S

C
H
L
U
M
B
E
R
G
E
R

O
I
L
F
I
E
L
D

R
E
V
I
E
W
W
I
N
T
E
R

1
9
9
8
V
O
L
U
M
E

1
0


N
U
M
B
E
R

4
Winter 1998
Integrated Drilling Software
Multilateral Well Technology
Formation Evaluation While Drilling
Annular Pressure While Drilling
Oilfield Review
Did you know that
Oileld Reviewcan
be found on-line?
Point your browser to
www.connect.slb.com to nd:
technical presentations, forums and
publications, including Oileld Review
detailed service information,
applications and case studies
log interpretation charts and
nonexclusive seismic maps
an oileld dictionary, mnemonics
database and other oileld links
location and telephone directory
DataLink* secure data transfer
InterACT* real-time data transmission
from wellsites
SuperVision* project monitoring.
Connect Schlumberger is the Internet
communications resource for Schlumberger
clients. Updated daily, this password-protected
interface is growing rapidly, providing timely
and interactive access to the information, data
and tools needed by the E&P industry.
You can also visit the public
Schlumberger Web site at
www.slb.com.
* Mark of Schlumberger
A decade ago, I introduced Schlumberger Oilfield Review
as a multidisciplinary, quarterly journal dedicated to
communicating the latest advances in E&P technology.
Today, Oilfield Review continues to function as a techni-
cal forum, focusing on timely, relevant topics of interest
to oilfield professionalsboth specialists and generalists.
With 2400 pages published to date, this issue completes
the journals tenth year. Total circulation worldwide has
reached 23,000 per issue. In addition to Schlumbergers
technical community, more than 11,000 oil and gas com-
pany technical experts and executives receive the publica-
tion, along with several hundred consultants and univer-
sity professors, governmental agencies and libraries.
Like Schlumberger itself, the flavor of Oilfield Review
has been and remains international and multicultural,
with direct involvement and participation by our oilfield
clients. To date, 345 client experts, representing 121 oil
and gas companies and their affiliates, have contributed
to Oilfield Review articles. Underscoring a commitment
to present global viewpoints and technological successes,
Schlumberger authorship has been almost evenly divided
between the western hemisphere (398) and the eastern
hemisphere (355).
This milestone comes at a time when the oil and gas
industry has, perhaps, the greatest need to access emerg-
ing technology. During periods of depressed oil prices,
global economic uncertainty, industry consolidation and
E&P spending cutbacks, cost-effective technologies pro-
vide a clear path to improve oilfield efficiency. Here at
Schlumberger, we maintain an unwaivering commitment
to technology development, supported by R&D programs
that generate the greatest value for operators.
The technology of the 1990s has had a profound impact
on how reservoirs are discovered, developed and pro-
duced. Individual technical innovations have changed the
face of the industry. Time-lapse, 4D seismic acquisition
can characterize changes in the reservoir over time,
providing new opportunities for enhanced recovery effi-
ciency. Great strides have been made in processing and
interpreting data that feed advanced reservoir models and
simulators. Data management, combined with the latest
information technology tools, has formed a foundation
for knowledge management. Directional drilling, logging-
while-drilling and measurements-while-drilling techniques
for extended-reach, horizontal and multilateral wells facil-
itate reservoir access and improve drainage. New-genera-
tion rigs drastically reduce drilling time and permit cost-
effective operations in frontier areas, such as deep water.
New chemistry, additives and total fluids management
have improved the efficiency of drilling muds, cements,
and completion and stimulation fluids. New perforating
techniques reduce formation damage while expanding
wellbore flow area. Compact, reliable platforms of inte-
grated sensors for openhole and cased-hole logging yield
better answer products and represent a quantum advance
in imaging and multiphase fluid-flow determination.
Permanent monitoring systems and intelligent comple-
tions promise to expand real-time decision-making to help
enhance productivity and optimize reservoir performance,
while limiting the need for well interventions. When reme-
dial actions are required, coiled tubing permits cost-effec-
tive reentry drilling and a host of workover options based
on advanced downhole tool technology.
Improvements have also been made in the safety of
oilfield operations and in protection of the environment
through developments in rig automation, environmentally
friendly products, improved disposal methods and
decreased reliance on radioactive sources.
Capitalizing on synergies across disciplines, integrated
servicesused only in isolated cases ten years agoare
now commonplace. Technology application has been aided
by teamwork between operators and service companies
that is best illustrated by business relationships such as
alliances and partnerships.
Each of these topics, plus numerous others, has been
discussed in Oilfield Review during the past decade. We
look forward with enthusiasm to the next ten years
and the innovative oilfield technologies that await us.
D. Euan Baird
Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
Schlumberger Limited
Ten Years of Technical Communication
Oilfield Review is published quarterly by Schlumberger to communicate
technical advances in finding and producing hydrocarbons to oilfield
professionals. Oilfield Review is distributed by Schlumberger to its
employees and clients.
Contributors listed with only geographic location are employees of
Schlumberger or its affiliates.
1998 Schlumberger. All rights reserved. No part of this publication
may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any
form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording
or otherwise without the prior written permission of the publisher.
Address editorial correspondence to:
Oilfield Review
225 Schlumberger Drive
Sugar Land, Texas 77478 USA
(1) 281-285-8424
Fax: (1) 281-285-8519
E-mail: [email protected]
Address distribution inquiries to:
Mark E. Teel
(1) 281-285-8434
Fax: (1) 281-285-8519
E-mail: [email protected]
Oilfield Review subscriptions are available from:
Oilfield Review Services
Barbour Square, High Street
Tattenhall, Chester CH3 9RF England
(44) 1829-770569
Fax: (44) 1829-771354
E-mail: [email protected]
Annual subscriptions, including postage, are
160.00 US dollars, subject to exchange rate fluctuations.
Executive Editor
Denny OBrien
Senior Production Editor
Mark E. Teel
Senior Editor
Lisa Stewart
Editors
Russel C. Hertzog
Gretchen M. Gillis
David E. Bergt
Contributing Editors
Rana Rottenberg
Dev George
Illustration
Tom McNeff
Mike Messinger
George Stewart
Design
Herring Design
Printing
Wetmore Printing Company, USA
Advisory Panel
Terry Adams
Azerbaijan International
Operating Co., Baku
Syed A. Ali
Chevron Production Co.
New Orleans, Louisiana, USA
Antongiulio Alborghetti
Agip S.p.A
Milan, Italy
Svend Aage Andersen
Maersk Oil Qatar AS
Doha, State of Qatar
Michael Fetkovich
Phillips Petroleum Co.
Bartlesville, Oklahoma, USA
George King
Amoco
Tulsa, Oklahoma
David Patrick Murphy
Shell E&P Company
Houston, Texas, USA
Richard Woodhouse
Independent consultant
Surrey, England
Winter 1998
Volume 10
Number 4
Schlumberger
40 Using Downhole Annular Pressure Measurements
to Improve Drilling Performance
A simple concept like measuring pressure downhole can profoundly impact a broad
range of applications. Combined with other well parameters, these measurements
are used to monitor borehole fluid conditions, which leads to early detection of
problems such as stuck tools, annulus packoff, lost circulation and fluid influx.
Monitoring annular pressure at the drilling bit also provides accurate formation
stress measurements, making the process of drilling ahead safer and more exact.
14 Key Issues in Multilateral Technology
Wellbores with mutiple forked branches and laterals reduce overall costs,
increase production and improve reservoir drainage. These types of wells
can increase recoverable reserves, make reservoirs easier to manage, and
are growing in popularity. However, constructing complicated well profiles is
challenging and risky. The latest applications and system developments are
convincing operators that multilateral advantages outweigh the disadvantages.
2 Planning and Drilling Wells in the Next Millenium
Because of recent developments in integrated computing, the initiation and
implemention of well construction processes is moving from a step-wise
method to a more interactive approach By sharing a database, teams of
multidisciplinary professionals can increase efficiency and reduce cycle
times. During operational phases, specialized software modules and systems
reduce cost and risk by allowing plans to be easily amended on the fly.
29 Pushing the Limits of Formation Evaluation While Drilling
Logging measurements taken while drilling reveal previously elusive formation
characteristics. Real-time resistivity and density readings made at a variety of
investigation depths and azimuths are the cornerstons of this new formation
evaluation capability. These measurements supply interpreters with data to
assess reservoir quality and structure in spite of filtrate invasion, formation dip,
resistivity anisotropy and thin beds, and from smaller hole sizes than ever before.
56 Contributors
58 Coming in Oilfield Reviewand 1998 Index
Oilfield ReviewServices and MORA Order Form (inside back cover)
Oilfield Review
1
Planning and Drilling Wells
in the Next Millennium
For help in preparation of this article, thanks to Mark
Burgoyne, Bobbie Ireland, Joe Jacquot, Mark Lochmann
and Victor Ward, GeoQuest, Houston, Texas; and Yves
Morel, Dowell, Clamart, France.
CemCADE, DESIGN-EXECUTE-EVALUATE, Drilling Ofce,
DrillSAFE, Finder, GeoFrame, GeoViz, PowerPlan,
PowerPulse, QLA, SideKick, TDAS (Tubular Design and
Analysis System), WellTRAK and WEST (Wellbore
Simulated Temperatures) are marks of Schlumberger.
UNIX is a mark of X/Open Company Limited. Windows NT,
Windows 95 and Windows 98 are marks of Microsoft
Corporation.
Computing technology is changing the way engineers and geoscientists work
together to plan and drill wells interactively. Project teams can now use specially
designed software to capture best practices and integrate all available data.
The results are optimized drilling and improvements in cost control, safety and efciency.
Until recently, exploration and production (E&P)
projects that led to drilling a well were viewed
as a sequential series of separate tasks rather
than as a continuum, or a smooth workow, and
seldom involved drilling engineers. Geologists
generated subsurface maps using formation
tops picked from well logs. Geophysicists
mapped seismic data to confirm, refine or
expand the geological interpretation. Once a
drilling target was selected by the geologist and
geophysicist, the location was provided to the
drilling engineer to begin planning and designing
the well. In this manner, the project was handed
off from one person to the next as tasks were
completed without necessarily sharing the rele-
vant data that supported critical interpretations
and decisions. In fact, databases were generally
discipline-specic, incompatible and unable to
share or exchange data readily.
Procedures for interpreting well logs or seis-
mic data, generating maps, performing log and
engineering calculations, and planning well con-
struction varied from one professional to the
next. The lack of interaction and continuity
among project participants often resulted in
interpretations and methods that were not chal-
lenged or tested, and solutions that sometimes
involved estimates and compromises rather than
rigorous technical analysis. Industry newcomers
faced a steep learning curve until they achieved
sufcient training or experience to decide for
themselves how to accomplish critical, often
interpretive tasks correctly.
In those days, iteration and multiple sce-
nario planning were not performed unless a par-
ticularly costly or high-profile project was
involved. The lack of routine iteration was in
Franois Clouzeau
Gilles Michel
Diane Neff
Graham Ritchie
Houston, Texas, USA
Randy Hansen
Dominic McCann
Sugar Land, Texas
Laurent Prouvost
Clamart, France
3 Winter 1998
4
part a consequence of the difficulty and time
necessary to revise and reproduce hand-drafted
maps and well plans. Problems may be com-
pounded in the stepwise approach to projects if
the objectives of geologists and geophysicists
differ from those of drilling engineers. This lack
of teamwork ultimately means that reserves
may be missed because of poor collective
understanding of assets and effective means of
exploiting them.
Multidisciplinary asset teams are now work-
ing together more effectively to reduce cost, risk
and delay in all aspects of the workow from the
beginning of exploration projects to the end of
the productive life of a eld. This new, optimized
process stems from using integrated software
and a shared database. This change parallels a
trend in the industry toward increased account-
ability of asset team members to manage and
improve asset value.
The increase in teamwork comes at a critical
time. Cost is more of an issue than ever before.
New discoveries are typically smaller and more
subtle. Some of the most promising environ-
ments for exploration and production are harsher
(deep-water and high-pressure, high-tempera-
ture environments, for example). As existing oil
elds mature, recovering the remaining reserves
is increasingly difcult. Operators must leverage
all available intellectual capital and data,
whether historical or real-time, to compete with
other operators and to compensate for depressed
crude oil and natural gas prices.
1
Efciency, cost control and risk reduction in
all phases of the exploration and production
workow, but particularly those that optimize the
drilling process, have the potential to temper
E&P spending. In this article, we focus on the
drilling workow, that is, the portion of the E&P
cycle from identification of a drilling target
through well construction. In the drilling work-
ow, technical integrity, or the use of skills in a
core competence that ensures a high level of per-
formance and adherence to technical standards,
is achieved with the help of software applica-
tions whose algorithms reect the best industry
practices. We begin by examining a traditional
drilling workow and then describe how the pro-
cess has been improved by using integrated soft-
ware to achieve consistently sound results.
Traditional Drilling Workow
As the traditional drilling workow was accom-
plished through a series of disconnected steps,
project participants did not benet from sharing
of data, interpretations and experiences (next
page, top). After geologists and geophysicists
selected a target, engineers assessed the feasi-
bility of drilling to it. If the target were unac-
ceptable from a drilling viewpoint, time-
consuming iterations to settle on a mutually sat-
isfactory target ensued.
Once a satisfactory target had been identi-
ed, engineers calculated pore pressures and
fracture gradients to design the casing program.
These calculations and designs could vary
widely depending on the expertise of the engi-
neer and company policies and procedures.
Typically, the next step would be for engineers or
service companies to design mud and cement
programs on the basis of the operating com-
panys requirements. The input data for these
designs would be given by telephone or on paper
rather than electronically. Again, depending on
the companies and engineers involved, as well
as the drilling environment, engineering prac-
tices varied considerably. Operations proceeded
once permits were obtained and other logistical
arrangements were made.
During drilling operations, real-time data
might have consisted of a daily drilling report and
mud log transmitted by fax or telephone to the
operators drilling department, data not necessar-
ily disseminated to the project geologist, geo-
physicist, petrophysicist or reservoir engineer. If
unanticipated drilling events occurred, the pro-
ject participants would share information and
work together to resolve problems, but real-time
changes involving the entire team were often
impractical given the time constraints and com-
munication tools available. More recently, multi-
disciplinary teamwork and new software tools
have demonstrated the benets of an iterative
method, real-time data sharing and consultation
among project team members.
Ideal Drilling Workow
An optimized workflow allows team members
to collaborate fully without consuming addi-
tional time (next page, bottom). The success of
integrated geological and geophysical (G&G)
software in streamlining exploration has
instilled a desire for a complementary suite of
integrated applications to improve the drilling
workflow. Thus, the ideal process described
next assumes the use of such tools and a com-
mon, shared database.
Geologists and geophysicists select a
drilling target, update their interpretations and
visualize the proposed well trajectory with G&G
interpretation tools. Engineers select a surface
or kickoff location using geological data and
employ drilling engineering tools to design the
optimal well path to satisfy drilling constraints.
Because these processes occur simultaneously
and data and interpretations are shared among
the team members, iterations between geolo-
gists, geophysicists and engineers in selecting
target and surface locations are fewer and
faster than before.
Once the surface location and trajectory have
been decided, the well prognosis for the litho-
logic column, pore pressure and fracture pressure
are determined. This might also require iterations
of the surface location and trajectory to avoid
drilling hazards such as shallow gas or overpres-
sured zones. Next, the engineer designs the cas-
ing program on the basis of geological
interpretations and offset well information.
Service companies can then assist the engineer
with the appropriate drilling mud program,
cementing program and other well construction
services. At the end of the planning phase, the
operator applies for permits and makes logistical
arrangements to commence drilling.
It is during drilling operations that an ideal
workow scenario allows the operator to reap
the considerable benets of data sharing and col-
laboration among the team members. Real-time
updates while drilling help optimize operations,
avoid hazards and anticipate problems as the
entire team works together sharing information.
New real-time data are generated and input into
the database in the appropriate format to update
engineering calculations, so engineers need not
reenter data into different applications at the risk
of data entry errors. As experience grows and
historical data accumulate in the database, the
needs and abilities of geologists, geophysicists
and drilling engineers will be understood better
from the broader perspective of a shared
database. Operations can proceed more ef-
ciently and at lower cost and risk.
1. Close DA and Stelly OV: New Information Systems
Promise the Benets of the Information Age to the
Drilling Industry, paper IADC/SPE 39331, presented at
the IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, Dallas, Texas, USA,
March 3-6, 1998.
Oileld Review
5
Engineering
database
Geological and
geophysical
database
Optimize well
design
Engineering
Discuss well plan; reiterate
process until finished
All Groups
Gather information for
post-drilling review
Engineering
Generate well
trajectory
Geology and Geophysics Geology and Geophysics
Finalize mud and
casing design
Engineering
Reports
Compile and update
reports weekly
Engineering
Finalize economics
and Authorization for
Expenditure (AFE)
Engineering
Preliminary Well Planning Detailed Well Design Drilling Operations Post-drilling
Load well
trajectory
>
Traditional drilling workflow. A linear workflow requires more people and incurs higher cost because of inefficiency in the process. Iteration is time-
consuming and costly, particularly at the stage when drilling target selection occurs. The lack of a shared digital database inhibits integration of data
and interpretations among team members. Integration, in this situation, depends on human interaction as well as duplication of data entry efforts in
incompatible databases.
Retrieve latest
version
Finalize economics
and Authorization for
Expenditure (AFE)
Engineering
Preliminary Well Planning Detailed Well Design Drilling Operations Post-drilling
Project database
Update current
well trajectory
Compile and update
reports
Engineering
Optimize well
design
Engineering
Finalize mud and
casing design
Engineering
Drilling
parameters
Drilling
history
Hazards
3D reservoir
model
Production
history
Structure
Stratigraphy
Prospective
targets
Production
history
Reservoir
property
distributions
Generate well
trajectory
Geology and Geophysics Geology and Geophysics
>
Ideal drilling workow. With team members using the same database and model of the earth, the drilling process becomes less linear. At each point in the
process, validation occurs earlier, saving time and money. Inferior solutions are weeded out early in the process. The use of real-time data allows optimiza-
tion of operations during drilling. After completion of drilling operations, results are readily available in the database to improve subsequent operations.
Winter 1998
Many exploration and production companies
have carefully examined their unique drilling
workow to maximize the productivity of each
multidisciplinary team and the value of each
asset. Schlumberger has worked with a number
of operators to identify the process best suited to
that company and the changes necessary to
achieve it. Several common priorities emerged
from these studies:
The ability to move targets and surveys easily
between G&G and drilling software to nalize
the drilling target early
Standardized survey, well naming and coordi-
nate systems
Three-dimensional workspace and multi-user
access with conferencing exibility so that all
team members, be they at the wellsite, in the
operators ofce or in a service company ofce,
can access data and the latest interpretations
A link between G&G models and well-planning
applications that simplies and speeds changes
to drilling plans in real time, optimizing the well
path and reducing the need to sidetrack
The use of real-time data in application format,
so that data entered in one application are
automatically available in all other applications
An automated process for capturing actual
versus planned results in operational and
nancial parameters
Access to databases using query tools to pro-
mote effective use of data and formal compila-
tion and archiving
The ability to move data easily between multi-
user projects and stand-alone projects.
Technical Hurdles
Integrated software to streamline the drilling
workow is a key to improving the process.
Among the technical hurdles that must be
addressed, perhaps most pressing is the need for
digital data and a database architecture that pro-
motes sharing of data and interpretations for the
duration of a project. The amount and variety of
data used to plan and drill wells are mind-bog-
gling: seismic data, well logs, mud logs, core
samples and their descriptions, drilling fluid
reports, directional surveys, drilling histories and
production histories are but a few examples.
A clear understanding of both the existing
and ideal workows is essential, requiring a time
commitment up front to assess possible scenar-
ios and solutions, such as what software to use,
and the roles and responsibilities of each team
member. Willingness by team members to adapt
and improve can ease the transition from the tra-
ditional method to an improved process using
new software. Many professionals are reluctant
to abandon products with which they are familiar,
even in favor of those that are better integrated.
This is related to another cultural obstacle, a fear
of many professionalsbeing replaced by com-
puters. The reality is that as reserves become
more scarce and difcult to exploit and wells
become more complex (multilateral and
extended-reach wells, for example), multiple
