PLATFORM RIGS
As modular platform rigs have developed to adapt to a
higher level of offshore competition and changes in
demands from Operators, the need to continue
improving designs and methods will not abate. Some of
the greatest potential for modular platform rigs is minimal
spaced platforms in all water depths, deep-water
platforms and marginal fields. Minimal spaced platforms
are emerging as Operators continue to find ways to cut
development costs. Many Operators are requesting the
experience of drilling contractor engineers to help design
platforms that can maintain as small deck space as
possible and still perform the necessary drilling,
completion, and workover operations. Modular platform
rigs must stay attune to the need to increase efficiency,
reduce size and weight as the Operator demands. The
current deep-water frontier for finding large holdings of
reserves is demanding significant engineering
innovation. Platforms, such as SPARs and TLPs moving
into water depths of 5,000 feet (1,525 meters) and
deeper having greater impacting environmental forces
requiring frugality of available deck space and applied
weight constraints. The future modular platform rigs
must continue to be more operationally efficient, lighter,
smaller, and in the deep offshore environment,
dynamically engineered to withstand the demanding
oceanic forces.
6 G. CARTER
Creativity will play a large part in the future of modular
platform rigs. Below are some ideas that could be
brought to fruition allowing there is enough cooperation
between operator and contractor.
Lighter platform designs Concepts such as the
Slim Production Platform (see figure 2 on page 2)
can significantly reduce the weight of the platform.
The design reduces operator cost by incorporating a
combination of smaller production modules,
condensed deck space for platform rig packages,
and utilization of deviated well conductors which
reduce required well angle while drilling.
Centralized power As the operator plans to
develop a new field and install platforms, thought
could be given to a centralized power station either
on land or on a centrally located platform. This
power station could supply power to platforms
around it with enough reserve for the occasional
addition of drilling or workover rigs. The rigs would
then not need to bring power packages to the
platform, reducing required space, weight and the
number of lifts.
Platform storage Some of the most difficult
components of a modular platform rig to store on a
platform are fluid (diesel and water) and bulk tank
storage. These components typically take up large
amounts of space and apply high deck loads.
Should the operator integrate larger tank storage
into their platforms there would be greater efficiency
in rig moves and less required top deck space.
Storage could be added into crane bases, platform
legs, or other unused space.
Consumable Pods Another idea to remove the
large consumable loads off the platform, such as
potable and drilling water, mud, diesel, and dry bulk
material is by taking the loads completely off the
platform. Remove these loads from the platform
structure and the platform can be designed with less
required platform rig loads. Instead of using the
obvious weather dependant standby barge or lift
boat, build small tubular pods that can be moored
near the platform with appropriate internal pumps,
and required safety mechanisms for vessel
regulations and sea conditions. These tubular pods
would have ballasting capabilities, easy to transport
and install and easily maintained. They would vary
in capacity by varying the length of the tubular.
Dynamic compensation Significant rig weight
reduction and increased efficiency could be
developed by substituting motion compensators in
rigs within deep offshore waters with shock
IADC/SPE 77231
absorbing pads similar to those used in buildings for
earthquake areas. The pads would need to be
designed for longer and larger cycles than those
experienced in earthquakes.
Laser drilling As laser technology becomes
available, it could be applied to modular platform
rigs. Although laser requires a large energy source,
the centralized power station (mentioned above)
could possibly supply this resource. Drilling with
laser is currently being studied in the United States.
It could possibly eliminate the need to run casing
since the laser is said to harden the walls of the hole
as it cuts the formation. The rig could be designed
with fewer and smaller components since weight on
the bit and significant rotation is not required.
9 - CONCLUSIONS
Historical data on the efficiency of newer
modernized modular platform rigs demonstrates that
Operators have gained significant cost savings
associated with innovative designs and more
efficient equipment. As demonstrated in the case
history of smaller workover rigs, 50% to 100% of the
rig rates can be saved by utilizing the most up-to-
date modernized modular platform rigs.
Efficiently designed platform rigs can eliminate the
need for expensive derrick barges, reduce rig move
time, bring production to the Operator sooner, and
reduce or eliminate platform shut-in time.
There are many futuristic ideas to apply to modular
platform rigs that, if coordinated by Operators and
Contractors, would significantly enhance the cost
effectiveness of modular platform rig utilization.
Modular platform rigs are becoming smaller in size
and weight, but also more mechanically efficient, in
response to exploration and production companies
desires to cut costs.
The overall efficiency of a modular platform rig is
determined by how well the rig is designed. Simply
because a rig is smaller and lighter does not mean it
was designed well.
Modular platform rig technology developed over the
past 10 years is having and will continue to have a
large impact upon the economics of developing
existing deep-water and marginal offshore fields.
IADC/SPE 77231 TECHNICAL DEVELOPMENTS IN MODULAR RIG DESIGN LOWERING OPERATOR COSTS 7

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 18. J.F. (Jim) Jones: Top Drive A Drilling

Enhancement that Pays Dividends, CADE/CAODC
The author would like to thank the many employees at Spring Drilling Conference, April 8, 1997, Paper No.
Nabors Industries, MEPECO SRL, Hydro Drilling 97-119 pp 1-8
International, Canrig Drilling Technology, OD&E, and
American Bureau of Shipping for their support and input
to this report. Their knowledge and assistance helped to
sow the seeds necessary for this proceeding.

