Talk:Drilling rig

message: Can somebody write articles on these companies - Blastcube 07:37, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Articles needed

message: *Drill_bit_tricone_new.jpg (Drilling bits)
*minipiling.JPG (Minipiling drilling rig)
*MC Drill Rig.jpg (Multi-combination drilling rig, capable of both diamond and RC drilling)
It would be good to get a higher resolution image of a drill bit from an RC rig and a diamond rig. The image here is a less commonly used diamond drill bit and image resolution is very low, unfortunately - Blastcube 07:37, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Images which need articles

message: Article currently reads:
"Diamond drilling is much slower than reverse circulation (RC) drilling due to the hardness of the ground being drilled. Drilling of 1200 to 1800 metres is common and at these depths, ground is mainly hard rock. Diamond rigs need to drill slowly to lengthen the life of drill bits and rods, which are very expensive."
My expertise is in oilwell drilling technology, but I would think what the "core-drilling" industry calls "Diamond Drilling" is slower solely because of "the hardness of the ground being drilled."  Reverse circulation per se has nothing to do with it, but may be a better method for other reasons at the deeper depths.  (However, if water or mud is being used, the additional head of the liquid in the annular area does indeed change the stress conditions at the bottom of the hole -- possibly enough to cause the rock failure mode to become plastic rather than elastic -- and can slow down penetration rate.  But this effect is trivial with air as the circulating fluid.)
Diamond bits are more expensive than milled-cutter steel bits, but are the rods also "very expensive" enough to mandate drilling slowly (e.g., to minimize external wear)?  I wouldn't think so unless we're talking about very high RPM in the other drilling applications.  In any event, the optimum RPM and WOB (weight-on-bit) in hard and abrasive rocks probably are different from those used in softer rock.  Again I suspect "Diamond rigs" drill slowly because the rock is hard and not for any other reason.
Also, in oilwell drilling the following terminology is used:
1) Conventional circulation: Mud down the drill pipe and up the borehole annulus
2) Reverse circulation: Mud down the borehold annulus and up the drill pipe.  This is rarely used as a drilling technique because of need for a special rotating pressure pack-off at the surface and danger of the drill pipe becoming plugged with rock cuttings.
I'll clarify this eventually in the main article.
Finally, the drill "rods" the article describes with the drilling fluid going up or down in a dual-walled tube would be called "concentric drill pipe" in the oilwell drilling industry -- but is rarely used.
Irv Smith —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Casey56 (talk • contribs) 17:23, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Diamond drilling vs RC 

message: It is a little unclear to me what is described in the article as RC drilling, maybe this is a regional thing? It sounds similar to what I know as dual-wall percussion hammer drilling with reverse circulation. To me, reverse circulation is a term which describes merely the direction of flow of the drilling fluid/air, as Irv writes. It would be great if whoever wrote the section could take another stab to explain it better since it looks very interesting. Anyway, all in all, the entire drill(ing) rig article needs mucho helpo.  Drillerguy 22:51, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  RC Drilling or dual-wall percussion hammer RC drilling? 

message: Borehole, water well, etc. could use help from a variety of perspectives. If you are contributing here, please have a look at those articles as well. Thanks! Drillerguy 05:32, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Related articles need help

message: A total layman here. Section "History", text "Reverse Circulation RC drills" - the "RC" there is a wikilink, to disambiguation page with lots of stuff that does not seems connected in any way to this. Is it just an abbreviation for "Reverse Circulation"? Why make it a link then? Or does it mean something else - is the drill RC controlled? In the former case it could be non-link in () brackets and maybe a link to here could be added to the disambiguation page instead. In the latter, link to the exact page would be better than disambiguation. Unfortunately I don't know a thing about this, or I would correct that myself...  VladimirSlavik (talk) 20:57, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "RC" stands for? 

message: The image from China is not an oil well. Its a salt mine. If you click the picture the one who took the photograph admits its from a salt museum.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.36.75.241 (talk) 01:50, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mobil Drilling Rig 

message: There is no section in the page detailing the drills used for seismic exploration.  I was just wondering if someone who knew about seismic exploration could do a section on it.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.144.179.34 (talk) 03:24, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reflection Seismology 

message: Maybe good image for the article? --Snek01 (talk) 19:22, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure. However I wouldn't be surprised if some jurisdictions allowed it and others didn't. -- Derek Ross | Talk 00:17, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image 

message: Can some knowledgeable person kindly fix the following oxymoronic expression in the article:
Percussion rotary air blast drilling (RAB)
RAB drilling is used most frequently in the mineral exploration industry. (This tool is also known as a Down-The-Hole Drill.) The drill uses a pneumatic reciprocating piston-driven 'hammer' to energetically drive a heavy drill bit into the rock. The drill bit is hollow, solid steel... To my layman's eyes, it cannot be both hollow and solid, and this needs to be clarified. Totally ignorant myself, sorry... Nick Michael (talk) 09:57, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oxymoron 

message: I think the section "water well drilling" should be changed into "water well drilling rigs". Because the former is a way of drilling or a aplication of drilling rig, the last is a kind of drilling rig machine. And the tittle "drilling rig" is a machinery noun.
Besides, the classification of drilling rig is not sufficient to contain all classification conditions. The section"By the applications" should contains water well drilling rig, mining drilling rig. The section "mobile drilling rig" should be classificated by the chassis. --Loney tulip (talk) 06:08, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article layout and section should be modified 

message: The file :File:Labeled oil derrick.JPG, used on this page, has been deleted from Wikimedia Commons and re-uploaded at :File:Labeled oil derrick.JPG. It should be reviewed to determine if it is compliant with this project's non-free content policy, or else should be deleted and removed from this page. If no action is taken, it will be deleted after 7 days.  Commons fair use upload bot (talk) 06:55, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fair use candidate from Commons: [[:File:Labeled oil derrick.JPG]] 

message: The unsourced section Drilling_rig#Water_well_drilling appears to be created by a user for promotional purposes. See contribs from Crushdrilling, Special:Contributions/Crushdrilling and http://www.suncoenergygroup.com/drilling%20rigs.htm . Should I move to delete that section?
Nfette (talk) 21:30, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ad section? 

message: Hello, I have been reading this article while checking for more edits that need to be made for an editing course I am taking in College.  I have noticed very little issues with the content and style of this article.  I can thank all of you editors for this.  This is my final post regarding the current state of the article.  The article has very few copyediting problems within it but has an overwhelming amount of different subheadings with a large amount of information regarding all the different types of drilling.  Due to this, I believe that some of the content after the different forms of drilling could be removed to keep the article focused on different types of drilling rigs.  The section labeled "Limits of Technology" and all the sections following this section and before the reference section, should be removed because it is not relevant to the vast majority of the article that came prior.  This information could go better in an article referring to changes in drilling techniques.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:49, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Certain Sections not needed 

message: The statement that "technically there is no limitation on depth" is misleading at best. There are, in fact, many technical limitations of depth, including rig design, cable spool capacity, cable load limits, cable stretch, gear ratio changes as more cable is added to a drum, and diminishing drill speed with increasing depth. The statement is true only as a hypothetical, which makes it meaningless. The same way that saying a Ford F150 truck is unlimited in its range because in runs on gas and there is no limit to the size of the fuel supply. Vangelysian (talk) 02:23, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cable tool