hypotheses or scenarios must be evaluated.
Asset managers need to get more from existing
resources. One solution is to provide better soft-
ware tools that increase the efciency of each
person involved.
Integrated Drilling Software
All software programs, even those performing
common engineering calculations, must be vali-
dated: the underlying algorithms must reflect
appropriate, correct approaches to a given task.
A management system in which the workflow,
software and underlying policies and proce-
dures are sound ensures both technical integrity
and appropriate management of information
used in the system.
Several companies have developed individual
software tools to perform specic tasks in the
drilling workow. Schlumberger also developed a
number of applications to assist with well plan-
ning and design, cementing and other tasks. As
integrated project management became a key
concern, the need to use all the applications and
available data together led GeoQuest to inte-
grate its applications, which are collectively
called the Drilling Ofce system (next page).
More than merely performing specic tasks
and integrating them seamlessly, the Drilling
Ofce system had to meet the Schlumberger
standard of technical integrity, meaning that it
had to meet technical standards of performance,
reliability and robustness for a given project: the
workow, the applications used in the workow,
and the underlying methods and calculations
reect appropriate procedures and technology.
Each application uses validated algorithms for
each task, and within each task a selected pro-
cess or ow reects appropriate technical proce-
dures for performing that task.
The Drilling Ofce suite currently includes:
the PowerPlan modules for well trajectory plan-
ning and design, torque and drag, anticollision
analysis, bottomhole assembly (BHA) design and
hydraulics analysis; the CemCADE tool for
cement design and evaluation; the QLA well log
analysis software; the MudTRAK application for
drilling uids management; the SideKick gas kick
and underbalanced drilling simulator; the TDAS
Tubular Design and Analysis System casing
design system; and the WEST Wellbore
Simulated Temperatures program. Like all
GeoQuest products, the Drilling Ofce system is
Year 2000-ready. Validated by both Schlumberger
and the industry, these applications reect best
practices. The commercial software has been
used extensively within Schlumberger. For exam-
ple, Dowell engineers have used the CemCADE
program for over ten years to design cement jobs
and Anadrill engineers have planned hundreds of
directional wells using PowerPlan modules.
6 Oileld Review
Asset managers need to get more from
existing resources. One solution is to
provide better software tools that increase
the efciency of each person involved.
New applications in development include the
WellTRAK system for well tracking and report-
ing, a unique drilling data management system.
The WellTRAK program is used at the wellsite to
capture drilling data and knowledge. In addition,
it allows actual drilling activities to be tracked
against the original plan so that the project team
can readily identify suboptimal conditions and
unplanned events and their costs. A link
between the WellTRAK program and the Finder
corporate database will provide data manage-
ment tools for well construction data as well as
G&G information. Enhancements are under way
to allow engineering calculations to be updated
and calibrated using operations data while
drilling. Reporting features that ensure compli-
ance with quality control procedures are also
being developed for the software.
These modules can be used as relatively inex-
pensive stand-alone applications or as part of a
fully integrated system that is designed to allow
third-party applications to be linked. The soft-
ware runs on a personal computer (PC) using
Windows NT 4.0 or Windows 98 or 95 (with a
minimum of 64 MB of RAM) and a recommended
processing speed of 166 MHz or greater.
In any software package, user friendliness is
key to acceptance and training. This is particu-
larly true for integrated drilling software because
workow analysis has shown that drilling engi-
neers often use the software intermittently and
have little time to learn new packages. Drilling
Ofce applications follow the standard Windows
look and feel to shorten the learning period and
accommodate cross-disciplinary use. End users
who have worked with only one module can learn
the entire system quickly. The modules will even-
tually have a more common look and feel, which
visually reinforces the movement of data and cal-
culations from one application to another.
The Drilling Ofce suite is based on the
GeoFrame heterogeneous computing environ-
ment that uses the Standard Data Model devel-
oped by the Petrotechnical Open Software
Corporation (POSC). POSC is a nonprot organiza-
tion supported by Schlumberger and other indus-
try sponsors. The Standard Data Model was
initially designed for G&G data, so Schlumberger
had to add the drilling view of data to the model.
The applications in the various domains are
designed to allow end users to access relevant
data without being overwhelmed by data they do
not needdrillers do not see most G&G data
unless they seek them.
Future database functionality will include
improved access privileges, whereby only the
owners of a particular interpretation, the project
geologists, geophysicists and engineers, can
change the interpretation, but the interpreta-
tions appear to others as read only versions.
For example, geophysical interpretations by the
project geophysicist or formation tops edited by
only the geologist can be viewed by well plan-
ners. Versions of interpretations are retained in
the database, so if personnel changes occur dur-
ing a project, the evolution of a particular inter-
pretation can be established and reproduced,
which prevents unnecessary, expensive duplica-
tion of interpretive effort.
j lklkjdl;sdajfaasdhk
sdjhfjsfd fshg sl sh
sdfkiwkhlknahlks s ;gjsdgklsglks
sd gkjsdljdsfldlss s dfjsdldsfkldfdj s lkghsd sjj jhs sd sfdhjg dfsh g
s dfsfd gsdfggfg
sfsfgg fdggfdgsg
fsddggfgsdgsd
dsfsdfgdfg
sdfsdgdsgdgdfg
sdgfdsgdfgfgfgdfs
ss hgfh gfhds s s
sd gsdf g
sdf gfds df sdf
sdf sdf gsdf sdf df s gsfd gfdsgf gsdf gf gdsf gg sgsgsdfsdffsdfgdfs dfsfsddfsfssdfdf
j lklkjdl;sdajfaasdhk sdjhfjsfd fshg sl sh
sdfkiwkhlknahlks s ;gjsdgklsglks
sd gkjsdljdsfldlss s dfjsdldsfkldfdj s lkghsd sjj jhs sd sfdhjg dfsh g
s dfsfd gsdfggfg
sfsfgg fdggfdgsg
fsddggfgsdgsd
dsfsdfgdfg
sdfsdgdsgdgdfg
sdgfdsgdfgfgfgdfs
ss hgfh gfhds s s
sd gsdf g
sdf gfds df sdf
sdf sdf gsdf sdf df s gsfd gfdsgf gsdf gf gdsf gg sgsgsdfsdffsdfgdfs dfsfsddfsfssdfdf
Wellsite database Query tools
Wellbore stability monitoring Casing design
Trajectory planning
Mud and cementing designs Third-party applications
Project database
Master database
Well proposal and drilling policies Basis of design document Programs Operations tracking End of well reports
Planning and Design Execution Evaluation
Knowledge Management and Decision Support Tools
Validate and quality control
Print reports
Capture data
Drilling Office applications
Integrated data and reports
Reports and real-time data
Wellsite
data entry
>
How the Drilling Ofce system works. A master database and integrated software tools are the foundation for Drilling Ofce integrated drilling software.
Links to the wellsite allow real-time data transfer to optimize operations and continuous archiving for future reference. Such a system improves all phases
of the drilling workow from design and planning to execution and evaluation.
7 Winter 1998
Well Logs
Petrophysical Modeling
Drilling Data
Seismic Modeling
Geological Modeling
Classification System
Reservoir Simulations
3D and 4D Seismic Data
Shared Earth Model
>
Shared earth model. A central project database houses the numerical representation of the subsurface, the shared earth model, which is developed from
geological, geophysical, petrophysical and drilling data. The shared earth model is used in the drilling workow to improve drilling planning and operations.
The database can be expanded, and the model enhanced, by adding real-time drilling data.
8 Oileld Review
Changes in the geological interpretation
affect the well design, so a link has been devel-
oped in the Drilling Ofce system between well
design steps and the shared earth model. The
shared earth model is a concise numerical repre-
sentation of the subsurface based on geological,
geophysical and petrophysical data and models
or simulations generated from them (previous
page).
2
Such models, however, are inherently
uncertain because of limited subsurface data,
measurement errors and, in some cases, incor-
rect models. Integrated software, the appropriate
database and a shared earth model allow real-
time ow of data and interpretations to improve
decision-making during planning and operations.
The shared earth model affects many areas of
well planning, including selection of surface
location, trajectory design, pore pressure predic-
tion and wellbore stability, to name a few. The
use of shared earth models for well planning has
already had a positive impact in a number of eld
development projects by reducing drilling costs
due to wellbore instability and stuck pipe. The
pending release of GeoFrame version 3.6 will, for
the rst time, give drilling professionals using the
Drilling Ofce suite on a PC direct access to the
shared earth model developed by geoscientists
on UNIX workstations to improve the drilling
planning and operations workow.
Implementing Integrated Drilling Software
As is true of any fundamental change in how
something is done, integrated drilling software is
not a panacea. This new software consists of a
set of tools, but does not automatically dictate a
particular workow. Therefore, to realize the
maximum benet from the Drilling Ofce system,
companies that adopt the system must evaluate
their procedures critically and carefully. A given
workflow can be modified to suit individual
requirements because the software is modular
and exible. In addition, if the entire suite of
applications is not needed, a particular module
can be used, such as a single application on a
stand-alone computer at the wellsite. The soft-
ware facilitates the iterative nature of teamwork
to achieve the best planning and real-time opti-
mization of operations. Iterative and collabora-
tive project planning and execution are enhanced
by making individual applications compatible, as
the following generic case study illustrates.
3
At the start of the drilling workow, geosci-
entists typically identify drilling targets on the
basis of attractive potential pay rather than the
feasibility of actually drilling to the target, which
is the primary concern of the planning engineer
(above left). With properly integrated applica-
tions, geological and geophysical data and inter-
pretations in a project database are accessed
with software that generates a preliminary well
trajectory to select a drillable target. In the past,
selecting the optimal drillable target from a num-
ber of choices was a time-consuming process.
With integrated software and a shared database,
iterations between engineers and geoscientists
are reduced in number and duration while
achieving superior results (above right).
Target 1
Target 2
>
Drilling target selection. Visualization software is used to overlay well
paths on three-dimensional geological or geophysical interpretations.
In this example from the West Cameron area of the Gulf of Mexico, the
trajectory intersects two attractive targets in the surface interpreted
from seismic data.
Target 1
Target 2
>
Well design visualization. Visualization software is used with the Drilling
Ofce PowerPlan tool to overlay a well design on a geological or geophysi-
cal interpretation. In this example from the West Cameron area of the Gulf of
Mexico, the trajectory selected by geoscientists (blue) has been modied by
the planning engineer to create a drillable trajectory (yellow) to both targets.
2. Beamer A, Bryant I, Denver L, Saeedi J, Verma V, Mead
P, Morgan C, Rossi D and Sharma S: From Pore to
Pipeline, Field-Scale Solutions, Oileld Review 10, no. 2
(Summer 1998): 2-19.
3. McCann DP, Ritchie GM and Ward VL: The Integrated
Solution: New System Improves Efciency of Drilling
Planning and Monitoring, paper IADC/SPE 39332, pre-
sented at the IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, Dallas,
Texas, USA, March 3-6, 1998.
9 Winter 1998
Traveling cylinder
90
10
30
60
70
90
100
120
140
150
160
170
180
190
220
230
260
270
280
290
300
310
320
340
350
Survey Q
Survey A
Survey B
Survey C
Survey E
Survey J
Survey K
Survey Q
Survey T
Survey P
Survey 0
Survey M
Survey L
Survey D
Survey N
North
Once a target has been selected, the optimal
well design is created. The well design applica-
tion in the PowerPlan module uses input design
constraints to rapidly create both plan view and
vertical section plots. The design includes anno-
tations of formation tops, casing seats and
other critical points (left).
4
Collision avoidance is
achieved through the use of the Close Approach
module and survey data from offset wells for
anticollision analysis (below left). These appli-
cations, along with the ones that follow, are
used to create drilling proposals quickly. If the
area of the well target can be enlarged without
compromising well objectives, further cost sav-
ings might ensue.
Information about offset wells is accessible
in the database and used to improve drilling per-
formance in successive wells. BHA selection is
optimized during initial planning or during drilling
by using the BHA Editor and DrillSAFE Drillstring
Forces Analysis modules in the PowerPlan appli-
cation (next page, top). In complex wells, such as
extended-reach drilling situations, BHA perfor-
mance is especially important to the success of
the operation. The DrillSAFE module is routinely
used for both torque-and-drag analysis and BHA
tendency, including computing build and turn
rates according to the hardness and other char-
acteristics of formations drilled. Output from the
DrillSAFE module is graphical and numerical and
capitalizes on both historical and real-time data.
With the PowerPlan Hydraulics application,
drilling experience can be used to improve hole
cleaning and circulating hydraulics (next page,
bottom). Circulating pressure losses and equiva-
lent circulating densities are calculated, which
allows bit parameters, motor performance and
hole cleaning to be optimized using the modules
validated algorithms (see Using Downhole
Annular Pressure Measurements to Improve
Drilling Performance, page 40).
5
>
Anticollision traveling cylinder plot. A traveling cylinder map generated using the PowerPlan
anticollision tool is valuable for both planning and drilling wells in densely drilled areas, such as
from an offshore platform. The planned or actual subject survey is always at the center of the plot
and the offset wellbores (red lines) show the distance and direction from the subject well. Real-time
directional survey measurements while drilling are used to update the map and reduce the risk of
collision with existing wells.
Plan view
Vertical
section view
< Directional well design. Drilling tools provide
detailed trajectory information. Graphical output
includes plan and vertical section views of the
well trajectory. Drilling Ofce applications have
a look that is similar to common spreadsheet
applications, making them user friendly.
4. Chapman CD: The PowerPlan System Integrated Drilling
Planning: The Key to Optimization, Petroleum Engineer
International 71 (September 1998): 87-95.
5. Chapman, reference 4.
10 Oileld Review
>
>
Bottomhole assemblies. The BHA Editor can be used for well planning. During drilling operations, real-time data allow
drillers to optimize BHA configuration and performance. The up-to-date information and new software capabilities are
especially useful in complicated drilling situations, such as extended-reach drilling. In this view of the BHA Editor screen,
the driller displays a schematic diagram of the BHA in use (center) and its performance specifications (right). In the left
part of the view, the driller navigates to detailed views of the drillstring.
>
Wellbore hydraulics. The Drilling Ofce system contains a wellbore hydraulics module that can help improve
hydraulics planning and operations. The wellbore hydraulics tool allows calculation of pressure loss (left), equivalent
circulating density, and motor performance (right) and hole cleaning analysis.
11 Winter 1998
When well construction begins, real-time
data are available to all team members so that
operations are optimized and hazards are antici-
pated and avoided. The well design can be mod-
ied if predrill predictions are not correct, such as
when a formation top associated with a casing
point is higher or lower than predicted.
Planning might involve a spectrum of possi-
bilities, whereas operations occur within a lim-
ited range of conditions. Individual modules of
integrated drilling software make use of different
algorithms depending on the operational ranges
or assumptions. Real-time changes during opera-
tions are incorporated readily into plans to
improve predictions and anticipate potential
problems. For example, as a mud system changes
while drilling, hydraulics calculations incorporate
its variations. Real-time torque-and-drag data
allow drillers to make more accurate predictions
ahead of the bit. The well trajectory can be mod-
ied and performance of the BHA optimized by
incorporating real-time data into modeling appli-
cations for calibration purposes.
In addition to core drilling applications,
there is a need for integrated petrophysical
analysis, casing and cementing design and tem-
perature simulation. Interactive well log analy-
sis is performed using the QLA Well Log
Analysis module. The TDAS application includes
an expert system that guides engineers to
quickly design the lowest cost casing or tubing
string from available inventory using an overall
corporate design philosophy. The TDAS applica-
tion also ensures that casing designs meet
American Petroleum Institute (API) standards
and International Organization for Standards
(ISO) criteria. The CemCADE cementing soft-
ware helps engineers plan successful cement-
ing jobs from large-diameter surface casing to
the deepest liner. Efficient scenario planning
reduces waiting-on-cement time, avoids reme-
dial cementing and ensures well safety.
For planning and drilling high-pressure, high-
temperature (HPHT) wells, the Drilling Ofce sys-
tem includes advanced simulators for gas kick
and temperature modeling, critical aspects for
success in these wells.
6
The gas-kick simulator
was the result of extensive research by
Schlumberger and BP International Ltd. The pro-
ject was initiated by the UK Health and Safety
Executive (HSE) Offshore Safety Division follow-
ing a number of well-control incidents on HPHT
wells. Anadrill commercialized the resulting soft-
ware as the SideKick program. Additional devel-
opment was funded by the European Union
Thermie program. The SideKick simulator models
inuxes, such as gas kicks, and can evaluate risk,
design casing programs and plan procedures for
controlling HPHT wells.
7
The WEST program
improves temperature predictions by engineers
during drilling and cementing operations.
Complex wells constitute perhaps 20 to 30%
of total wells drilled, and the benefits
of teamwork and data sharing in these cases are
obvious. Simpler wells can also be improved,
however. A major benet of integrated software
and streamlined workflows can be achieved
through an assembly-line approach to the simpler
wells: the planning cycle is shortened, work
becomes consistent and repeatable, productivity
and cost savings increase dramatically. The work
becomes less of an art and more of a streamlined
operation, with greater efciency, simplicity and
reliability. This shortens the drilling time-depth
curve and ultimately reduces cost per barrel. By
mastering simple, routine operations, engineers
can then concentrate on improving processes,
procedures and ways of operating (below).
For example, an engineer developing a
mature oil eld might realize that a single multi-
lateral well is a cost-effective replacement for
numerous vertical holes, or that it is possible to
reduce the number of casing strings (see Key
Issues in Multilateral Technology, page 14). The
ability to study scenarios and improve on tradi-
tional approaches leads to reduced cost and risk
in both simple and complicated situations.
EVALUATE
EXECUTE
DESIGN
Conceptual
design
Detailed
design and
planning
Rig site
continuous
improvement
>
DESIGN-EXECUTE-EVALUATE. Project teams develop a learning culture by constantly
improving planning and operations. Integrated drilling software and a shared database
support such continuous improvement. By working together and understanding each others
roles better, geoscientists and engineers increase efciency and reduce cost and risk.
6. For more on use of the SideKick simulator in HPHT wells:
Adamson K, Birch G, Gao E, Hand S, Macdonald C, Mack
D and Quadri A: High-Pressure, High-Temperature Well
Construction, Oileld Review 10, no. 2 (Summer 1998):
36-49; and Rezmer-Cooper IM, James JP, Fitzgerald P,
Johnson AB, Davies DH, Frigaard IA, Cooper S, Luo Y and
Bern P: Complex Well Control Events Accurately Repre-
sented by an Advanced Gas Kick Simulator, paper SPE
36829, presented at the SPE European Petroleum
Conference, Milan, Italy, October 22-24, 1996.
7. MacAndrew R, Parry N, Prieur J-M, Wiggelman J,
Diggins E, Guicheney P, Cameron D and Stewart A:
Drilling and Testing Hot, High-Pressure Wells,
Oileld Review 5, no. 2/3 (April/July 1993): 15-32.
12 Oileld Review
Companies that incorporate the Drilling Ofce
system in their technical computing strategies
will benet from better data management, data
integration and evolving computing standards.
Integrated drilling software will improve planning
and execution of drilling operations by reducing
error and redundancy in the workow. The com-
panies can also expect to manage, use, integrate
and understand their data better.
A major oil company has tested the Drilling
Office tool suite and provided feedback to
GeoQuest developers. The company is adopting
the system as part of their internal computing ini-
tiative. Several E&P companies seek to buy rather
than develop their own applications for general,
mainstream needs and to develop proprietary
software only for rare cases of unique needs. For
such companies, the Drilling Ofce system will
meet the need for both general drilling planning
needs and specialized real-time calculations.
Looking Ahead
Integrated software for drilling planning and
operations is a response to the need for products
that support integrated, multidisciplinary work-
ows and todays more exacting requirements for
design and accurate placement of wells. Ideally,
such software should follow the drilling process
naturally, have a single database for each project
and house applications that represent the best
practices of the industry. Schlumberger will con-
tinue to enhance the capabilities of the Drilling
Ofce system. In contrast to stand-alone applica-
tions that focus on individual tasks, the most
powerful drilling software will integrate and
unify tasks into smooth processes. As asset
teams focus more on the overall process at hand,
the value of corporate assets, that is, reserves in
oil and gas elds, will be maximized (above).
As the use of integrated drilling software
increases, members of project teams will better
understand each others disciplines and roles
through the new perspective of a shared
database. By implementing the use of integrated
software whose technical integrity has been
clearly demonstrated at each stage of the work-
ow, companies can document their compliance
with regulatory requirements, such as zonal iso-
lation of water from hydrocarbons or shallow gas
zones, more readily.
Just as integrated drilling software provides
a seamless link back to geological and geophysi-
cal exploration applications, future functionality
will include a similar link forward to the produc-
tion phase that follows. A single database and an
integrated suite of applications will simplify the
exploration and production workow from project
conception to maturity. GMG
O
p
e
r
a
t
o
r