REFERENCES

1. Worldwide Platforms Installed 1975 to present:

Offshore Data Services, Houston, Texas,
November, 2000.
2. Siro Brunato: The Slim Production Platform SPP ,
Manuscript prepared for the 1999 Offshore
Mediterranean Conference, December 1998. Hydro
Drilling International, Alessandria, Italy.
3. Offshore Rig Locator: Offshore Data Services,
Houston, Texas, December 1, 2000.
4. Joe Evangelista: Fifty Years of Crazy Ideas.
Surveyor (a quarterly publication of the American
Bureau of Shipping), March 1997, pp 22-27
5. Rick Von Flatern: New Wave Drilling Rigs Offer
Automation, Ergonomics and Economy. Petroleum
Engineer International, May 1996, pp 75-78
6. Keith Rappold: Modular Designs Highlight Several
New Rigs. Oil & Gas Journal, December 4, 1995,
pp 64-66
7. Dan McNabb: Compact Rigs Suited to Gulf Work.
Oil & Gas Journal, November 3, 1975, pp 64-66
8. Dira/Rapo: Fast Moving Workover Rig Adriatic 1.
D&P News AGIP, June 1995.
9. 50 Years of Offshore Innovation. The American
Bureau of Shipping, 1997.
10. Philip W. Wasterval and Sam C. Lynch: Modular
Platform Rig Design Reduces Operations, Capital
Costs. Drilling, January 1984, pp 56, 63-66.
11. Don Lyle: New Rigs Raise Efficiency. Harts Oil
and Gas World, October 1997, pp 22-25.
12. Duane Russell, James Armstrong, Jerry Shanklin:
Development of the Rigmaster Hydraulic Drilling
Rig, Drilling Technology Conference paper, March
7-9, 1978, pp 343-350.
13. Ian Shearer: Modular Rigs Reduce Topside
Weight, The Institute of Petroleum Petroleum
Review, October, 1990, pp 522-524.
14. John J. Filson: Offshore Industry: Introduction,
ABS, Part XI The Offshore Industry, pp 561-578.
15. James E Steele: Offshore Industry: Early Years
ABS, Part XI The Offshore Industry, pp 579-585.
16. Bruce G. Collipp: Offshore Industry 1950 1965:
Invention, ABS, Part XI The Offshore Industry, pp
586-593.
17. Allan S. Richardson: Electric Top Drive Systems,
IADC European Drilling Issues Conference, Berlin,
June, 1997.
8 G. CARTER IADC/SPE 77231

Built 1974

Typical 150 x 75 Gulf of Mexico platform in 71 meters of water.

Built 1998

Built 1998

1998 Gulf of Mexico Minimal Space Platform in 85 meters of water.

Figure 1 Comparing Platform Deck Sizes.

IADC/SPE 77231 TECHNICAL DEVELOPMENTS IN MODULAR RIG DESIGN LOWERING OPERATOR COSTS 9

Figure 3 200 Ton Modular Platform Rig

10 G. CARTER IADC/SPE 77231

Figure 4 500 Ton Modular Platform Rig

IADC/SPE 77231 TECHNICAL DEVELOPMENTS IN MODULAR RIG DESIGN LOWERING OPERATOR COSTS 11

Portable Hydraulic Top drive

Portable Electric Top Drive Portable Hydraulic Top Drive
System, 400 tons and 31,000
System, 250 tons and 30,000 System, 300 tons and
ft/lbs maximum torque.
ft/lbs maximum torque. 27,500 ft/lbs maximum
torque.

Expanded Mud Contioning Systems

Compact 335 bbl round bottom mud tank
equipped with 16-cone desander, two (2)
linear motion shale shakers, degasser, mud
agitatiors, mixing jets and hosing manifolds.

