Accurate Daily Drilling Reports (DDR) are essential for optimizing drilling operations, tracking costs, and ensuring project efficiency. However, a variety of challenges persist in the way DDRs are recorded, standardized, and used for decision-making. In this blog, we’ll explore the most common pitfalls in DDR reporting and how companies can improve their data collection and cost tracking.
1. Lack of Standardization in Reporting
One of the biggest issues in DDRs is the inconsistency in report formats. Many rigs and drilling contractors have their own ways of recording data, leading to differences in terminology and missing key operational details. For instance, one rig might report, “TOOH f/xxx to BHA,” while another writes, “TOOH for DTF f/xxx.” These inconsistencies make it difficult to compare performance across different wells and rigs.
Without a standardized format for trips, drilling, rig moves, and downtime, cross-referencing and troubleshooting issues become much harder. A uniform approach to reporting would allow teams to analyze performance trends, identify inefficiencies, and make data-driven decisions.
2. Missing or Incomplete Data
Many reports lack critical details that could provide valuable insights into drilling performance and cost tracking. Entries such as “back ream out hole” without additional parameters leave room for ambiguity. This missing information can make it difficult to determine why one rig or well performs more efficiently than another.
If detailed data were included—such as depth, torque, ROP, mud properties, and pressure parameters—it would be easier to assess whether additional time taken was due to mechanical issues, formation changes, or inefficiencies in operations.
3. The Challenge of Cost Tracking
Cost tracking is a significant issue in drilling operations. Discrepancies arise when end-of-well (EOW) costs do not align with actual vendor invoices due to missing or inaccurate field entries. Often, costs are tracked manually, and invoice details are not consistently recorded in the DDR. This leads to time-consuming efforts in reconciling expenses, tracking down missing invoices, and managing monthly billing sheets.
A potential solution is implementing a cost controller role within the drilling department. This individual can serve as a link between accounting, procurement, and drilling engineers to ensure that costs are accurately recorded and allocated. Additionally, every vendor invoice should include detailed descriptions and ticket numbers to facilitate cost verification at the field level.
4. Non-Productive Time (NPT) Billing Discrepancies
Many operators fail to capture and bill back Non-Productive Time (NPT) costs to contractors. A lack of detailed explanations in DDRs often results in operators absorbing costs that should have been allocated to service providers. Properly documenting reasons for NPT and associating them with specific vendors or service providers can help recover costs and improve accountability.
5. Data Accuracy and Input Consistency
Field personnel often enter DDR data inconsistently. Some include excessive details, while others provide only minimal information. This inconsistency stems from differences in experience levels, training, and attitudes toward report accuracy. Unfortunately, many rig workers view DDRs as just another task rather than a critical component of operational analysis.
Office teams and management, however, rely on these reports for decision-making and cost control. Having a structured approach with defined fields and required inputs can help enforce consistency and improve overall reporting accuracy.
6. Choosing the Right DDR Software
Selecting the best DDR software can have a significant impact on data entry efficiency and accuracy. Industry professionals have varying opinions on different DDR platforms:
- Peloton / WellView – Reporting, cost tracking, and ease of use.
- Quorum / WellEZ – Generally regarded as less user-friendly.
- Mi4/Rig Reports – Cost effective & easy to use
- Open-Well – A alternative with functional reporting features.
- RIM-Base – Another effective system, depending on specific operator needs.
An ideal DDR system should allow for easy searchability by vendor, cost tracking with minimal variance (ideally within 5%), and the ability to share reports with joint venture partners. It should also provide quick access to critical drilling parameters such as ROP, mud motor and MWD hours, casing and cementing details, BHA configurations, and MPD applied pressures.
7. The Burden of Data Corrections
Another major challenge is correcting incorrect data entries. Often, drilling engineers and cost controllers must spend time going back through reports to fix errors or reconcile past discrepancies. This adds to the administrative workload and can cause delays in decision-making.
One way to mitigate this issue is to implement a review process where a cost controller and drilling engineer verify DDR data before finalizing reports. This additional step ensures greater accuracy and reduces the risk of costly mistakes down the line.
Conclusion
DDR data entry and cost tracking are vital components of drilling efficiency and cost control, yet they are often plagued by inconsistencies, missing data, and inaccurate cost allocations. By enforcing standardized reporting formats, improving data input consistency, implementing real-time cost tracking measures, and selecting the right DDR software, oil and gas operators can significantly enhance the accuracy and usability of drilling reports.
A well-structured DDR process not only reduces operational inefficiencies but also improves cost control, leading to better financial outcomes for operators and contractors alike.
What challenges have you faced with DDR data entry and cost tracking? Share your thoughts in the comments below!