v
a
l
u
e
Task
Process
Corporate asset
S
t
a
n
d
-
a
l
o
n
e
C
o
n
t
e
n
t
U
s
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
C
o
n
n
e
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
I
n
t
e
g
r
a
t
i
o
n
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
U
n
i
f
i
e
d
i
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
U
n
i
f
y
i
n
g
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
F
u
l
l
i
n
t
e
g
r
a
t
i
o
n
>
Value of technology. The value of corporate assets increases as software is used to integrate tasks and improve the
focus on the total process rather than discrete tasks. Value, the y-axis, is both the perceived value to team members
as well as the monetary value to the corporation. The value attributed to each item listed along the x-axis depends on
whether one is task-oriented (bottom curve), process-oriented (middle curve) or taking the viewpoint of a corporation
(top curve). Task-oriented people are most concerned with content and usability. Process-oriented professionals seek
integration and standards. Corporate leaders recognize that data and process integration maximizes asset value.
13 Winter 1998
Key Issues in Multilateral Technology
Steve Bosworth
Union Pacic Resources
Fort Worth, Texas, USA
Hussein Saad El-Sayed
Dubai, United Arab Emirates
Gamal Ismail
Zakum Field Development Company
Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
Herv Ohmer
Mark Stracke
Chris West
Sugar Land, Texas, USA
Albertus Retnanto
Jakarta, Indonesia
For help in preparation of this article, thanks to Lennis
Cook, Anadrill, Sugar Land, Texas, USA; Chip Corbett,
GeoQuest, Houston, Texas; Vladimir Doroshenko,
Schlumberger Wireline & Testing, Moscow, Russia;
Doug Durst, Weatherford, Houston, Texas; Alexander
Mikhailovich Grigoryan, Los Angeles, California, USA;
David Hill, Anadrill, Shekou, Shenzhen, China; David
Malone, Camco, Houston, Texas; Pat McKinley, Anadrill,
Midland, Texas; Eric Neme, Schlumberger Oileld Services,
Lagos, Nigeria; and Claire Vishik, Austin Product Center,
Austin, Texas.
Drilling, completing and later reentering wells with multiple branches to improve
production while saving time and money are becoming commonplace, but complications
remain, as do the risks and chances of failure. Existing techniques have been applied
and fresh approaches are being developed to overcome technical hurdles, establishing
new standards and a specialized vocabulary for these well types and applications.
In 1953, a unique oil well called simply 66/45
was drilled with turbodrills in the Bashkiria eld
near Bashkortostan, Russia. This well ultimately
had nine lateral branches from a main borehole
that increased exposure to the pay zone by 5.5
times and production by 17-fold, yet the cost was
only 1.5 times that of a conventional well.
1
It was
the worlds rst truly multilateral well, although
rudimentary attempts at multilaterals had been
made since the 1930s. Under the auspices of the
Soviet Oil Industry Ministry, another 110 such
wells were drilled in Russian oil elds over the
next 27 years (see The Father of Multilateral
Technology, page 16 ). Not until ARCO drilled
the K-142 dual-lateral well in New Mexicos
Empire field in 1980, did another operator
attempt such a feat, for multilaterals were simply
too difcult and too risky, requiring substantial
investment of both time and technology.
A multilateral well is a single well with one
or more wellbore branches radiating from the
main borehole. It may be an exploration well, an
inll development well or a reentry into an exist-
ing well. It may be as simple as a vertical well-
bore with one sidetrack or as complex as a
horizontal, extended-reach well with multiple
lateral and sublateral branches. General multi-
lateral configurations include multibranched
wells, forked wells, wells with several laterals
branching from one horizontal main wellbore,
wells with several laterals branching from one
vertical main wellbore, wells with stacked later-
als, and wells with dual-opposing laterals (next
page, top). These wells generally represent two
basic types: vertically staggered laterals and
horizontally spread laterals in fan, spine-and-rib
or dual-opposing T shapes.
14 Oileld Review
INFORM (Integrated Forward Modeling), PowerPak,
RapidAccess, RapidConnect, Slim 1, USI (UltraSonic
Imager) and VIPER are marks of Schlumberger.
1. Horizontal Well Technology Unit, Heriot-Watt University
and The Petroleum Science and Technology Institute,
Multi-Lateral Well Technology Technical Study (1995): 6-9.
2. Horizontal Well Technology Unit, reference 1: 6-14.
Vertically staggered wells usually target sev-
eral different producing horizons to increase pro-
duction rates and improve recovery from
multiple zones by commingling production.
Wells in the Austin Chalk play in Texas (USA) are
typically of this type (below right). Their produc-
tion is a function of the number of natural frac-
tures that the wellbore encounters. A horizontal
well has a better chance of intersecting more
fractures than a vertical well, but there is a limit
to how far horizontal wells can be drilled. By
drilling other laterals from the same wellbore,
twice the number of fractures can often be
exposed at a much lower cost than drilling long
horizontal sections or another well.
Horizontal fan wells and their related
branches usually target the same reservoir inter-
val. The goal of this type of well is to increase
production rates, improve hydrocarbon recovery
and maximize production from that zone.
Multiple thin formation layers can be drained by
varying the inclination and vertical depth of each
drainhole. In a naturally fractured rock with an
unknown or variable fracture orientation, a fan
conguration can improve the odds of encoun-
tering fractures and completing an economic
well. If the fracture orientation is known, how-
ever, a dual-opposing T well can double the
length of lateral wellbore exposure within the
zone. In nonfractured, matrix-permeability reser-
voirs, the spine-and-rib design reduces the ten-
dency to cone water. Lateral branches are
sometimes curved around existing wells to keep
horizontal wellbores from interfering with a ver-
tical wells production.
A successful multilateral well that replaces
several vertical wellbores can reduce overall
drilling and completion costs, increase production
and provide more efcient drainage of a reservoir.
Furthermore, multilaterals can make reservoir
management more efcient and help increase
recoverable reserves. But why has it taken so long
for multilateral technology to catch on?
Between 1980 and 1995, only 45 multilateral
well completions were reported; since 1995,
hundreds of multilateral wells have been com-
pleted and many more are planned over the next
few years.
2
This increased number of multilateral
wells is related to a rapid sequence of advances
in the methods for drilling multilateral wells
directional and horizontal drilling techniques,
advanced drilling equipment and coiled tubing
drilling. However, the levels of well complexity
have remained low due to a lack of comparable
advances in multilateral completion equipment
and designs. As a consequence, the primary risks
involved in multilateral wells have been in lateral
junction construction and completion rather than
Multibranched Forked
Laterals into horizontal hole
Stacked laterals
Laterals into vertical hole
Dual-opposing laterals
Multilateral Well Configurations
>
Common forms of multilateral wells in use today. Wellbore design and conguration are dictated by
specic formation and reservoir drainage requirements.
5700
6100
6500
6900
7300
0 800 1600 2400 3200 4000 4800
Lateral section displacement, ft
T
r
u
e

v
e
r
t
i
c
a
l

d
e
p
t
h
,

f
t
Top of
Austin Chalk
Bentonite
Eagleford
False Buda
Buda
Georgetown
>
Typical Austin Chalk well in south Texas, USA. Stacked drainholes target multiple zones to increase
production rates and improve recovery by commingling production. Horizontal wells have a better
chance of intersecting natural fractures than vertical wells; production is a function of the number of
fractures that the wellbore encounters.
15 Winter 1998
(continued on page 18)
As with many advances in petroleum technology,
the rst multilateral well was accomplished by a
Soviet drilling engineer. Alexander Mikhailovich
Grigoryan was born during 1914 in Baku, the
capital of todays Republic of Azerbaijan, then a
principal center of oil production. After gradua-
tion from high school, he worked as a drillers
assistant, became an apprentice and ultimately
graduated as a petroleum engineer in 1939 from
Azerbaijan Industrial Institute (right).
During most of the Soviet era, the ofcial pol-
icy was to produce as much oil as possible, since
it was a strategic commodity and one of the few
exports that could be exchanged for grain and
other consumer goods. High quotas were
imposed on drillers to bore as many holes as
they could. The prevailing attitude was that the
more holes drilled, the greater the likelihood of
successfully tapping a reservoir and thereby
achieving greater production.
Grigoryan was an innovator and inventor.
Upon graduation, he began working as an oil-
eld driller and soon was attached to the
Ministry of Oil. Believing that he could produce
more oil by following a known oil sand than by
merely penetrating it with a number of bore-
holes, he drilled one of the worlds rst direc-
tional wellsBaku 1385in 1941, nearly 20
years before anyone else attempted such a feat.
Without a whipstock or a rotating drillstring, he
used a downhole hydraulic motor to penetrate
oil-bearing rock and signicantly expand reser-
voir exposure and production. It was the rst
time that a turbodrill was used for both vertical
and horizontal sections of a borehole.
1
Grigoryans pioneering work in horizontal
drilling technology led to scores of other suc-
cessful horizontal wells across the USSR and
his elevation to department head at the
All-Union Scientic-Research Institute for
Drilling Technology (VNIIBT). He was not,
however, satised with these accomplishments.
He developed a new borehole sidetrack kickoff
technique and a device for stabilizing and
controlling curvature without deectors. But all
of these innovations were in preparation for his
major contribution to drilling technology.
Inspired by the theoretical work of American
scientist L. Yuren, who maintained that
increased production could be achieved by
increasing borehole diameter in the productive
zone, Grigoryan took the theory a step further
and proposed branching the borehole in the
productive zone to increase surface exposure,
just as a trees roots extend its exposure to the
soil. In 1949, he took his ideas to noted
Russian scientist K. Tsarevich, who conrmed
that branching a well in a productive zone with
uniform rock permeability should yield an
increase in oil production in proportion to the
number of branches.
Grigoryan put this new theory into practice in
the Bashkiria eld complex in what is today
Bashkortostan, Russia (right). There, in 1953,
he used downhole turbodrills without rotating
drillstrings to drill Well 66/45, the rst multilat-
eral well. Bashkiria eld complex lies in south-
ern Bashkortostan (next page, left). Late
Carboniferous carbonate reefs built by rugose
corals trap vast oil reserves (next page, right).
The elds had been in production since before
1930, and most wells produced low volumes at
the time Grigoryan rst attempted a multilat-
eral well.
2
Grigoryan chose to drill Well 66/45 in
Bashkirias Ishimbainefti eld, which evidenced
an interval of Artinskian carbonate rocks with
good reservoir properties and wide areal distri-
bution. His target was the Akavassky horizon,
an interval that ranged from 10 to 60 m [33 to
197 ft] thick.
Grigoryan drilled the main bore to a total
depth of 575 meters [1886 ft], just above the pay
zone. From that point, he drilled nine branches
from the open borehole without cement bridges
or whipstocks; the window conguration
enabled insertion of tools on drillpipe into the
The Father of Multilateral Technology
>
Alexander Mikhailovich Grigoryan. Now 84
years of age, Grigoryan immigrated to the
United States in the 1980s and became an
American citizen. He kindly granted Oileld
Review an interview and made documents
about his technique available.
Ru
s
s
i a
n
F
e
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
Ufa
Neftekamsk
Salavat
Sterlitamak
Oktyabrski
Ishimbai
B
a
s
h
k
o
r t o s
t
a
n
B
e
l
e
y
a
R
i
v
e
r
>
Map of Bashkortostan inset in a map of the Rus-
sian Federation. The rst multilateral wells were
drilled in the Ishimbai region in the south-central
region of the republic.
16 Oileld Review
sidetracks without instrumentation. He drilled
by touch alone, slanting away from the vertical
bore like roots of a tree, each branch extending
for 80 to 300 meters [262 to 984 ft] in different
directions into the producing horizon.
3
Grigoryan allowed the drill bit to follow the pay
zone into the most productive zones, the
branches curving automatically to the planned
trajectory. Drilling speed and penetration rate
depended entirely on the hardness of the rock
and downhole motor capabilites.
When completed, Well 66/45 had nine produc-
ing laterals with a maximum horizontal reach
from kickoff point of 136 meters [447 ft] and a
total drainage of 322 meters [1056 ft].
Compared with other wells in the same eld,
66/45 penetrated 5.5 times the pay thickness.
Its drilling cost was 1.5 times more expensive,
but it produced 17 times more oil at 755 B/D
[120 m
3
/d] versus the typical 44 B/D [7 m
3
/d].
4
Under the auspices of the Soviet Oil Industry
Ministry, another 110 multilateral wells were
drilled in Russian oil elds over the next 27
years, with Grigoryan drilling 30 of them him-
self. About 50 of these rst multilaterals were
exploratory, the remainder were for delineation
of reefs and channel structures.
223
425
455
473
490
521
617 TD
506
595 TD 595 TD
605 TD
617 TD
613 TD
660 TD
582 TD
627 TD
Artinski limestone
Well 66/45
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
225
250
275
300
325
350
375
400
425
450
475
500
525
550
575
M
e
a
s
u
r
e
d