Figure 5
Auxiliary Mud PumpsCompact,
designed, 1,000 hp triplex mud pump
package. Note small deck space
required when installed.
12 G. CARTER IADC/SPE 77231

Class D
20 (7%)
2000 to 3000 HP
Class A = 6,700 to 9,800 M
550 to 750 Ton Capacity
1,000 to 2,000 HP
Class B = 4,900 to 6,700 M
Class C 250 to 550 Ton Capacity
58 (20%)
Class A 600 to 1,000 HP
Class C = 3,500 to 4,900 M
74 (26%) 100 to 250 Ton Capacity
165 to 600 HP
Class D = 1,500 to 3,500 M
60 to 100 Ton Capacity
Class B
134 (47%)
Sizes of 286 total worldwide Modular Platform Rigs

Chart 1

Asia
Submersibles Canada
7 (1%) Australia New Zealand 4 (1%) Arabian Sea / Persian Gulf
2 (1%)
Platform Tenders 6 (2%) 1 (0%)
31 (3%) Drillships Africa
Artic Other (Europe)
26 (3%) Caspian Sea 7 (2%) 1 (0%)
3 (0.3 %)
Barges 13 (5%)
43 (5%) Mediterranean / Black Sea North Sea & NW Europe
14 (5%) 84 (30%)
Semisubmersibles Mexico
151 (16%) 18 (6%)
Jack-Ups S. America (Venezuela,
382 (41%) Brazil & Other)
25 (9%)
USA Gulf of Mexico
USA Alaska & Pacific
80 (28%)
31 (11%)
Self Contained Platform
Rigs
286 (31%)

Location of working and non-working Offshore

All working and non-working Offshore Self-Contained Platform Rigs
Rigsorldwide Total = 286 Rigs
Total = 929 Rigs

Chart 2 Chart 3
IADC/SPE 77231 TECHNICAL DEVELOPMENTS IN MODULAR RIG DESIGN LOWERING OPERATOR COSTS 13

TABLE 5.1 Important features found in todays electric top drives

FEATURES CHARACTERISTICS ADVANTAGE to MODULAR PLATFORM RIGS

Allows power components to be shared with existing modular
Drive Electrical
rig power.
Greater range of capacity to match appropriate rig size. Only
Capacity 150 to 750 ton
500 ton available prior to early 1990s.
Length 5 to 8 meters Nearly half the length of the early 1990 models.
Weight 20 to 30 tons Weights have decreased from original 40 tons.
Installation 1 to 2 days Fast rig-up. Earlier models took over two weeks to install.
Costs have come down from over $2,000,000(US) in earlier
Cost Avg. $1,200,000(US)
models.
Folding monorail guide Easier portability. Earlier models were fixed and time
Interfacing (Mech)
track. consuming.
Interfacing Self contained modular Minimal interfacing. Earlier models were electrically fixed to
(Electrical) units. the rig and invasive.

TABLE 6.1
THREE YEAR WORKOVER PROGRAM
with MODERN 120 TON RIG
GULF OF MEXICO, USA
Platform Number Total Hours
DATE location of wells hours on to move
(Start) (Gulf of Mexico) Worked-over location rig
4/29/89 ST 26-F 3 1128 30
6/14/89 ST 26-C 2 792 36
7/17/89 ST 26-D 3 1848 42
10/2/89 ST 26-F (return) 2 744 27
11/2/89 ST 26-C (return) 7 1008 21.5
12/14/89 ST 26-D (return) 4 2328 36
3/21/90 ST 26-F (return) 3 1512 33
5/23/90 ST 26-C (return) 2 624 23
6/18/90 ST 26-D (return) 2 744 39
7/19/90 MP 194-A 8 2592 52.5
11/4/90 ST 26-D (return) 5 1128 44
2/12/91 SP 70-C 6 1416 30
4/11/91 SP 70-D 5 1128 52.5
9/10/91 MP 290-B 2 1104 31
10/25/91 SP 62-D 7 2544 52
2/8/92 SP 62-A 4 720 42
TOTAL = 65 21360 591.5
Average move time between platforms = 37 hours (1.5 days)
Average time on platforms = 1335 hours (55.6 days)
14 G. CARTER IADC/SPE 77231

TABLE 6.2
WORKOVER PROGRAM
with MODERN 200 TON RIG
ADRIATIC SEA, ITALY
Platform Number Total Days
DATE location of wells days on to move
(Start) (Adriatic Sea) worked-over location rig
8/24/93 Cervia B 2 74 9
11/7/93 Clara W 3 156 5
4/12/94 Garabaldi A 7 236 4
12/5/94 Antonella 3 176 5
6/1/95 Emma 8 295 3
3/23/96 Ago B 2 197 4
10/5/96 PC 80 2 144 8
2/27/97 Garabaldi B 7 210 5
10/4/97 Ago A 7 240 3
TOTAL = 41 1728 46
Average move time between platforms = 5 days
Average time on platforms = 192 days

TABLE 6.3
WORKOVER PROGRAM
With MODERN 500 TON RIG
TRINIDAD
Platform Number Total Days
DATE Location of wells drilled/ days on to move
(Start) (Trinidad) worked-over location Rig
11/19/97 IMMORTELLE 14 361 8.1
11/14/98 MOHOGANY 3 23 9.1
TOTAL = 17 384 17.2
Average move time between platforms = 8.6 days
Average time on platforms = 192 days