d
e
p
t
h

,
m
>
An early multilateral well. Drilled in Bashkiria, now Bashkortostan,
one of Russias most prolic regions, the rst multilateral well had
nine lateral branches that tapped the Ishimbainefti eld reservoir.
250
260
270
280
290
300
310
320
330
340
350
360
370
380
390
400
410
P
a
l
e
o
z
o
i
c
P
e
r
m
i
a
n
D
e
v
o
n
i
a
n
C
a
r
b
o
n
i
f
e
r
o
u
s
Upper
Late
Lower
Early
Upper
Late
Middle
Lower
Early
Upper
Late
Middle
Lower
Early
Thuringian
Saxonian
Autunian
Orenburgian
Gzelian
Kasimovian
Moscovian
Bashkirian
Serpukhovian
Strunian/Etroeungtian
Couvinian
Zlichovian
Pragian
Lochkovian
Million
years
>
Bashkiria stratigraphic column. The rst multilateral well target was
within the Akavassky horizon, in the center of the lower Bashkirian
sequence, middle Carboniferous era. [Adapted from Haq BU and
Van Eysinga FWB: Geological Time Table, 4th ed. Amsterdam,
The Netherlands: Elsevier Science BV, 1994.]
1. Gaddy D: Pioneering Work, Economic Factors Provide
Insights into Russian Drilling Technology, Oil & Gas
Journal 96, no. 27 (July 6, 1998): 67-69.
2. Boisseau T, Chuvashov B, Ivanova R, Maslo A, Masse P,
Proust J-N, Vachard D and Vennin E: Etude
Sedimentologique et Biostratigraphique du Stratotype du
Bashkirien (Oural du Sud, Russie), Bulletin, Centres
Recherche Exploration-Production, Elf Aquitaine 20, no. 2
(December 1996): 341-365.
3. Bakke D: Russia Gears Up Offshore Activity for Biggest
Production Gains in Its History, Offshore 35, no. 5 (May
1975): 303-306.
4. Horizontal Well Technology Unit, Heriot-Watt University
and The Petroleum Science and Technology Institute,
Multi-Lateral Well Technology Technical Study, 1995: 6-9.
17 Winter 1998
drilling. Of the hundreds of multilateral wells
drilled, most have been simple openhole comple-
tions in hard rock; many have been reentries to
salvage wells or boost output from old elds, but
an increasing number represents new, develop-
ment wells seeking to maximize drainage of
known reservoirs.
Regardless of the level of complexity, multi-
lateral wells today are drilled with state-of-the
art directional drilling technology. Even so, the
drilling of multilateral wells involves certain risks
ranging from borehole instability, stuck pipe and
problems with overpressured zones to casing,
cementing and branching problems. And there
can be a high risk of drilling or completion forma-
tion damage and difculties locating and staying
in the productive zone while drilling the laterals.
Multilateral technology may be at about the
same level of development that horizontal and
directional drilling were 10 years ago. Horizontal
and reentry multilateral drilling has increased
50% over the past ve years and is expected to
grow another 15% a year through 2000.
3
This
rapid growth is attributed to operators realizing
that the advantages of multilateral systems
increasingly outweigh the disadvantages.
For years, because there were so few reliable
and sophisticated examples of successful multi-
lateral applications, few such wells were drilled
because operators lacked benchmarks by which
to determine whether prospects were suitable
candidates for multilateral development (right).
There were concerns about higher initial costs
and the risk of possible interference of laterals
with each other, crossow and difculties with
production allocations. An increased sensitivity
to and concern about reservoir heterogeneities
like vertical permeability deterred multilateral
development. The prospect of complicated
drilling, completion and production technologies,
complicated and expensive stimulation, slow and
less effective cleanup, and cumbersome well-
bore management during production also made
operators cautious.
As more multilaterals were drilled success-
fully, however, even the simplest wells demon-
strated the potential of this emerging
technology. The main benets of these success-
ful wells have been increased production,
increased reserves and an overall reduction in
reservoir development costs.
Production from known reserves has tradi-
tionally been expanded by drilling additional
wells to increase drainage and sweep efciency.
As a consequence, both capital expenditures and
operating costs have also increased with every
new well. To counteract these cost increases,
multilateral technology is now being employed to
increase borehole contact with the reservoir,
improve operating efciency and reduce well
costs. These goals are achieved primarily by
drilling the main trunk and overburden from sur-
face to the reservoir only once and by reducing
surface equipment to a single installation at a
signicant cost-savings. Furthermore, this can be
achieved in both offshore platform and subsea
situations where a limited number of slots is
available and in onshore locations where surface
installations are expensive or where the lease
has an irregular conguration.
Multiple lateral penetrations in the same
reservoir or in independent reservoirs not only
produce signicant cost-savings, but increase
production rates appreciably (next page). Such
penetrations are commonly used to increase the
effective drainage and depletion of a reservoir,
particularly when reservoirs have restricted
hydrocarbon mobility due to low permeability,
low porosity or other characteristics that limit
production ow. When independent reservoirs
are targeted, production can either be commin-
gled into a single production tubing string or pro-
duced separately in multiple production tubing
strings. Multilateral wells are also an economical
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Does the reservoir contain hydrocarbons in
small or isolated accumulations?
Is there an accumulation of oil above
the reservoir's highest perforations?
Is the reservoir separated into low-transmissibility
vertically stacked segments?
Is the reservoir naturally fractured or does it have
high permeability only in one direction?
Does the reservoir have numerous
lens-shaped pay zones?
Are there two different, or distinct sets of
natural fractures in the reservoir?
Does the reservoir require waterflood?
Does waterflood of the reservoir cause a breakthrough in
high-quality zones before low-quality zones are swept?
If offshore, is the platform unable to accomodate an
additional well that is needed to drain additional fault blocks?
Are future rigless completions planned
for additional zones?
Drill a conventional vertical
or horizontal well.
Consider a
multilateral well.
>
Determining if multilateral technology is applicable.
18 Oileld Review
3. Longbottom J and Herrera I: Multilateral Wells Can
Multiply Reserve Potential, American Oil & Gas Reporter
40, no. 9 (September 1997): 53-58.
way of rapidly depleting a reservoir, effectively
accelerating production, shortening the eld life
cycle and reducing operating costs.
Multilateral wells are often able to overcome
the shortcomings of both horizontal and conven-
tional wells, particularly if there are geological
factors like thinly layered formations or a signi-
cantly fractured system, and in specic enhanced
oil recovery scenarios such as steam-assisted
gravity drainage. In addition, the application of
multilateral technology can result in decreased
water and gas coning.
Because of the capability to more thoroughly
drain reservoirs vertically and horizontally, recov-
erable reserves per well and per field are
increased considerably while both capital and
operating costs per well and per eld are mini-
mized. In fact, the cost of achieving the same
degree of drainage with conventional wells
would be prohibitive in most cases, especially
situations like deepwater subsea developments.
Multilateral wells allow costs to be amortized
over several reservoir penetrations and in some
cases have eliminated the need for inll drilling.
In heterogeneous reservoirs with layers, com-
partments or randomly oriented natural fractures,
more pockets of oil and gas can be exploited and
an increased number of fractures can be inter-
sected by drilling multilateral wells.
In anisotropic formations with unknown
directions of preferred permeability, drilling
multibranched wells can reduce economic risk.
Lateral branches can balance the nonuniform
productivity or injectivity of different layers.
Multilateral wells provide extensive information
about the reservoir and can be useful for explo-
ration and formation evaluation in addition to
their capability to efciently and economically
drain reservoirs.
TAML Classication
Until 1997, there was considerable confusion
regarding multilateral technology. Few terms that
described the technology were universally agreed
upon, and a classication of multilateral wells by
difculty and risk was lacking. As a consequence,
under the leadership of Eric Diggins of Shell
UK Exploration and Production, a forum called
Technology AdvancementMulti Laterals
(TAML) was held in Aberdeen, Scotland, in the
Spring of 1997. Its goal was to provide a more
unied direction for multilateral technology devel-
opment. Experts in multilateral technology from
leading oil companies shared experiences and
agreed to a classication system that ranks multi-
lateral wells by complexity and functionality.
Today, multilateral wells are referred to by level
of complexity from Level 1 through 6S, and
described with a code to represent type and func-
tionality (see, Classifying Multilateral Wells,
page 20).
The three characteristics used to evaluate
multilateral technology are connectivity, isolation
and accessibility. Of these, the form of connec-
tivity or junction between the main trunk and lat-
eral wellbore branches is not only the most
distinguishing feature, but also the riskiest and
most difcult to achieve. For this reason, about
95% of multilateral wells drilled worldwide have
been Level 1 or 2. Some 85% of 1998 multilater-
als have been Levels 1 to 4, with 50% of those
Levels 1 and 2. But the race is on; virtually all
major operators and drilling service companies
are developing multilateral connectivity, isolation
and accessibility capabilities. In addition, new
junction systems are emerging to facilitate
increasingly higher levels of difculty.
Level 1 is essentially a simple openhole side-
tracking technique, much like the rst multilater-
als drilled in Russia. The main trunk and lateral
branches are always openhole with unsupported
junctions. Lateral access and production control
are limited.
In Level 2 wells, the main bore is cased, but
the lateral junction remains openhole, or possibly
with a drop-off linercasing placed in lateral
sections without mechanical connection or
cementingto provide full-opening main well-
bore access and improve the potential for reentry
into the lateral.
Anadrill performs Level 1 and 2 multilateral
connections throughout North America and the
Middle East (see, Multilaterals in the Middle
East, page 24). Drilling is usually carried out
with either short-radius or medium-long radius
drilling assemblies. The Anadrill RapidAccess
system and third-party casing exiting services
like those of Smith International are used to pro-
vide support. Milling can also be carried out in
existing wells using conventional retrievable
whipstock or cement plug techniques. Other
providers can supply similar systems or junctions
with windows precut.
Level 2 wells commonly require a window, or
hole, to be cut in the casing with a milling assem-
bly. Generally, this level of multilateral consists
of whipstock sidetracks from existing casing
Shallow or
depleted reservoirs
Layered reservoirs
Fractured reservoirs
>
Enhancing productivity with multilateral well congurations. In shallow or depleted reservoirs, branched horizontal wellbores are often most efcient,
whereas in layered reservoirs, vertically stacked drainholes are usually best. In fractured reservoirs, dual-opposing laterals may provide maximum
reservoir exposure, particularly when fracture orientation is known.
19 Winter 1998
Classifying Multilateral Wells
1
2
3
4
5
6
6S
< Multilateral well complexity ranking (Level 1 to 6S).
This general classication is based on junction
complexity. Level 1 is an openhole sidetrack or
unsupported junction. Level 2 has a cased and cemented
main bore, or trunk, with openhole lateral. Level 3 is a
cased and cemented main bore with lateral cased, but not
cemented. Level 4 has both main bore and lateral cased
and cemented at the junction. Level 5 pressure integrity is
achieved at the junction with completion equipment. For
Level 6, junction pressure integrity is achieved with casing
and without the assistance of or dependence on comple-
tion equipment. In the subcategory Level 6S, a downhole
splitter, basically a subsurface dual-casing wellhead,
divides a large main bore into two equal-size laterals.
Single Bore
Dual Bore
Concentric Bore
>
Multilateral well descriptions. In
addition to criteria such as the num-
ber of junctions and well typepro-
ducer with or without artical lift,
injector or multipurposethe com-
pletion type, whether single, dual or
concentric, has a major impact on
the type of equipment that is needed
at the junction.
NRNo selective reentry
PRReentry by pulling completion
TRThrough-tubing reentry
NONNone
SELSelective SELSelective
REMRemote monitoring
RMCRemote monitoring and control SEPSeparate
Accessibility
Flow Control
>
Junction types. The categories of accessibility are
no selective reentry, reentry by pulling completion and
through-tubing reentry (top). Flow control (bottom) is
the degree to which uid ow across a junction can
be adjustedno control, selective or separate control,
and remote monitoring or remote monitoring and control.
20 Oileld Review
(right). Premilled window casing subs are also
used frequently to avoid the higher risk task of
milling. Although retrievable whipstocks are
employed to drill laterals, their removal along
with the packer assembly from the main wellbore
makes locating laterals and reentry access
almost impossible. Accurate positioning of sub-
sequent guide assemblies and azimuthal orienta-
tion are also difcult if not impossible. For this
reason, the Anadrill Level 2 RapidAccess multi-
lateral completion system was enhanced by
adding a mechanical connection with a fullbore
casing prole nipple for positioning and orienting
whipstocks or other assemblies to provide selec-
tive drainhole access.
The Level 2 RapidAccess construction was
engineered with robust simplicity to be transpar-
ent to the drilling operation, while retaining
options for higher level multilateral completions.
RapidAccess couplings do not require orientation
or special procedures during installation and are
cemented using conventional equipment and pro-
cedures. These couplings are full opening, per-
manent reference points from which multiple
branches can be constructed and reentered from
the main wellbore. Since orientation prior to
cementing is not required, casing movement dur-
ing primary cementing helps ensure a successful
cement bond. Multiple RapidAccess couplings
can be installed in casing strings to allow numer-
ous reservoir penetrations for optimum field
development. Depth and orientation of each cou-
pling can be determined by measurements-
while-drilling (MWD) survey after cementing and
by wireline or coiled-tubing conveyed USI
UltraSonic Imager surveys (right).
Level 3 multilateral technology offers both
connectivity and access. The main trunk and lat-
erals are cased; the main bore is cemented, but
laterals are not. Until recently, only premilled
windows were used at this level if access into
each lateral needed to be maintained. Lateral lin-
ers are anchored to the main bore by a liner
hanger or other latching system, but cementing is
not required. There is no hydraulic integrity or
pressure seal at the lateral liner and main casing
junction, but there is main bore and lateral reen-
try access.
The Level 3 RapidConnect system will provide
mechanical connectivity to both the lateral and
main wellbore and high-strength junctions for
unstable formations. This enhancement is critical
when sands or shales become unstable over the
productive life of a well. Completion options that
may be required by the reservoir depletion plan
allow upper laterals to be isolated at the junction
while producing from lower laterals. Selective
access to laterals is made possible by placing an
oriented diverter at the junction.
The most common completion performed in
Level 2 and 3 wells is uncemented, predrilled or
slotted liners and prepacked, but not gravel-
packed screens. Anadrill uses a drop-off liner
completion design in which the top of the liner in
the lateral is immediately released outside the
exit from the casing through a hydraulic sub.
External casing packers are often used in the
drop-off liner completion assembly to isolate
zones, anchor the liner top and facilitate reentry
access to the liner.
Another mid-tier approach to multilateral
completion offers only individual hydraulic isola-
tion of a lateral. In this case, laterals are drilled
using whipstock sidetracking procedures and if
any completion is performed in the lateral, it uses
a drop-off liner. Conventional casing packers in
the main casing with tubing between them
straddle packersare used to isolate each of
Step 1
Run
multilateral
packer on
starter mill
assembly
Step 3
Complete
milling of
window
Step 2
Set packer
Shear starter
mill
Begin milling
window
Window from USI log
Index casing coupling
from USI log
Window to
ICC spacing
< Window orientation,
depth and quality. A
USI UltraSonic Imager
log can determine the
orientation and depth
of a cemented
coupling relative to
casing collars and
gamma ray (GR) logs.
A USI log can also
be used to provide
feedback about
window quality dur-
ing well construction.
These images show
an index casing
coupling (ICC) and
a window milled in
7-in., 26-lbm/ft casing
using a downhole
motor. This log was
run to verify the
length of a full-gauge
window. A USI log
can be run in most
common drilling uids.
>
Window milling. Lateral openings are cut into the casing wall with whipstock and milling equipment.
The whipstock packer is run and set on a mill assembly. The starter mill is then sheared off the top of
the whipstock and a window is cut into the wall and formation to begin a lateral drainhole branch.
21 Winter 1998
the laterals hydraulically. Production from the lat-
erals is controlled with sliding sleeves and other
ow-control devices. This is an inexpensive and
relatively straightforward multilateral completion
method that was proven in the North Sea and is
now being adapted for deepwater subsea wells.
The critical technology in these completions
is operation of ow-control devices downhole.
Schlumberger Camco intelligent well technology
is now capable of activating and controlling
these ow control devices remotely.
Level 4 multilateral wells have both the main
bore and lateral cased and cemented at the junc-
tion, which provides a mechanically supported
junction, but no hydraulic integrity. The lateral
liner is, in fact, cemented to the main casing. The
most common sidetracking procedure relies on
whipstock-aided milling of casing windows,
although premilled window-casing subs are also
employed. There is no pressure seal at the junc-
tion interface of the lateral liner and the main
casing, but the main bore and the laterals have
fullbore access. This level of multilateral technol-
ogy, although complex, high risk and still in
development, has been successful in multilateral
wells worldwide.
A Level 5 multilateral well is characterized by
either the Level 3 or Level 4 lateral connection
technique with addition of completion equipment
to provide a pressure seal across the junction of
the lateral liner and main casing. The main well-
bore is fully cased and the junction is hydrauli-
cally isolated; cement is not acceptable as the
hydraulic isolation. Reentry access to both the
main bore and the laterals is available. Hydraulic
isolation is achieved with the use of auxiliary
packers, sleeves and other completion equip-
ment in the main casing bore to straddle the lat-
eral junction with production tubing.
Level 5 and 6 wells are distinguished from the
mid- and lower tier levels by hydraulic isolation of
the laterals as well as connectivity and accessi-
bility characteristics. The most difcult aspects of
multilateral technology are hydraulic isolation
and integrity at high pressure, and most providers
are still seeking ways of improving these.
Level 6 multilateral systems incorporate an
integral pressure seal in the junction of the lat-
eral liner and the main casing. A pressure-tight
junction, achieved with an integral sealing fea-
ture or a monolithic formed or formable metal
design, is the goal and will be valuable in deep-
water offshore and subsea installations.
Schlumberger rst evaluated Level 6 multilat-
eral technology in 1995 with a system developed
by Anadrill, Camco and Integrated Drilling
Systems. With multilateral technology develop-
ment transferred from Anadrill to the Camco
Advanced Technology Group, Schlumberger is
evolving these techniques into newer systems
rather than proceeding with this particular
version. The company is continuing development
of multilateral technology with a new Level
6 design.
Level 6S, a generally recognized Level 6 sub-
level, uses a downhole splitter, or subsurface
wellhead assembly, that divides the main bore
into two smaller, equal-size lateral bores.
Positioning Multilaterals
Regardless of the design level or multilateral
technology used, for lateral branches to achieve
the desired contact with productive intervals,
borehole direction must be an integral part of
well plans. Determining these trajectories
depends on reservoir properties, the rock stress
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
ICC
Slim 1
MWD
Gelled
fluid
SLT
ICC
>
The Level 2 multilateral process.
1. The main wellbore casing is run with index
casing couplings (ICC) as integral compo-
nents. The ICC, normally of standard coupling
OD and pipe ID sizes, does not need to be
oriented when run. It can be placed below,
above or in angle-build sections.
2. The main bore casing is cemented using stan-
dard procedures and casing wiper plugs.
3. The lower branch is drilled, completed and
isolated with a retrievable bridge plug.
4. The coupling orientation is determined from
the USI log or by running a Selective Landing
Tool (SLT) with Slim 1 MWD in the Universal
Bottomhole Orienter (UBHO). During this trip
the coupling can be cleaned with a special
jetting tool and a gel pill may be spotted in the
kickoff section to suspend debris.
5. The whipstock face is then properly aligned
with the landing tool orientation key and run
into the well. This assembly automatically
aligns and latches in the appropriate
coupling. The milling tool is then released
from the whipstock.
6. A casing window and short pilot hole into the
formation are cut with a special milling
assembly powered by a downhole motor, in
this case, an XP series PowerPak motor.
22 Oileld Review
4. Ehlig-Economides CA , Mowat G and Corbett C:
Techniques for Multibranch Well Trajectory Design in
the Context of a Three-Dimensional Reservoir Model,
paper SPE 35505, presented at the European 3-D
Reservoir Modeling Conference, Stavanger, Norway,
April 16-17, 1996.
5. Roberts M, Kirkwood A and Bedford J: Real-Time
Geosteering in the Tern Field for Optimum Multilateral
Well Placement, paper SPE 50663, presented at the 1998
SPE European Petroleum Conference, The Hague, The
Netherlands, October 20-22, 1998.
Allen D, Dennis B, Edwards J, Franklin S, Livingston J,
Kirkwood A, Lehtonen L, Lyons B, Prilliman J and Simms D:
Modeling Logs for Horizontal Well Planning and
Evaluation, Oileld Review 7, no. 4 (Winter 1995): 47-63.
regime and the geometries of productive reser-
voir units. Laterals can be vertical, inclined or
horizontal, as can the main wellbore, but
because production from several laterals can be
commingled in the main wellbore, it is possible
to drill more drainholes in the reservoir than
would be feasible with a conventional well.
4
Trajectories for the main wellbore and later-
als are determined using various information
sources, including 3D surface and borehole seis-
mic data, well logs and core analyses, formation
and well testing, and other data like uid proper-
ties and production histories. Predrill planning
also ideally includes geological and petrophysi-
cal forward modeling with tools like INFORM
Integrated Forward Modeling software to help
identify risks and the value of logging-while-
drilling (LWD) measurements. Such modeling
provides initial petrophysical descriptions along
proposed trajectories by using imported geologi-
cal models (above). Thereafter, 2D and 3D LWD
tool response functions are generally used to
produce synthetic log datasets to complete for-
ward models.
5
Well path designs begin in the producing for-
mation where the optimal lateral location is
determined. From the farthest point in the later-
als, the design proceeds to the main bore, then
upward to the surface or seaoor wellhead. Both
permeability and stress anisotropy are important
considerations when selecting an optimal well
path orientation in three dimensions. Production
and perhaps drainage volume can be severely
restricted by pressure gradients associated with
converging ow in formations. Productivity can
be enhanced if laterals are oriented to take
advantage of permeability differences in produc-
ing zones or across an interval of different layers.
For this reason, slanted and horizontal laterals
are most productive when oriented perpendicular
to natural fractures. When vertical permeability
is much less than horizontal permeability, slanted
laterals are best.
Closely spaced lateral branches increase the
possibility of accelerated production and
improved recovery efciency in large reservoirs
with thin zones or in thick zones underlain by
water or overlain by gas. In reservoirs with struc-
turally or stratigraphically isolated zones, multi-
lateral wells are able to target the various layers
with several laterals.
While multilateral wells are from the bottom
up, risks involved in actually drilling drainholes
develop from the top down. The best drilling
and completion strategy is to construct laterals
from the deepest branch up. This isolates risks
at the lowest point and ensures that developing
problems leave the wellbore above that point
free of difficulty.
Drilling Multilaterals
The majority of multilateral wells drilled since
1953 have been Level 1 and 2 openhole com-
pletions in hard rock. Much of this drilling used
relatively simple technologies, but as openhole
completions with limited functionality give way
to higher level multilaterals to meet the
requirements of complicated reservoir and geo-
logical conditions, standard directional drilling
is being replaced by increasingly complex tech-
nologies (previous page and below).
m4
m3
m2
m1
Trunk
>
Subsurface models. Petrophysical descriptions
along proposed well trajectories can be gener-
ated using imported geological models. Here four
laterals (m 1, m 2, m 3 and m 4) branch from a main
wellbore in a vertically stacked conguration.
8 9 10 11 12 13
RDT
SLT
7. After a lateral is drilled to depth, it may be left
openhole or a simple cemented or drop-off
liner may be run. The landing tool is released
and the entire assembly is retrieved from the
well. The hole is cleaned out and the bridge
plug is retrieved.
8. The process is changed for a cemented liner
by replacing the full-size whipstock with a
smaller diameter reentry deection tool (RDT)
that is run and latched into an ICC.
9. The bottomhole assembly (BHA) is run and a
lateral branch is drilled.
10. A liner is run into the lateral and possibly
cemented back into the main casing.
11. The liner running tool is released, the hole
cleaned up by reverse circulating, and then
the liner running tool is pulled out of the hole.
12. After the lateral is completed, the RDT is
retrieved by releasing the selective landing
tool (SLT), and both the RDT and SLT are
pulled from the well.
13. The lower wellbore section is cleaned out, the
isolating bridge plug is retrieved and the main
bore is ready for completion.
23 Winter 1998
(continued on page 27)
Since multilateral drilling began in the Middle
East during the mid-1990s, it is estimated that
more than 200 horizontal wells have been
drilled in the region. In the United Arab
Emirates, Zakum Field Development Co.
(ZADCO) and its operating company Abu Dhabi
Marine Operating Co. (ADMA-OPCO) are devel-
oping one of the largest Middle East oil elds.
The experience of ZADCO with various aspects
of multilateral horizontal drilling is typical of
the state of this technology.
Zakum eld, discovered in 1963, is situated
offshore in the Arabian Gulf about 80 km
[50 miles] northwest of Abu Dhabi. The
producing formation is a large Cretaceous
limestone with various layers in three main
stacked reservoirs (above). Development began
in 1977 with conventional drilling. Horizontal
drilling was introduced in 1989 and extensive
multilateral drilling commenced in 1994 as a
result of improvements in horizontal technology.
The rst multilateral well was completed in
March 1995. Encouraged by a signicant pro-
duction increase, ZADCO decided to develop the
stacked reservoirs using horizonal and multilat-
eral drilling. To date, 39 dual-lateral and 45 mul-
tilateral wells have been drilled and completed,
and more are planned.
1
During initial development, the complex of
reservoirs was penetrated by a deviated well-
bore and then by a single horizontal drainhole
through most of the layers. These two tech-
niques increased borehole exposure to the
reservoir and allowed oil to be produced from
the highest permeability layers, but oil in less
permeable layers was left behind with subse-
quent substantial loss of reserves. Drilling sepa-
rate drainholes for subzones provides a better
opportunity for stimulation and enhanced pro-
duction because each horizontal hole is con-
nected directly to the main wellbore.
Drilling Multilaterals
Level 2 multilateral wells at Zakum eld begin
with a deviated section. After surface and inter-
mediate casing are cemented, wells are deep-
ened to 9
5
8-in. production casing or 7-in. liner
depth just above lower reservoir targets with
maximum inclination of 55 to facilitate wire-
line operations. Using a retrievable whipstock, a
casing window is milled near the top reservoir
and the upper drainhole is drilled using inter-
mediate- and short-radius techniques. The whip-
stock is removed so that multiple openhole
sidetracks and laterals can be drilled. The next
horizontal hole is kicked off below the produc-
tion casing string. Wellbore inclination is
increased to horizontal and a lateral is drilled
into the reservoir. A new deviated section is
drilled from the last kickoff point and another
lateral is drilled using the same procedures.
Specialized or custom proles, like stair-steps to
maximize footage in certain intervals, can also
be used (next page, top).
Curves are drilled with dogleg severity rang-
ing from 6/100 ft [31 m] to 10/100 ft depend-
ing on reservoir requirements and whether
medium- or short-radius techniques are used.
Horizontal sections are typically 750 to 3000 ft
[229 to 396 m] and the common hole size is
6 in. Position and direction in thin oil layers
are achieved using measurements-while-drilling
(MWD) and logging-while-drilling (LWD) to
keep well trajectory within the required reser-
voir target interval.
Successful multilateral drilling depends on
several factors, including zonal insolation, win-
dow milling, drilling dense barriers, early water
breakthrough, low-departure targets, low-per-
meability zones, staying within targets, multiple
holes from a single casing window and stimula-
tion of multilateral openholes (next page,
bottom left).
2
Multilaterals in the Middle East
0 100 km
0 63 m
Zakum
field
Bahrain
United Arab
Emirates
Qatar
S
A
U
D
I
A
R
A
B I A
less than
5 mD
less than
5 mD West East
I1, I2
I3
I4
I5
I6
I7
IIIA
IIIB
IIIC
IIIDH
IIIJ
IIA
IIB
IIC
IID
IIE
IIF
Abu
Dhabi
> Zakum eld
location and
geology. Located
northwest of Abu
Dhabi in the Arabian
Gulf, Zakum eld pro-
duces from three
stacked reservoirs
with various layers
in a large Cretaceous
limestone. Three
major producing reser-
voirsI, II and III
are subdivided
according to lithology.
1. Siddiqui TK, El-Khatib HM and Sultan AJ: Utilization
Of Horizontal Drainholes In Developing Multilayered
Reservoir, paper SPE 29879, presented at the SPE
Middle East Oil show, Bahrain, March 11-14, 1995.
2. El-Khatib H and Ismail G: Multi-Lateral Horizontal Drilling
Problems & Solutions Experienced Offshore Abu Dhabi,
paper SPE 36252, presented at the 7th Abu Dhabi
International Petroleum Conference and Exhibition,
Abu Dhabi, UAE, October 13-16, 1996.
24 Oileld Review
Zonal isolation The ability to achieve isola-
tion is key to multilateral well success. Between
upper laterals and lower drainholes, zonal isola-
tion is extremely important due to pressure dif-
ferential between the two reservoirs. Cement
additives and operations were optimized to
improve primary cement bond in addition to the
use of external casing packers (ECP) on the pro-
duction casing in some wells (above).
>
Drilling Zakum eld multilateral wells. The drilling sequence for a Level 2 Zakum eld multilateral is as follows: A. Surface and intermediate
casing are set and wells are deepened to production casing or liner depth just above the reservoir targets. Maximum inclination is 55 to facilitate wireline
operations. B. A window is milled in the casing and the upper drainhole is drilled using intermediate- and short-radius techniques. C. The next horizontal
hole is kicked off below the production casing string. D and E. New deviated sections are drilled from previous kickoff points so that more laterals can be
drilled. F. Multilaterals with stair-step, traverse or other proles can be drilled to minimize drilling in tight barriers, maximize horizontal footage in pro-
ductive intervals and delay water breakthrough.
(dense)
(dense)
(dense)
(dense)
(dense)
IA
II
IIA
IIB
IIC
IID
13
3
/8-in. casing
30-in. casing
9
5
/8-in. casing
13
3
/8-in. casing
30-in. casing
9
5
/8-in. casing
13
3
/8-in. casing
30-in. casing
9
5
/8-in. casing
13
3
/8-in. casing
30-in. casing
9
5
/8-in. casing
IA
II
IIA
IIB
IIC
IID
IA
IIA
IIB
IIC
IID
IA
II
IIA
IIB
IIC
IID
A B
C
D E
II
IA
IIA
IIB
IIC
IID
IIE
II
(dense)
II
F
13
3
/8-in. casing
30-in. casing
13
3
/8-in. casing
30-in. casing
9
5
/8-in. casing
9
5
/8-in. casing
8
1
/2-in.
hole
IA
II (dense)
IIA
IIB
IIC
IIE
IID
13
3
/8-in. casing
9
5
/8-in.
casing
2000
1000
0
-1000
-2000
-3000
IA
IIDE
IIB
IIC
Departure, ft
IA
IIA
IIB
IIC
IID
IIE
II (dense)
8
1
/2-in. hole
9
5
/8-in. casing shoe
6-in. hole
6-in. hole
6-in. hole
dense
-1000
0
-2000
-3000
-4000
1
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
Departure, ft
L
a
t
i
t
u
d
e
,

f
t
IIIJ branch 1
IIIJ branch 2
IIIF
IIIG
9
5
/8-in. casing shoe
9
5
/8-in.
casing shoe
III
IIIF
IIIG1
IIIJ Branch 1
Branch 2
7-in. liner shoe
IIA
IIA-D
IIG-F
IIA
9
5
/8-in. casing
9
5
/8-in.
whipstock
13
3
/8-in.
casing
New 7-in. liner shoe
1000
-
1
0
0
0
-
2
0
0
0
-
3
0
0
0
2000
3000
L
a
t
i
t
u
d
e
,

f
t
Departure, ft
IA
IA
IICD
IICD
IIEF
IIEF
Sidetrack
Original
hole
-1000
0
-2000
-3000
-4000
1
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
Departure, ft
L
a
t
i
t
u
d
e
,

f
t
IA IIC
IIF
IID
IIE
Branch 2 Branch 1
Branch 1
Branch 1
Branch 2
Branch 2
TH.IA
TH.IIA
TH.IIB
TH.IIC
TH.IID
TH.IIE
TH.IIF
TH.III (dense)
60
inclination
35 inclination 75 inclination
7-in.
liner shoe
A B
C D
(dense)
>
Multilateral wellbore proles these can include: A. Hook shapes for low-departure multilateral
wells. B. Two branches in thin and tight reservoirs. C. Two opposing branches for target centralization.
D. Multilateral holes from one window to minimize casing cement bond failure.
TH.IA reservoir
TH.II (dense)
TH.II reservoir
9
5
/8-in. casing shoe

Perforations


9
5
/8-in. External
casing packer (ECP)

8
1
/2-in. hole
>
Zonal isolation. In addition to optimizing
cement slurries to improve primary
cement jobs, external casing packers
(ECP) are sometimes used to separate
certain intervals.
25 Winter 1998
(continued on page 26)
Window millingUsing retrievable whip-
stocks and removal of these assemblies are criti-
cal to successful drilling of multilateral wells.
More than 40 horizontal wells have been side-
tracked with retrievable whipstocks. New single-
trip whipstocks reduce the number of trips and
the time necessary to exit the casing (right).
Drilling dense barriersBecause Zakum
eld porous layers are separated by tight reser-
voir rock, different techniques were adopted to
minimize drilling in these dense, low-permeabil-
ity barriers and maximize horizontal footage
within specic reservoir zones to improve oil
recovery. The technique of stair-step drilling
through various reservoir layers is operationally
difcult because of low angles of incidence
when trying to cross barriers. Another tech-
nique, drilling separate drainholes for each
reservoir zone, resulted in postdrilling problems
associated with production monitoring and stim-
ulation of individual drainholes.
Early water breakthroughMultilateral
wells are drilled to avoid or delay water break-
through by selecting the horizontal section posi-
tion and length within desired layers based on
specic reservoir requirements.
Low-departure targetsAnother challenge
was drilling multilateral wells with targets less
than 1000 ft [305 m] from the platform well-
heads. Various options were considered to drill
the deviated sections of these low-departure
multilateral wells, but a hook-shaped prole
was found to be operationally and economically
the best. This well prole can be designed to
have sufcient inclination to use previously suc-
cessful medium-radius drilling. Several hook-
shaped multilateral wells with four drainholes
from the main bore were successfully drilled
and completed.
Low-permeability zones One benet of a
multilateral approach is the ability to exploit
thin reservoirs. Developing stacked low-perme-
ability limestone oil reservoirs is typically
unattractive because of anticipated early water
breakthrough in vertical or deviated wells. One
of the elds reservoirs that held substantial oil
in place was a 8 ft [2.5 m] thick zone with 6-mD
permeability. Two branches were drilled in dif-
ferent directions to increase the drainage area
and improve production. The number and geom-
etry of the branches were dictated by reservoir
characteristics.
Staying within targetsAnother challenge
for drilling multilateral wells is to correctly
position and maintain horizontal sections
within existing sweep patterns. Since branches
drilled in opposing directions were found to be
optimum, severe left- and right-turning trajec-
tories must be drilled to achieve the required
reservoir exposure. A signicant increase in
production rates was observed in wells drilled
in this manner.
Multiple holes from a single casing
windowSeveral drainholes were successfully
drilled from the same main borehole after exit-
ing casing in reentry and new wells. This proce-
dure can avoid the time and expense of multiple
casing exits, but does limit the ability to moni-
tor and stimulate laterals.
Stimulation of multilateral openholes
ZADCO uses openhole completions that com-
mingled production from reservoirs I and II.
Production from these two main reservoirs is
kept separate using dual-tubing completion.
Because of the inability of current through-tub-
ing stimulation systems to access each drain-
hole selectively, common practice is to
bullhead stimulation treatmentspump down
the production tubing from suface. When possi-
ble coiled tubing was run through the produc-
tion tubing to selectively treat individual
openhole laterals in the main reservoirs.
Permeability variation in each productive
layer requires that acid be diverted across all
intervals where coiled tubing is unable to
reach total depth. Techniques using diverting
additives and procedures integrally combined
with stimulation acid treatments are successful
in increasing the productivity of some multilat-
eral wells, but in many wells these diversion
techniques cannot effectively stimulate the
desired number of laterals. Production logs are
being used to further evaluate stimulation
effectiveness as well as design and procedural
modifications.
Future Multilaterals
Multilateral drilling in Zakum eld provided an
opportunity to improve recovery and manage
eld production more efciently. Some 84 new
and reentry Level 1 and Level 2 multilateral
wells, from single and dual laterals up to seven
laterals, were drilled and completed success-
fully in the last four years. Multilateral horizon-
tal drilling brought new life to the elds thin,
low-permeability reservoirs where development
by deviated or vertical wells had not been effec-
tive. Horizontal wells with branches in opposing
directions were the optimum solution. The
future challenge is to conduct independent
operations in each lateral and overcome zonal
isolation difculties.
After comparing drilling costs for different
horizontal well typesmedium, intermediate-
radius and short-radiusZADCO determined
that short-radius drilling is more expensive than
medium-radius wells, but short-radius wells are
better in terms of production compared with
vertical wells. Through rapid growth in short-
radius drilling technology, the cost per foot of
horizontal drilling was reduced by 30% after
drilling 27 horizontal sections in ten wells.
Lower costs, resulting from steerable drilling
technology, encouraged ZADCO to continue
drilling multilateral horizontal wells.
4.8
2.6
1.6
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Mechanical
Hydraulic
Single-trip
hydraulic
W
i
n
d
o
w

m
i
l
l
i
n
g

d
u
r
a
t
i
o
n
,

d
a
y
s
Mechanical Hydraulic Single-trip
hydraulic
>
Retrievable whipstock and anchor window milling performance.
26 Oileld Review
Short-radius wells, small-diameter wells and
multiple radial slimholes are now being drilled
not only in the Texas Austin Chalk region, but
also in areas like the Middle East and Southeast
Asia. In Alaska, USA, for instance, BP and Camco
have drilled multilaterals with build angles of
around 1.8/ft, changing the well from vertical to
horizontal in approximately 50 ft [15 m]. This
steep build rate produces less formation damage,
requires less time for drilling to target, uses less
drilling uid, and is generally more economical.
Small-diameter boreholes are drilled to
reduce cost, and multiple slimhole horizontal
reentries can be drilled from small-diameter
wells to further increase reservoir exposure.
Coiled tubing is also employed to drill multiple
radials from the main bore. Coiled tubing drilling
is frequently used to remove near-wellbore for-
mation damage to increase reservoir ow poten-
tial, but in the Snorre eld, Norway, for example,
has also been used for drilling drainholes to
replace perforations.
Multilateral reentry is not the sidetracking
technique used for decades to salvage old well-
bores that would otherwise have to be aban-
doned. Rather, it is an evolving technology for
producing from and working over both the main
bore and the laterals. Determining the right tech-
niques for reentering multilateral wells to per-
form stimulation, acidizing, perforating or any
other uid pumping operation is a key problem
confronting the oil industry today. As well cong-
urations become more complex, the degree of
difculty increases.
Two major challenges are reentering a single
branch at a specic depth and reentering multi-
ple branches at the same depth. In addition, com-
pletion type, whether openhole or cased, the
hole size and the vertical-to-lateral build rate
represent primary factors involved in the selec-
tion of proper reentry techniques. The need to
hydraulically isolate laterals impacts the choice
of solution as well.
Reentry is a two-step operation: recognize the
entry point and enter the lateral. One recognition
method is accomplished by running a tool on
coiled tubing that rotates to reentry depth. The
tool has a bend on the end that provides a surface
weight change indication when the bend enters a
lateral opening. The Schlumberger coiled tubing
VIPER system also has a bottom orientation sub
that is used to locate and access laterals.
Mechanical methods are another way of
achieving lateral entry. In a minimum of three
runs, a whipstock diverting device is set; coiled
tubing work is performed; and the diverter is
retrieved. The tool carrying the diverter controls
depth as it lands on a predened tubing or casing
prole nipple. The nipple provides tool orientation
and allows the diverter to be located accurately at
the lateral opening. This technique is used with
completion equipment designed specically for
through-tubing reentry into laterals.
Reentry technology is evolving towards viable
and reliable systems most likely based on a cas-
ing prole nipple or a tubing nipple and ported
tubing sub aligned with the casing window, to
which a bottomhole assembly will attach. An ori-
entation locator coupled with upper and lower
packer assemblies will nd the orientation nipple
and align the lateral access joint in the correct
direction. A landing nipple plug will be used to
isolate the lower packer or window joint for test-
ing. An orientation device to accept a coiled tub-
ing-conveyed diverter will facilitate access to the
lateral opening for reentry.
6
Wellbore Management
In production engineering and operation of multi-
lateral wells, the key considerations are whether
a well needs articial lift and the degree to which
imposed formation pressure drawdown is
affected by frictional pressure drop inside the
well. For example, short opposed laterals are
preferable to a long, single horizontal well in one
direction if drawdown is about the same as pres-
sure drop in the wellbore. Conversely, if draw-
down is several hundred psi, or more, a single
horizontal leg may be adequate.
Selective wellbore control is provided by
three basic completion congurations: individual
production tubing strings tied back to surface,
commingled production, and commingled produc-
tion from individual branches that can be reen-
tered or shut off by mechanical sliding sleeves or
plugs. These options relate directly to reservoir
management because the need for selective con-
trol increases as wellbores are opened to more
areas of the reservoir. For example, laterals that
drain multiple layers or different formations
require selective management if pore pressures
and uid properties differ widely between zones.
The degree of communication between the
drainage areas of individual laterals may be the
most important reservoir engineering issue in
multilateral applications.
There are logistical and operational issues in
completing certain well systems that may be
dictated by obvious reservoir exploitation strate-
gies and schemes. Currently, multilateral wells
can be constructed with connectivity, isolation
and access. Numerous completion choices are
available. The following three congurations are
common:
Drain several stacked layers that may not be in
communication
Drain a single layer in which areal permeability
anisotropy is critical
Drain geologic compartments that may not be
in communication.
Draining stacked layers favors a vertical
main bore, but heterogeneous and com-
partmentalized reservoirs favor a single
horizontal well, dual-opposing laterals, or multi-
branched wells. Commingled production from
stacked laterals is analogous to commingled
production from two or more layers in a vertical
well. The two main advantages of stacked later-
als are that each lateral has greater productivity
than a conventional vertical completion through
the same layer, and that control of vertical
inow, or conformance, is facilitated because
the productivity of each lateral is approximately
proportional to its length. Vertical ow confor-
mance avoids differential depletion under pri-
mary production and uneven water or gas
breakthrough under secondary production.
7
Future Multilateral Technology
Optimal multilateral connectivity will depend on
the development of reliable junctions between
the main bore and laterals as well as new com-
pletion strategies to connect more lateral well-
bores with productive reservoir intervals. A rst
step will be the improvement of casing windows
to facilitate efcient drilling and reentry of multi-
ple lateral drainholes. Many in the industry
believe that a technique must be developed to
seal casing window connections. Considerable
effort is being expended to perfect a reliable
mechanical seal or new chemical sealants for
TAML Level 6 wells to provide pressure integrity
at the junction. Others maintain that the vast
majority of multilaterals exit the main bore into
the same reservoir, where the pressure differen-
tial at the junction is negligible. They advocate
that, rather than pressure integrity, priority be
given to developing fit-for-purpose junction
integrity to increase production and the ability to
manage laterals over the life of a well.
27 Winter 1998
6. Turcich TA: Pressure-Control Engineering, presented at
the SPE Fourth European Coiled Tubing Roundtable,
Aberdeen, Scotland, November 19-20,1997.
7. Ehlig-Economides et al, reference 4.
Downhole construction of lateral junctions
has associated problems such as generating
debris and lack of cementing options. Surface
construction, as in Level 6S wells, which can be
done for new wells only, is debris-free, but lim-
ited to shallow wells.
There are also opposing opinions about con-
struction of casing windows. Construction down-
hole favors milling standard casing by
referencing inexpensive casing prole nipples or
packers. Multiple nipples can be designed into
casing strings, permitting operators to choose
sidetrack locations when they are ready and pro-
viding a reentry sleeve reference as well.
Another possibility is to run a composite casing
section with a prole nipple below it from which
the drilling whipstock and lateral entry system
sleeve can be spaced. Although there is no
milling, casing strength is compromised (left).
Premilled windows or casing stock that has
removable sleeves or is encased in drillable mate-
rial are promoted by many to provide tensile
strength without having to mill downhole. As with
composites, the whipstock and lateral entry sys-
tem sleeve are deployed through casing nipples.
Generally, lateral casing is allowed to protrude
into the main casing, where it is cemented in
place and then milled or washed over to restore
full main bore diameter. Both mechanical and
pressure-tight tie-backs are being developed.
8
Other technical issues need to be resolved as
well, including the management and monitoring
of production. Downhole control of ow with
remotely operated chokes and other ow devices
that independently optimize individual laterals
and selectively shut-off zones to block water and
gasintelligent completionswill aid produc-
tion management. Downhole permanent gauges
for each lateral are also on the drawing board to
monitor changes in pressure, temperature, ow
rate, and water and gas cut. When connected to
surface systems, these advances will permit
additional surface measurement and eventually,
the allocation of ow from each lateral. Selective
reentry will permit servicing of these devices and
sensors, and allow batch treating of each lateral.
Future multilateral wells will involve fewer
trips into the well, incorporation of sealed lateral
devices, and a full range of downhole controls
and sensors to regulate ow, pressure and multi-
phase differentials. Downhole uid separation
and injection will be accomplished with surface
control, and expensive rig interventions will be
virtually eliminated by electrohydraulic control of
downhole functions. This trend will reverse the
risk-reward ratio offshore, where risks are high
and reserves are large, in favor of multilaterals
(left). Ultimately, multilateral well technology
will be the basis for the intelligent completions
that will one day yield remotely operated subter-
ranean and subsea factories with oil and gas as
the nished products. DG, DEB, RR, MET
4
1
/2-in. upper tubing
13
3
/8-in. casing
Top of liner
3680 ft, TVD
M-seal sealant
Window bushing
assembly
Top of window
3858 ft, TVD
7-in. composite joint
Hollow whipstock
Orienting latch
Multilateral packer
Orienting nipple
Retrievable packer
TD 8439 ft, MD
4
1
/2-in. predrilled
casing
6
1
/8-in. open hole
6
1
/8-in. open hole
9
5
/8-in. casing
7-in. liner 4798 ft, MD
TD 8439 ft, MD
>
Composite casing section with a nipple prole.
>
Intelligent completions. Future multilateral completions may involve many processes, from formation
drainage to downhole separation, inow control, injection and reservoir monitoring.
28 Oileld Review
8. Turcich, reference 6.
Tim J. Bourgeois
Ken Bramlett
Pete Craig
Shell Deepwater Production, Inc.
New Orleans, Louisiana, USA
Darrel Cannon
Kyel Hodeneld
John Lovell
Sugar Land, Texas, USA
Ray Harkins
Ian Pigram
ARCO British Limited
Guildford, Surrey, England
For help in preparation of this article, thanks to
Dave Bergt, Schlumberger Oileld Services, Sugar Land,
Texas, USA; Ted Bornemann, Bill Carpenter, Frank Shray
and Rachel Strickland, Anadrill, Sugar Land, Texas;
Joseph Chiaramonte and Darwin Ellis, Schlumberger-Doll
Research, Ridgeeld, Connecticut, USA; Craig Kienitz,
Anadrill, The Hague, The Netherlands; Martin Lling,
Schlumberger Riboud Product Center, Clamart, France;
Dave Maggs, Anadrill, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA; and
David Robertson, Forest Oil, Denver, Colorado, USA.
ADN (Azimuthal Density Neutron), ARC5 (Array Resistivity
Compensated), ARC675, CDR (Compensated Dual
Resistivity), ELAN (Elemental Log Analysis), FMI (Fullbore
Formation MicroImager), GeoVISION675, PowerPulse, RAB
(Restivity-at-the-Bit), TLC (Tough Logging Conditions),
VISION475, VISION675, VISION First Look and VISION Telemetry
Protocol are marks of Schlumberger.
Logging-while-drilling (LWD) technology became
available a mere ten years ago. At that time, the
tools fulfilled the primary purpose of their
design, which was to aid in correlation. Within a
couple of years, the industry had found six main
applications for these toolsapplications that
remain key today:
Formation evaluationReal-time correlation
and evaluation allow coring and casing point
selection. Logging before extensive invasion
occurs may reveal hydrocarbon zones that can be
saturated with borehole uid by the time wire-
line logs are run.
Multiple-pass loggingComparison logs
made at different times can help distinguish pay
from water zones, locate uid contacts and iden-
tify true formation resistivity (R
t
). Permeable
zones may be identied from time-lapse ltrate
movement.
Insurance loggingLogs obtained while
drilling provide contingency data in case the well
is lost or when conditions create boreholes that
yield poor-quality wireline logs.
Cost reductionRunning wireline tools in
high-deviation wells requires conveyance by
drillpipe. In some cases, these wells can be
logged with LWD tools, either while or immedi-
ately after drilling, saving rig time offshore or in
wells otherwise needing the TLC Tough Logging
Conditions system.
Enhancing drilling safety and efciency
Measurements while drilling provide real-time
data on drillstring mechanics, uid dynamics and
petrophysics for assessing pore pressure and
wellbore stability and for drilling program and
completion strategies (see Using Downhole
Annular Pressure Measurements to Improve
Drilling Performance, page 40).
GeosteeringBy comparing real-time log
responses to an expected model, the wellbore
trajectory is modied, thereby placing the well in
the most productive portion of a pay zone.
As the real-time nature of LWD information
began to be fully exploited, the early emphasis
on correlation in the late 1980s gave way to dom-
inance by geosteering and well-placement appli-
cations. Availability of LWD data permitted safe
and efcient drilling of exotic trajectories and
extended-reach and multilateral wells that were
unimaginable ten years ago (see Key Issues in
Multilateral Technology, page 14). These wells
frequently make headlines in industry journals
when technological advances contribute to
breaking existing directional drilling records.
1
Pushing the Limits of Formation
Evaluation While Drilling
Through a few case studies this article demonstrates how new
logging-while-drilling measurements are being used to open
frontiers and evaluate formations as soon as they are encountered.
29 Winter 1998
1. Allen F, Tooms P, Conran G, Lesso B and Van de Slijke P:
Extended-Reach Drilling: Breaking the 10-km Barrier,
Oileld Review 9, no. 4 (Winter 1997): 32-47.
Many of the LWD innovations that have
helped directional drillers master the art and sci-
ence of geosteering are also advancing the cause
of assessing reservoir quality while drilling.
Forward modeling routines have been developed
that allow real-time comparison between pre-
dicted and observed logs, helping drillers stay in
the pay.
2
This modeling capability also lets inter-
preters evaluate LWD data for petrophysical and
uid properties and for geologic structure.
Oil company interpreters are becoming more
familiar with while-drilling measurements,
understanding their departure from wireline-
style logs, and trusting them. Operators are also
demanding more measurements for more hole
sizes, and as a result, a broader range of services
is being offered. The more comprehensive reser-
voir assessment that is now possible makes LWD
formation evaluation results valuable not only for
wellsite decisions, but also for longer term reser-
voir planning and developmentas wireline log-
ging results have been all along.
Ten years ago, the available LWD measure-
ments were gamma ray, neutron porosity, litho-
density, photoelectric effect and phase-shift and
attenuation resistivities.
3
In the interim, techno-
logical advancements have vastly improved and
enhanced these basic measurements and even
added new formation evaluation measurements
not previously available in the logging industry.
First came azimuthal or quadrant measurements
such as the quadrant density and photoelectric
factor (Pe) on the ADN Azimuthal Density Neutron
tool and the quadrant gamma ray and real-time
resistivities on the RAB Resistivity-at-the-Bit tool.
Then came quantitative images with multiple-
depth resistivity images from the RAB tool and
density images from the VISION475 system. The
addition of multiple depths of investigation to the
azimuthal data has created new opportunities to
complete the formation evaluation picture.
The comprehensive Schlumberger VISION475
system (the nominal outer diameter of the tool is
4.75 inches) encompasses the enhanced technol-
ogy to provide formation evaluation and drilling
measurements in 5
3
4- to 6
3
4-in. holes. In addition
to direction, inclination and toolface, the
VISION475 tool makes a neutron porosity mea-
surement, azimuthal readings of lithodensity, Pe
and gamma ray, and records 2-MHz phase-shift
and attenuation resistivities at up to ten depths
of investigation.
Deciphering phase-shift measurements with
multiple depths of investigation for resistivity
interpretation has become common practice in
the industry. However, the inclusion of attenua-
tion resistivity measurements with multiple
depths of investigation has brought additional
value to the petrophysicist. Although acquired
with the same transmitter-receiver spacing, the
attenuation measurement has a greater depth of
investigation than the corresponding phase-shift
measurement. These complementary measure-
ments offer an opportunity to understand more
about the uid and resistivity characteristics of
the formation. For example, comparison of atten-
> Possible oil-water contact
on phase-shift resistivity.
The gamma ray (GR) in
track 1 shows sand from
7740 to 8020 ft, and the
phase-shift resistivity in
track 2 indicates the zone
above 7920 has high
resistivitya possible pay
zone above the oil-water
contact. Attenuation
resistivity in track 3 shows
the possible oil layer to be to
a zone of resistive invasion,
and not worth completing.
30 Oileld Review
>
uation and phase-shift resistivities provides a
diagnostic method for differentiating between
borehole uid invasion and formation anisotropy,
a technique discussed later in this article
In one case from a Forest Oil well in the Gulf
of Mexico, the while-drilling gamma ray (GR)
indicated a sand from 7740 to 8020 ft and the
phase-shift resistivities identied a possible oil-
water contact at 7920 ft (previous page). The ve
phase-shift resistivities, each with a different
depth of investigation, have very little separa-
tion, which indicates little to no invasion. A sim-
ple resistivity index calculation yields 38% water
saturation, making the potential oil layer a candi-
date for testing.
However, the attenuation resistivities that are
simultaneously recorded by the VISION475 tool
appear to contain evidence to the contrary. These
deeper reading resistivities show signicant sep-
aration, with the deepest measurementan
approximately 30-in. [75-cm] depth of investiga-
tion from the 34-in. receiver-transmitter spac-
ingrecording the lowest resistivity of about 0.4
ohm-m. This prole indicates resistive invasion,
which might be expected for wells drilled with
oil-base mud, but this was water-base mud with
a resistivity, R
m
, of 0.1 ohm-m. However, forma-
tion water resistivity, R
w
, in this zone is approxi-
mately 0.03 ohm-m, causing the resistive
invasion prole. When formation resistivity is
computed by inversion processing that takes
invasion into account, the zone shows 100%
water saturation. If this zone had been com-
pleted, a signicant investment would have pro-
duced only water. The extra information brought
by the deeper reading attenuation measurements
avoided the cost of an unnecessary completion.
Extracting meaningful information from the
two-receiver, ve-transmitter tool conguration to
probe ve depths of investigation each for phase-
shift and attenuation resistivity requires careful
borehole compensation and borehole correction
of the measurements. Without borehole correc-
tion, washouts together with conductive mud can
masquerade as invaded or anisotropic zones.
Borehole rugosity can cause spikes, or resistivity
horns that may be misinterpreted as laminated
formations (above). Borehole compensation is
necessary because it signicantly reduces the
effects of borehole rugosity and precisely cancels
measurement errors caused by gain and phase-
shift differences in the receivers electronics,
which typically vary with temperature.
>
Borehole compensation for accurate VISION475 multidepth measurements. Without borehole compensation and correction (top), spikes and
separations in the curves of the phase-shift resistivity measurements cannot be interpreted reliably. With correction (bottom), high-resolution
data and curve separations can be identied and interpreted.
31 Winter 1998
2. Bonner S, Burgess T, Clark B, Decker D, Orban J,
Prevedel B, Lling M and White J: Measurements at the
Bit: A New Generation of MWD Tools, Oileld Review 5,
no. 2/3 (April/July 1993): 44-54.
Bonner S, Fredette M, Lovell J, Montaron B, Rosthal R,
Tabanou J, Wu P, Clark B, Mills R and Williams R:
Resistivity While DrillingImages from the String,
Oileld Review 8, no. 1 (Spring 1996): 4-19.
Allen D, Dennis B, Edwards J, Franklin S, Livingson J,
Kirkwood A, White J, Lehtonen L, Lyon B, Prilliman J and
Simms G: Modeling Logs for Horizontal Well Planning
and Evaluation, Oileld Review 7, no. 4 (Winter 1995):
47-63.
3. Bonner S, Clark B, Holenka J, Voisin B, Dusang J,
Hansen R, White J and Walsgrove T: Logging While
Drilling: A Three-Year Perspective, Oileld Review 4,
no. 3 (July 1992): 4-21.
A series of logs from a Shell deep-water pro-
ject in the Gulf of Mexico demonstrates the
impact of adding still more LWD measurements
to the interpretation. In this highly deviated well,
the standard GR, rate of penetration (ROP),
phase-shift resistivity and average density and
neutron data indicate a homogeneous formation
in this potential pay zone (above). The well was
drilled with high-salinity drill-in uid, and phase-
shift curves exhibit a conductive invasion prole
with the deepest spacing at 34-in. measuring the
highest resistivity, about 4 ohm-m. Resistivity
processing to compensate for the invasion
effects would correct R
t
to above 4 ohm-m.
This is the limit of information available from
a conventional triple combo be it LWD or a
wireline system, and it appears to give a
respectable interpretation of the reservoir, but
the VISION475 system provides more information
and sheds new light on the reservoir interval.
If this were truly a conductive invasion prole,
as the phase-shift measurement indicates, the
deepest attenuation curves would show higher
resistivity than the deepest phase-shift curves.
However, all the attenuation outputs read a
lower resistivity than even the shallowest phase-
shift curve. This is an example of resistivity
anisotropya difference in resistivity value
depending on the direction in which the mea-
>
Formation evaluation while drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. In this highly deviated well the GR and ROP in track 1, phase-shift and attenuation resistivities in
tracks 2, 3 and 4, and average density and neutron data in tracks 3 and 5 indicate a homogeneous pay formation. Phase-shift resistivity curve separation
suggests conductive invasion, but this is not conrmed by attenuation resistivities; resistivity anisotropy is responsible. Quadrant displays of density, on top,
bottom, left and right of the borehole, are in tracks 6 and 7.
32 Oileld Review
surement is made (see the rst case study from 7700 to 7740 ft for another
example of anisotropy, page 30).
4
In vertical wells penetrating horizontal layers with no invasion, 2-MHz
tools measure horizontal resistivity, R
h
. This is taken as equivalent to R
t
, the
resistivity input to most formulae derived to predict uid saturation, and so
serves as the reference, or threshold, by which formations are judged to con-
tain pay or not. At other angles, for example, in highly deviated and horizon-
tal wells passing through horizontal layers, 2-MHz tools respond to some
combination of vertical and horizontal resistivities. Vertical resistivity (R
v
), or
resistivity perpendicular to bedding, is always at least as much as, and usu-
ally more than, horizontal resistivitysometimes reaching a 10 to 1 ratio (see
Anisotropy and Invasion, next page).
In the case at hand, the phase-shift curves are each reading a different
combination of horizontal and vertical resistivity, depending on the transmit-
ter-receiver spacing. Formation resistivity, R
t
, is not greater than 4 ohm-m, as
would have been calculated by a radial-invasion resistivity inversion program.
An anisotropy inversion program can be used to calculate R
h
and R
v
, and then
R
h
is used in water saturation calculations to derive S
w
.
Density curves from the VISION475 log also provide more information than
previous-generation LWD density tools, which combine weighted averages of
density from all around the borehole. The density and Pe measurements of
the VISION475 tool are recorded in 16 oriented sectors. These can be displayed
either as an image, or presented as four quadrantstop, bottom, right and
leftas the drillstring rotates (below).
For a rst view, the bottom and average densities can be compared for
consistency (previous page). This log was recorded in a highly deviated well,
so the bottom-quadrant density, in closer contact with the borehole, should
give the best quantitative data. In this interval, not only does the bottom-
quadrant density disagree with the average density, but it also occasionally
measures a lower bulk density. This appears strange because assuming the
bottom of the tool is in contact with the formation also implies that the top
of the tool is not. When that occurs, the mud density, which here is less than
that of the formation, should inuence the top-quadrant reading and as a
result, the average density would tend to be lower.
Taking the next step in evaluating this well, all four quadrant densities are
presented with photoelectric factor and bulk density correction for each quad-
rant (left). The right and left density quadrants agree well throughout the
entire interval. The top and bottom quadrant densities not only disagree, but
cross each other. A threaded borehole, borehole breakout, or a combination
of heavy mud and hole conditions could explain this unusual response. The
response could also be due to a position change of the borehole assembly in
< What quadrant densities mean. Density mea-
surements are gathered into four quadrants
top, bottom, right and leftas the drillstring
rotates. If the VISION475 tool cuts across a layer
boundary with a near full-gauge stabilizer (left),
all quadrant measurements are quantitative.
The view is along the tool axis, which in this
case is also in the plane of the layer boundary.
Quadrant density measurements readily dene
this boundary, providing a distinct bulk density
in each layer. Without a stabilizer (right) the tool
tends to lie on the bottom side of the hole, giving
better borehole contact and so better quality
to the bottom quadrant measurement. The top
quadrant measurement would be qualitative
due to the standoff distance.
33 Winter 1998
4. Anderson B, Bryant I, Lling M, Spies B and Helbig K: Oileld Anisotropy: Its Origins and
Electrical Characteristics, Oileld Review 6, no. 4 (October 1994): 48-56.
Lling MG, Rosthal RA and Shray F: Processing and Modeling 2-MHz Resistivity Tools in
Dipping, Laminated, Anisotropic Formations, Transactions of the SPWLA 35th Annual
Logging Symposium, Tulsa, Oklahoma, USA, June 19-22, 1994, paper QQ.
>
Many resistivity logs exhibit a combination of
anisotropy, invasion and shoulder (adjacent)
bed effects, and each effect must be taken into
account to deduce true formation resistivity.
Resistivity anisotropy can be caused by layer-
ing, lithology or uid content. It is typically
expressed as the ratio of vertical to horizontal
resistivity, R
v
/R
h
, and its effects on tool response
can be understood by modeling. The standard
response of 2-MHz tools in vertical wells pene-
trating horizontal layers with no invasion is
taken as the reference, and tool response to lay-
ers at other relative angles can be computed
(below left).
In this model the formation consists of a sand
interbedded with an equal amount of shale for
an anisotropy ratio R
v
/R
h
of 6.7. As the relative
angle increases, the apparent resistivity mea-
sured by both phase shift and attenuation
increases. Above 45 degrees, the effect is
greater on the longer spacings; for example, the
phase-shift 34-in. curve measures a higher
apparent resistivity than the phase-shift 28-in.
curve. The curve order resembles a conductive
invasion prole, and therefore may be misinter-
preted. Anisotropy can cause resistivities mea-
sured in high-angle wells to be deceptively high.
Two keys are used to distinguish conductive
invasion from anisotropy. The rst is comparison
of phase-shift to attenuation measurements:
although phase-shift resistivities indicate a con-
ductive invasion prole, corresponding attenua-
tion outputs measure lower resistivity. If
conductive invasion were causing the phase-shift
curve separation, the deeper reading attenuation
outputs would measure a higher apparent resis-
tivity than the phase-shift curves. This is an
important use of attenuation measurements. The
second key is revealed in the modeled exam-
plethe curves are uniformly separated when
viewed on a logarithmic scale. Uniform separa-
tion is less common with invasion.
If anisotropy can be identied in sands, it is
usually an indication of hydrocarbons. However,
in anisotropic formations that are hydrocarbon-
bearing, deep invasion could hide the
anisotropic response if R
mf
and R
w
are similar.
1
To understand the effect of invasion on an
anisotropic formation, a state-of-the-art 3D
nite-difference code was developed that com-
putes phase-shift and attenuation responses
with increasing diameter of invasion.
2
Resistivity responses were modeled for an
anisotropic formaton whose anisotropy changes
with invasion (below right). The virgin forma-
tion anisotropy ratio, R
vt
/R
ht
, is 6.8, but once
invaded, the anisotropy ratio falls to 1.25
nearly isotropic. This change will have different
effects on the phase-shift and attenuation resis-
tivity responses, depending on their depth of
investigation. For invasion diameters less than
15 in., the anisotropy effect dominates.
Anisotropy is recognizable by separated phase-
shift curves reading higher than attenuation
curves. At invasion diameters greater than 50
inches, the effects of invasion rule curve separa-
tion. Measuring phase-shift and attenuation
resistivities before extensive invasion is there-
fore crucial when anisotropy is present.
Anisotropy and Invasion
>
Effects of anisotropy on phase-shift and attenuation resistivities. Anisotropy
becomes evident as the relative angle between bedding and tool axis increases.
The curves resemble those seen in a conductive invasion prole except that with
anisotropy, phase-shift curves read more resistive than attenuation.
>
Effect of invasion on an anisotropic formation. In this formation, which is
anisotropic before invasion, but less so after, modeling shows that for invasion
diameters less than 15 in., the anisotropy is still interpretable from phase-shift
and attenuation resistivity curves. After invasion diameters surpass 50 in., the
effects of invasion mask the anisotropy of the virgin formation.
34 Oileld Review
1. Klein JD, Martin PR and Allen DF: The Petrophysics of
Electrically Anisotropic Reservoirs, Transactions of the
SPWLA 36th Annual Logging Symposium, Paris, France,
June 26-29, 1995, paper HH.
2. Anderson B, Druskin V, Habashy T, Lee P, Lling M,
Barber T, Grove G, Lovell J, Rosthal R, Tabanou J,
Kennedy D and Shen L: New Dimensions in Modeling
Resistivity, Oileld Review 9, no. 1 (Spring 1997): 40-56.
the wellbore caused by changes in wellbore incli-
nation. But no interpretation guesses are neces-
sary because the VISION475 system clearly
provides the answer with density image data.
The density images reveal the detail of reser-
voir congurationa series of thin sands and
shales dipping at varying angles relative to the
borehole (below left). These VISION475 images
provide an easy and efcient means of interpret-
ing complex data. The rst track image is color-
scaled to represent measured quantitative
density variations, while in the second track the
variations have been enhanced by changing the
color scale to bring out detail.
Throughout this interval, the azimuthal density
imaging was the only measurement to ag the
subtle sand-shale layering. The lessons learned
are twofold: rst, the standard suite of GR, resis-
tivity, neutron and average density measurements
may not always be sufcient for complete forma-
tion evaluation. In this case, all the standard mea-
surements pointed to a homogeneous zone.
Clearly the revelation of a laminated sand-shale
sequence can have an impact on the appraisal of
reservoir quality and its subsequent drainage.
Second, techniques that assume maximum den-
sity to be the correct density would greatly under-
estimate porosity and distort the true reservoir
character. This new information is valuable not
only to drillers in real time, but also to well plan-
ners who may need to change future drilling tra-
jectories, to completion engineers for effecting
more efcient completions, to reservoir engineers
for modeling and simulating production and to
geologists for calculating structural dip.
5
Invasion, Dip and Gas
The previous examples show how LWD logs
improve formation evaluation in deviated oil
wells with invaded zones, anisotropic layers and
thin dipping beds. Determining accurate values
of porosity and water saturation in gas wells
under these conditions, however, has been a
special problem that only recently is seeing
some resolution.
In vertical wells, depth of invasion of mud l-
trate into a formation depends on many factors,
including mud properties and lithology, porosity
and absolute and relative permeability of the for-
mation. In the simplest case of a vertical hole in
a homogeneous permeable formation, the inva-
sion prole is radially symmetric. But when
impermeable or dipping layers, or both, are
encountered, the volume invaded by borehole
uid takes on a new shape (below right).
The invasion front becomes even more dis-
torted in a gas zone, because the borehole uid is
so much heavier than the formation gas. Invasion
begins radially, but with time the heavier phase
g/cm
3
ROP
RHOB Image
Gamma Ray
API
Image Orientation
g/cm
3
Image Orientation
U R B L U
degrees 0 90
200 0
ft/hr
1:240 Apparent
Dip
True
Dip
0 90
degrees
U R B L U
0 100
Dynamic RHOB Image
DEVI Deviation
M
e
a
s
u
r
e
d
D
e
p
t
h
,

f
t
2.05 2.45
XX300
XX250
XX200
XX350
>
Density image from the VISION475 system. Measured densities appear in track 1, and
are redisplayed to highlight detail in track 2. Structural dips (green dots in track 3) are
hand picked using the same process as for wireline FMI Fullbore Formation Micro-
Imager data and relative dip to the borehole is calculated (blue dots). These images
are also useful for calculating a sand count or determining the net-to-gross sand ratio.
Filtrate
Impermeable
layer
Impermeable
layer
Slumped
filtrate
Wellbore
W
e
l
l
b
o
r
e
>
Invasion and slumping ltrate. A radial
invasion front becomes distorted in the
presence of a horizontal layer (top) or dipping
impermeable layer (bottom).
35 Winter 1998
5. Bornemann E, Bourgeois T, Bramlett K, Hodeneld K and
Maggs D: The Application and Accuracy of Geological
Information from a Logging-While-Drilling Density Tool,
Transactions of the SPWLA 39th Annual Logging
Symposium, Keystone, Colorado, USA, May 26-29, 1998,
paper L.
slumps in the down-dip direction. The rate of
slumping depends on the vertical permeability of
each zone: the higher the vertical permeability,
the more rapid the slumping. In addition, perme-
ability anisotropy will distort slump geometry. In
formations with permeability on the order of one
darcy, strong azimuthal variations in invasion
have been observed less than an hour after the
bit penetrates the formation.
In gas zones, such variations can make quan-
titative porosity interpretation from nuclear tools
an even greater challenge than usual. Porosity
determination from nuclear tools requires that
the effects of gas be removed. For this, knowl-
edge of the gas volume and both radial and
azimuthal location is needed. Further complicat-
ing the problem, the neutron and density mea-
surements respond differently to the radial and
azimuthal location of gas. The neutron tool reads
deeper and is sensitive to any gas near the bore-
hole, relatively independent of the azimuthal
location of the gas. The density tool reads shal-
lower and is sensitive only to the gas in front of
its detectors.
What is needed is a way to quantify the vol-
ume of gas radially and azimuthally over the
same region of formation that the density and
neutron logs investigate. Then those volumes are
used to apply appropriate gas corrections to the
nuclear tools for nal computation of porosity.
Radial and azimuthal gas quantication is
accomplished by analyzing while-drilling quad-
rant resistivity data acquired as the RAB tool
rotates in the borehole. The RAB tool investi-
gates a region similar to that probed by nuclear
tools, and has ve depths of investigation. By
D
e
p
t
h
,

f
t
X050
X100
X150
X200
ohm-m
Porosity
p.u.
RAB Resistivity
RAB
Resistivity
VISION
Density
T
o
p
B
o
t
t
o
m
T
o
p
B
o
t
t
o
m
T
o
p
0.1 100 40 0
Shallow Button Down
Shallow Button Up
Deep Button Up
CDR
Density Up
Density Down
Neutron
>
Images of invasion slump. Density and RAB images show ltrate slumping, but not always down. Track 1 displays resistivities:
three from the RAB tool and attenuation resistivity from the CDR Compensated Dual Resistivity tool. Additional ltrate detected by
the resistivity in the down direction compared to the up direction is shaded. Similarly for the porosity curves in track 2, the left
curves are from the up and down quadrants of the density tool and the right curve is from the neutron tool. Track 3 contains the RAB
image, with white most resistive, and track 4 shows the density image with dark as the most dense, and lighter colors as less dense.
36 Oileld Review
using readings from all around the borehole,
three of those depths of measurement can be
partitioned azimuthally into 56 segments. From
these three measurements, three quantities can
be solved forthe diameter of invasion, DI;
invaded zone resistivity, R
xo
; and true formation
resistivity, R
t
in any or all of the 56 azimuthal
segments. R
xo
and R
t
are assumed to be constant
around the hole; only DI varies. The determina-
tion of R
t
is most robust from the direction with
minimum DI, and R
xo
is most robust from the
direction with maximum DI.
Correcting the LWD density and neutron tools
requires an appropriate radial response function
and appropriate DI; both are different for each
tool. The qualitative response of density and neu-
tron tools has long been understood.
7
The radial
response function of the density tool has been
quantied and is relatively independent of the
uids involved. The neutron radial response func-
tion has been elusive, but Ellis and Chiaramonte
of Schlumberger-Doll Research, Ridgefield,
Connecticut, USA have recently completed a
modeling code to allow the response to be calcu-
lated under all conditions. Their modeling shows
that the neutron responds to the gas closest to
the borehole. Therefore the DI needed to correct
the neutron is the minimum DI computed around
the wellbore. In the typical slumping-filtrate
case, the closest gas usually is at the top of the
hole or possibly on the sides, but denitely not at
the bottom. The DI for the density correction is
the one computed in the direction the density
sensor is pointing.
Finally R
xo
, R
t
, invasion factors for density and
neutron, bulk density, neutron porosity, plus
appropriate parameters are entered in ELAN
Elemental Log Analysis software to solve for
porosity and water saturation.
This method was tested by partners ARCO
and Enterprise on a North Sea gas well deviated
about 40 encountering formations with 70
apparent dip. Images from the ADN and RAB
tools plot the location of the higher density,
lower resistivity mud filtrate, which did not
always slump straight down (previous page). The
diameter of invasion is plotted, and the com-
puted porosity displayed for comparison with
core measurements (above).
in.
30 0
in.
30 0
D
e
p
t
h
,

f
t
X050
X100
X150
X200
Porosity
p.u.
0 40
Depth of Invasion
RAB Down
RAB Up
Neutron
Quadrant Corrected Effective Porosity
Density Down
Density Up
Core porosity
>
Porosity computed from corrected neutron- and density-while-drilling data. Track 1 displays the diameter of invasion, DI,
used to calculate corrections. The area between DI calculated from the up- and down-RAB measurements is shaded. Track 2
contains porosities from up- and down-quadrant density measurements, neutron measurements and core (red dots). The
effective porosity computed after corrections (orange curve) compares favorably with core measurements.
7. Sherman H and Locke S: Depth of Investigation of
Neutron and Density Sondes for 35-Percent-Porosity Sand,
Transactions of the SPWLA 16th Annual Logging
Symposium, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, 1975, paper Q.
37 Winter 1998
Getting a First Look
High-quality images provide valuable input to the
interpretation process. Geological information,
such as laminations, location of the wellbore
with respect to bed boundaries and the apparent
dip magnitude and direction of bedding planes, is
essential for interpreting log responses in highly
deviated wells. Images quickly reveal whether
the bit is drilling down into or up through bedding
planescritical for geosteering a well and ren-
ing geological interpretations.
The VISION First Look display is a wellsite
answer product that combines images with the
complete VISION dataset to provide a format for
quickly interpreting logs in highly deviated wells
and making drilling decisions. In this real-time
interpretation for the Shell deep-water Ram
Powell eld in the Gulf of Mexico, the horizontal
wellbore is drilled in a clean sand sheet deposit
nearly parallel to bedding. During drilling, several
tight or hard features were encountered unex-
pectedly (above). Rate of penetration dropped
signicantly, and resistivity and bulk density
increased while neutron porosity approached
zero p.u. These tight streaks were a surprise,
because two vertical wells drilled in this area
had not encountered such a feature.
These tight streaks were of concern, as they
might inuence production, perhaps necessitat-
ing a change in wellbore trajectory. They rst
were assumed to be depositional features lying
parallel to bedding. However, careful examina-
tion of the signature of the events on the density
and neutron curves reveals that these are vertical
interfaces. If the hard streaks were parallel to
bedding planes, the tool would encounter the
boundary more gradually and the measurement
transition from reservoir to tight streak would
occur over some distance. These transitions are
quite abrupt, indicating a high-angle boundary.
100
Gamma Ray
API
0
100 0
ft/hr
ROP5
D
e
p
t
h
,

f
t
XX500
XX550
XX600
1 100
ohm-m
Density, Bottom
g/cm
3
1.65 2.65
Neutron Porosity
0.6 0
ft
3
/ft
3
22-in. Phase-Shift
Resistivity
Real-time data revealing tight treaks.
While drilling in the Ram Powell eld,
Gulf of Mexico, tight streaks were
encountered unexpectedly. These
events show up as high-density, low-
porosity interfaces in track 3. Rate of
penetration (track 1) dropped signi-
cantly each time, and resistivity
increased (track 2).
38 Oileld Review
>
This interpretation of vertical boundaries
raised new concerns for the operator: Was the
reservoir compartmentalized? Were these
streaks mineralized fault planes? What is the
vertical extent of these features? Should the
wellbore trajectory be changed? The VISION First
Look log, played back with recorded mode data,
was able to answer these questions (above).
The density images displayed on the VISION
First Look log reveal the true nature of the
tight streaks. The boundaries of the features
are not planar, but rather calcite-cemented nod-
ules. The features are not continuous vertical
planar events and will not have a large-scale
impact on production.
The deeper reading attenuation resistivity
measurement conrms this interpretation. The
attenuation measurements are not inuenced by
the high-resistivity hard streaks to the degree
that phase-shift measurements are, and there
are no polarization horns, which indicates that
these events do not extend far from the wellbore.
The Future Vision
The ability to achieve better reservoir quality
assessments in real time has satised some, but
not all, formation evaluation while-drilling needs.
Already operators are asking for these LWD mea-
surements in more hole sizes, and this demand is
being met with the imminent introduction of the
VISION675 and GeoVISION675 systems for 8- to 12-
in. holes. The VISION675 system will encompass
the ARC675 Array Resistivity Compensated mea-
surement, an enhanced PowerPulse MWD tool
with the new VISION Telemetry Protocol system
and a new 6.75-in. VISION675 density-neutron
tool. The VISION675 density-neutron tool extends
the capabilities of the existing 6.75-in. ADN tool
by adding multisector density, Pe and caliper
images for both oil-base and water-base mud. A
related tool for geological imaging while drilling
will appear in the GeoVISION675 system, which
will contain a new-generation laterolog imaging
tool in place of the ARC675 module.
Other measurements are making their way to
the 4.75-in. format, including downhole annular
pressure and bit inclination for precision trajec-
tory control.
To keep pace with the introduction of new
measurements, interpretation experts are devis-
ing new techniques for getting the most from the
new data. Programs for interpreting measure-
ments in layers that are anisotropic, invaded, thin,
dipping, or all of the above, are nding new chal-
lenges when applied to time-lapse LWD data
LWD logs acquired before and after bit changes
or other delays in drilling. Researchers are devel-
oping methods for faster modeling and inversion
of tool responses in more complex geometries
and more realistic formations. These efforts will
enhance our ability to perform formation evalua-
tion while drilling, and also will improve all other
LWD applications. LS
Phase
Shift
TVD
API
Resistivity
Time After Bit
Gamma Ray
R
w
-corrected
Bulk Volumes
Effective Porosity
Matrix
Bound Water
0.02 200
ohm-m
Attenuation Resistivities
Phase Shift-Resistivities
0.2 2000
ohm-m
Bottom Density
Neutron Porosity
Attenuation
M
e
a
s
u
r
e
d

D
e
p
t
h
,

f
t
Clay
XX200
XX250
ft
3
/ft
3
0 60
1.65 2.65
g/cm
3
BHA sliding
Image orientation
U R B L U
0 hours 10
0 0 0.5
0 150
ft ohm-m 100
Azimuth and
Deviation
0 90
34 in.
10 in.
16 in.
22 in.
28 in.
g/cm
3
RHOB Image
2.05 2.45
>
VISION First Look wellsite images. Bulk volume analysis (track 2) and an R
w
curve (track 1) corrected for
clay volume and type are computed and displayed. [Adapted from Cannon D: Shales: An Alternate Source for
Water Resistivities, Transactions of the SPWLA 36th Annual Logging Symposium, June 26-29, 1995, Paris, France,
paper LLL.] Phase-shift and attenuation resistivity curves are displayed in track 3, densities are in track 4.
Density images (track 5) of tight streaks show that these features are clearly not planar.
39 Winter 1998
40 Oilfield Review
Using Downhole Annular Pressure Measurements
to Improve Drilling Performance
Walt Aldred
John Cook
Cambridge, England
Peter Bern
BP Exploration Operating Company Ltd.
Sunbury on Thames, England
Bill Carpenter
Mark Hutchinson
John Lovell
Iain Rezmer-Cooper
Sugar Land, Texas, USA
Pearl Chu Leder
Houston, Texas
For help in preparation of this article, thanks to Dave Bergt,
Schlumberger Oilfield Services, Sugar Land, Texas, USA;
Tony Brock, Kent Corser, Kenneth Sax and James Thomson,
BP Exploration, Houston, Texas; Tony Collins, Liz Hutton,
John James, Dominic McCann, Rachel Strickland and
Dave White, Anadrill, Sugar Land, Texas; Tim French,
Anadrill, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA; Vernon H. Goodwin,
EEX Corporation, Houston, Texas; Aron Kramer, GeoQuest,
Youngsville, Louisiana; and Technical editing Services (TeS),
Chester, England.
APWD (Annular Pressure While Drilling), CDR
(Compensated Dual Resistivity tool), LINC (LWD Inductive
Coupling tool), SideKick, VISION475, VISION675 and VIPER
are marks of Schlumberger. PWD (Pressure-While-Drilling)
service is a mark of Sperry-Sun.
When monitored downhole in the context of other parameters, pressure in the borehole annulus can
be used to identify undesirable well conditions, help suggest and evaluate remedial procedures and
prevent serious operational drilling problems from developing.
To survive and prosper in todays low-price oil
and gas market, operating companies are con-
tinually challenged to lower their finding and
producing costs. To tap the full potential of exist-
ing reservoirs and make marginal fields more
productive, many wellbores are becoming both
longer and more complex. However, keeping
costs low requires operating companies to
improve drilling efficiency. The rig floor is some-
times like a hospital surgical theater. Instead of
finding physicians and nurses, one finds drillers,
engineers and other crew members working
with one objective: to keep their patient, the
borehole, alive and healthy. Just as biological
vital signs, like blood pressure and heart rate,
are monitored during an operation, so the life
signs of the borehole construction process
downhole pressure and mud flow ratesare
monitored during drilling.
The measurements described in this article
are the sight and touch of the driller, enabling
him to see and feel the dynamic motions of the
The pressure window. In some wells,
especially deviated and extended reach, the
margins (right) between pore pressure (red
curve) and fracture gradient (yellow curve)
may be small500 psi [3447 kPa] or less
and very accurate annular pressure (white
curve) information is essential to maintain
operations within safe limits. Well control
requirements are such that circulation of an
influx through the long choke and kill lines
that run from the subsea blowout preventer
(BOP) also imply a lower kick tolerance
(orange dashed curve). The influence of
well deviation angle on the pressure window
(below) shows that managing the mud
weight in extended-reach wells is made
more difficult by annular pressure losses
which are inherently high for wells with long
horizontal sections.
Winter 1998 41
drillstring, and the downhole behavior of the
drilling fluid, so that optimal decisions can be
made. Vibration and shock data along with
torque and weight on bit can be used to modify
drilling parameters for increased bit and bottom-
hole assembly (BHA) reliability and performance.
The lifeblood of the drilling process is the drilling
fluid, and downhole mud pressuremeasured in
the annulus between the drill collar and the bore-
hole wallis one of the most important pieces
of information that the driller has available to
sense what is happening as the drill bit enters
each new section of formation, or during running
the bit into or out of the hole.
Monitoring downhole annular pressure is being
used in many drilling applications, including
underbalanced, extended-reach, high-pressure,
high-temperature (HPHT) and deep-water wells.
1
Such measurements are provided by a number of
service companies, and operators have been
using them for a wide variety of applications
including monitoring the effects of pipe rotation,
cuttings load, swab and surge, leak-off tests
(LOT), formation integrity tests (FIT), and detect-
ing lost circulation (see How Downhole Annular
Pressure is Monitored, page 42).
2
In underbalanced directional drilling, the use
of downhole annular pressure sensors keeps the
operation within safe pressure limits and moni-
tors the use of injected gas, which results in
more efficient, lower cost drilling. In extended-
reach drilling (ERD), annular pressure measure-
ments can be used to detect poor hole cleaning
and help the operator modify fluid properties
and drilling practices to optimize hole cleaning.
In conjunction with other drilling parameters,
real-time annular pressure measurements
improve rig safety by helping avoid potentially
dangerous well-control problemsdetecting
gas and water influxes. These measurements
are often used for early detection of sticking,
hanging or balling stabilizers, bit problem detec-
tion, detection of cuttings buildup and improved
steering performance. While real-time pressure
data are of significant value, the information
from these measurements is also useful in plan-
ning the next well.
This article examines the physical processes
associated with downhole hydraulic systems
and the use of annular pressure in monitoring
the downhole drilling environment. We will look
at field examples that show the dynamics of
common drilling problems and demonstrate how
a basic understanding of hydrodynamic
processestogether with a knowledge of
drilling parameterscan help provide advance
warning of undesirable and preventable events.
The examples illustrate three important drilling
applications in which downhole pressure meas-
urements are valuable:
Extended-reach wells, where efficient hole
cleaning and cuttings transport are essential in
preventing stuck tools and packoff events,
which may damage formations and lead to
expensive fluid loss.
Deep-water wells, where there is a narrow
pressure window between pore pressure
and formation fracture pressure, and both
fluid influx detection and wellbore stability
are critical.
Improved drilling efficiencies, with downhole
annular pressure measurements providing
accurate LOT and FIT pressures, and a more
realistic determination of formation stress.
Wellbore Stability
Successful drilling requires that the drilling fluid
pressure stay within a tight mud-weight window
defined by the pressure limits for wellbore sta-
bility. The lower pressure limit is either the pore
pressure in the formation or the limit for avoiding
wellbore collapse (above). Normal burial trends
lead to hydrostatically pressured formations,
where the pore pressure is equal to that of a
water column of equal depth. If the drilling fluid
pressure is less than the pore pressure, then for-
mation fluid or gas could flow into the borehole,
with the subsequent risk of a blowout at surface
or underground.
The upper pressure limit for the drilling fluid
is the minimum that will fracture the formation. If
the drilling fluid exceeds this pressure, there is a
risk of creating or opening fracturesresulting
in lost circulation and a damaged formation. In
the language of drilling engineers, pressures are
often expressed as pressure gradients or equiva-
lent fluid densities. The upper limit of the pres-
sure window is usually called the formation
fracture gradient, and the lower limit is called the
pore pressure, or collapse, gradient.
M
u
d

w
e
i
g
h
t
,

s
g
Collapse
gradient
0.0
0 20 40
Well deviation, degrees
60 80
0.4
0.8
1.2
1.6
2.0
2.4
Fracture
gradient
Stable
D
e
p
t
h
Pressure
Annular
pressure
Kick
tolerance
Fracture
gradient
Pore
pressure
1. Isambourg P, Bertin D and Brangetto M: Field Hydraulic
Tests Improve HPHT Drilling Safety and Performance,
paper SPE 49115, accepted for presentation at the SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New
Orleans, Louisiana, USA, September 27-30, 1998.
2. Rudolf R and Suryanarayana P: Field Validation of Swab
Effects While Tripping-In the Hole on Deep, High
Temperature Wells, paper SPE 39395, presented at the
IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, Dallas, Texas, USA, March
3-6, 1998.
42 Oilfield Review
The history of annular pressure measurements
extends as far back as the mid 1980s when
Gearhart Industries, Inc. provided annular pres-
sure sensors on their measurements-while-
drilling (MWD) tools. Since then, Anadrill and
other service companies have developed sensors
for downhole annular pressure measurements
while drilling.
1
The first application of these
measurements has been primarily for drilling
and mud performance, kick detection and equiv-
alent circulating density (ECD) monitoring.
Adding internal pressure sensors, combined
with annular pressure measurements, enables
differential pressure to be determined, which
can be used to monitor motor torque and power
performance.
Sperry-Sun was an early proponent of record-
ing ECD measurements during connections, and
while pulling out and running in hole to monitor
swab-and-surge effects.
2
Their PWD (Pressure-
While-Drilling) service uses a quartz pressure
gauge capable of measuring up to 20,000 psi
[138 MPa], and is available in collar sizes from
3
1
4 to 9
1
2-in.
Today, Anadrill provides APWD Annular
Pressure While Drilling measurements both in
real time and recorded mode using an electro-
mechanical or bellows resistor device installed
on the side of the 150C-[300F]-rated CDR
Compensated Dual Resistivity tool and the
175C-rated VISION475 tool (right). The CDR
tool is available in 6
3
4-, 8
1
4- and 9
1
2-in. collar
sizes. These tools can measure several pressure
ranges, up to 20,000 psi, with an accuracy of
0.1% of the maximum rating and a resolution of
1 psi. They are also capable of continuous moni-
toring during no-flow conditions, which enables
real-time dynamic testing while mud pump
motors are shut downsuch as during leakoff
testing. Other parameters measured while
drilling, such as downhole torque and weight
on bit, can be combined with APWD measure-
ments to evaluate hole-cleaning efficiency and
early detection of sticking, hanging or balling
stabilizers, to detect bit problems and cuttings
buildup, as well as to improve drilling and steer-
ing performance.
For operators trying to reduce drilling and
completion costs by downsizing from conven-
tional hole sizes, the Anadrill 4
3
4-in. VISION475
tool enables simultaneous real-time APWD
measurements as well as drilling, directional
surveying and formation evaluation of boreholes
as slim as 5
3
4 in. (see Pushing
the Limits of Formation
Evaluation While
Drilling, page 29).
HPHT upgrades for
25,000 psi [172
MPa] and 350 F
[175 C] are avail-
able, and a new
system with APWD
capability for larger
boreholes, called
VISION675, will be
available soon.
For underbalanced operations, a coiled tubing
drilling system, the VIPER system, offers real-
time internal, annular and differential pressure
measurements. The use of a wired BHA such as
in the VIPER system can be used in standpipe
gas injection applications such as nitrified fluids
and foams. APWD measurements in such under-
balanced operations enable the driller to opti-
mize production by maintaining planned
downhole pressures selected to minimize or
eliminate invasion and formation damage.
Under these conditions, the rate of penetration
will also be improved.
How Downhole Annular Pressure is Monitored
>
Annular pressure sensor. Resistor-based bellows
gauges (insert) are used for APWD measurements
in the CDR Compensated Dual Resistivity tool, and
are available in three pressure ranges to meet the
expected wellsite conditions. These tools are mud
pulse-operated, so no information is sent in real
time when the mud pumps are off. However, they
can record pressures when the pumps are off, and
once pumping is re-established, this information
can be sent to the surface. Master calibrations
are performed over a range of temperatures using
a dead-weight tester. At the location or wellsite,
hydraulic tests using a hand pump are performed
on these gauges before and after use in each well
to verify calibrations.
6.5 ft
Pressure port
Resistivity
Gamma ray
Annular pressure sensor
CDR tool
1. Hutchinson and Rezmer-Cooper, reference 5, main text.
2. Ward CD and Andreassen E: Pressure While Drilling
Data Improves Reservoir Drilling Performance, paper
SPE/IADC 37588, presented at the SPE/IADC Drilling
Conference, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, March
4-6, 1997.
Winter 1998 43
Pore pressureOne ongoing oilfield chal-
lenge is determining the pore pressure in shales,
and almost all pore pressure prediction is based
on correlation to other measured properties of
shales. Shales start their life at the surface as
clay-rich muds, and water is expelled from them
as they are buried and subjected to increasing
loading from the overburden above them. If the
burial is sufficiently slow, and there is an escape
route for the water, the pressure in the pore fluid
remains close to hydrostatic, and the overburden
is supported by increased stresses in the solid
parts of the rock. The water content, or porosity,
decreases, and this variation of porosity or other
water-dependent properties with depth is known
as the normal compaction trend.
However, if burial is very rapid, or the fluid
cannot escapebecause of the low permeability
of shalesthe increasing overburden load is sup-
ported by the increasing pore pressure of the fluid
itself. The stress in the solid parts of the rock
remains constant, and the water content, or
porosity, does not decrease. After rapid burial, the
shale is not normally compacted; its pore pres-
sure is above hydrostatic, and its water content is
higher than it would be for normally-
compacted shale at that depth. The shale
becomes overpressured as a result of undercom-
paction. Detecting overpressured zones is a major
concern while drilling, because water or gas
influx can lead to a blowout.
Fracture gradientsFracture gradients are
determined from the overburden weight and lat-
eral stresses of the formation at depth and from
local rock properties. Density and sonic logging
data help provide estimates of rock strengths.
3
Calculating offshore fracture gradients in deep
water presents a special problem. The uppermost
formations are replaced by a layer of water,
which is obviously less dense than rock. In these
wells, the overburden stress is less than in a
comparable onshore well of similar depth. This
results in lower fracture gradients and, in gen-
eral, fracture gradients decrease with increased
water depth. Thus, increasing water depth
reduces the size of the margin between the
mud weight required to balance formation
pore pressures and that which will result in
formation breakdown.
Downhole Pressure
After the wellbore stability pressure window has
been determined, the driller has more to do than
keep the drilling fluid within these limits. To cor-
rectly interpret the response of a downhole annu-
lar pressure measurement, it is important to
appreciate the physical principles upon which it
depends. The downhole annular pressure has
two components. The first is a static pressure
due to the density gradients of the fluids in the
borehole annulusthe weight of the fluid verti-
cally above the pressure sensor. The density of
the mud column including solids (such as cut-
tings) is called the equivalent static density
(ESD), and the fluid densities are pressure- and
temperature-dependent.
Second is dynamic pressure related to pipe
velocity (swab, surge and drillpipe rotation),
inertial pressures from string acceleration or
deceleration when tripping, excess pressure to
break mud gels, and the cumulative pressure
losses required to move drilling fluids up the
annulus. Flow past constrictions, such as cuttings
beds or swelling formations, changes in hole
geometry, and influxes or effluxes of liquids and
solids to or from the annulus all contribute to the
dynamic pressure. The equivalent circulating
density (ECD) is defined as the effective mud
weight at a given depth created by the total
hydrostatic (including the cuttings pressure) and
dynamic pressures.
Understanding the different pressure
responses under varying drilling conditions also
requires an appreciation of the drilling fluids rhe-
ological properties, including viscosity, yield and
gel strength, and dynamic flow behavior. Is the
flow laminar, transitional or turbulent? The varia-
tion of the rheological properties with flow
regime, temperature and pressure singly, and in
combination, affects the total pressure measured
downhole.
4
Some of these downhole parameters,
such as flow rate, can be controlled by the driller.
Others, such as downhole temperature, cannot.
Pressure Losses
Until recently, the industry had been divided on
the effects of drillpipe rotation on pressure
losses. Some researchers have explicitly stated
that rotation acts to increase axial pressure drop,
while others have taken the opposing view, that
an increase in rotation rate decreases annular
pressure drop. In fact, both of these seemingly
conflicting views can be correct, and both effects
have been observed. Annular pressure losses or
axial pressure drop depend upon which part of
the flow regime predominates when the rotation
rate is changed (below).
Rotation rate
F
l
o
w

r
a
t
e
Pressure increasing
Turbulent
Turbulent with vortices
Laminar
Laminar with vortices
>
Flow regimes. In laminar flow the annular pressure losses decrease with increasing pipe rotation,
because azimuthal stresses reduce the effective viscosity of the drilling fluid. Once the Taylor number
(a condition for rotational flow instability) is exceeded, vortices will be formed, which extract energy
from the mean axial flow, and yield a turbulent-like pressure drop. As the axial flow rate increases,
full turbulence will occur and the axial pressure drop will then increase with increasing rotational
rate. Similarly, increases in the rotation rate can also assist in the transition from laminar to turbulent
flow and can lead to an increase in the axial pressure drop.
3. Brie A, Endo T, Hoyle D, Codazzi D, Esmersoy C, Hsu K,
Denoo S, Mueller MC, Plona T, Shenoy R and Sinha B:
New Directions in Sonic Logging, Oilfield Review 10,
no. 1 (Spring 1998): 40-55.
4. For a detailed discussion of static, dynamic and cuttings
pressure contributions to the total downhole pressure:
Adamson K, Birch G, Gao E, Hand S, Macdonald C, Mack
D and Quadri A: High-Pressure, High-Temperature
Well Construction, Oilfield Review 10, no. 2 (Summer
1998): 36-49.
44 Oilfield Review
Experiments performed with the 50-ft [15-m]
flow loop at Schlumberger Cambridge Research
(SCR), in England confirmed the complex effects
of rotation on annular pressure losses (left). At
low flow rates, the pressure drop decreases with
increasing rotation rate. At higher flow rates, the
opposite effect is observed. However, in nearly
all field examples, with typical drilling muds in
conventional borehole sizes, only the increase in
annular pressure loss with increased rotation
rates has been observed (middle left). This is an
area of ongoing research.
Hole Cleaning
Efficient hole cleaning is vitally important in the
drilling of directional and extended-reach wells,
and optimized hole cleaning remains one of the
major challenges. Although many factors affect
hole-cleaning ability, two important ones that the
driller can control are flow rate and drillpipe rota-
tion (bottom left).
Flow rateMud flow rate is the most impor-
tant parameter in determining effective hole
cleaning. For fluids in laminar flow, fluid velocity
alone cannot efficiently remove cuttings from a
deviated wellbore. Fluid velocity can disturb cut-
tings lying in the cuttings bed and push them up
into the main flow stream. However, if the fluid
has inadequate carrying capacityyield point,
viscosity and densitythen many of the cuttings
will fall back into the cuttings bed. Mechanical
agitation due to pipe rotation or back-reaming
can aid cleaning in such situations, but some-
times are inefficient or worsen the situation.
Agitation that is too vigorous, such as rotating
too fast with a bent housing in the motor,
can have a detrimental effect on the life of down-
hole equipment.
Inadequate flow results in increased cuttings
concentrations in the annulus (next page, top). A
cuttings accumulation may lead to a decrease in
annular cross-sectional area, and hence an
increase in the ECDultimately leading to a
plugged annulus, called a packoff. The use of
real-time downhole annular pressure measure-
ments allows early identification of an increasing
ECD trend, caused by an increasing annular
restriction, and helps the driller avoid formation
breakdown resulting from high pressure surges
or a costly stuck-pipe event.
An example shows how APWD Annular
Pressure While Drilling measurements help
detect packoff.
5
The log shows that the annulus
started to pack off at approximately 1:20 (next
page, middle). Drilling parameters, such as
increasing surface torque and variations in rota-
tion rates, were becoming erratic. Standpipe
pressure increased slightly. These warnings
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0 50 100 150 200 250
Rotation, rpm
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

g
r
a
d
i
e
n
t
,

P
a
/
m
300 350 400 450 500
Low flow
Medium flow
High flow
Experimental conditions
Hole size = 4.9 in.
Pipe outer diameter = 3.5 in.
Plastic viscosity = 3.4 cp
Yield point = 3.8 lbf/100 ft
2
>
Laboratory-measured annular pressure losses. Experimental comparisons of the effect of rotation
on annular pressure losses with a clean drilling fluid (no solids) at low, medium and high flow rates
highlight the flow behavior in different flow regimes. These measurements confirm that under some
conditions rotation acts to increase axial pressure losses, whereas under other conditions it
decreases the losses.
E
q
u
i
v
a
l
e
n
t

c
i
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
n
g

d
e
n
s
i
t
y
,

s
g
0 10 50 100 120 130
Rotation, rpm
600 gal/min
400 gal/min
200 gal/min
1.13
1.11
1.09
1.07
1.05
1.03
1.01
0.99
0.97
0.95
>
Effect of rotation on equivalent circulating density (ECD). In addition to distinct effects on hole-
cleaning efficiency, rotation also affects fluid behavior in an unloaded annulus. In this field experiment
of drillpipe rotation (at different flow rates), the ECD increases from 1.092 sg to 1.114 sg as the rotation
rate increases to 130 rpm with a 1.0 sg mud weight circulating at 600 gal/min [2300 L/min] in an 8-in.
[20-cm] casing section. The increment of 0.022 sg is equivalent to 50 psi [350 kPa]. No cuttings were
in suspension as this test was performed just prior to drilling.
Drillpipe
eccentricity
Mud
weight
Cuttings
density
Cuttings
size
Hole size
and angle
Drillpipe
rotation
Flow
rate
Mud
rheology
Rate of
penetration
Hard to control Easy to control
Large
influence
on cuttings
transport
Little
influence
on cuttings
transport
Hole cleaning.
Some factors are
under the control
of the driller, such
as surface mud
rheology, rate of
penetration (ROP),
flow rate and hole
angle. Others,
including drillpipe
eccentricity, and
cuttings density
and size, cannot be
controlled as easily.
>
Winter 1998 45
could have been interpreted as due to increased
motor torque associated with an increase in sur-
face torque. However, the large ECD increase
confirmed that the mud flow was restricted
around the BHA just above the annular pressure
sensor. Based on the confirmation from APWD
measurements, the driller reduced the mud flow
rate and worked the pipe to prevent the ECD from
exceeding the fracture gradient.
Drillpipe rotationAnother example demon-
strates the effect of pipe rotation on hole clean-
ing (above). At 15:00, pipe rotation was stopped
to enable drill-bit steering. The ECD decreased
for 20 minutes as the cuttings fell out of suspen-
sion. A few swab-and-surge spikes were
observed. These pressure spikes were introduced
as the pipe was moved up and down to adjust
mud motor orientation. After steering for a total
of 1
1
4-hours (at 16:15), rotary drilling was
resumed, and the ECD abruptly increased as the
cuttingsaccumulated during the sliding inter-
valwere resuspended in the drilling fluid.
Here, real-time APWD data helped determine the
minimum rate of rotation required to effectively
stir up cuttings and clean the wellbore.
S
t
a
t
i
o
n
a
r
y
R
o
l
l
i
n
g
Asymmetric
suspension
Symmetric
suspension
Low flow rate High flow rate
L
o
w

E
C
D
H
i
g
h

E
C
D Cuttings transport. The cuttings transport mode affects hole-cleaning
ability, especially in deviated wells. At low flow rates, the cuttings can fall
out of suspension to the low side of the boreholebuilding a cuttings bed
and increasing the ECD due to cuttings restriction in the annulus. As the
flow rate is increased, the cuttings will start to roll along the wellbore erod-
ing the cuttings bed. As the cuttings bed is partially eroded, the annular gap
increases and the ECD will start to decrease. As the flow rate increases
further, the majority of the cuttings are transported along the low side of the
wellbore, with some suspended in the fluid flow above the bed (asymmetric
suspension) leading to an increase in ECD. At higher flow rates frictional
pressure losses are significant, and the cuttings are transported completely
suspended in the fast-moving fluid (symmetric suspension). [Adapted from
Grover GW and Aziz A: The Flow of Complex Mixtures in Pipes. Malabar, Florida,
USA: Robert E. Krieger Publishing Company, Inc., 1987.]
ECD/ESD
14 10
Temperature
C 200
lbm/gal
0
Standpipe pressure
4000 0
Total pump flow
1000 gal/min
psi
0
Surface torque
30 0
Surface rotation
150 rpm
kft-lbf
0
Time
Measured depth
11000 0
Surface weight on bit
60 klbf
ft
0
01:00
02:00
Packing off. The driller responds in real time
to an increase in the ECD (red curve), shown
in track 4, as the annulus packs off above the
measurements-while-drilling (MWD) tool.
Surface torque and rotation rates, shown in
track 2, start to become erratic as the drillpipe
begins to pack off. Standpipe pressure, shown
in track 3, increases slightly. By temporarily
reducing the mud flow (green curve), shown in
track 3, and working the pipe, the annulus
becomes clear again.
Hookload
Time
Surface torque
kft-lbf
Surface
rotation
Block
speed
ft
Depth
Rotation
stops
Sliding
interval
Rotation
starts
200 0 rpm 500 0 10 -10 14.2 13.2 lbm/gal
1000 0
gal/min ft/s klbf
Total
pump flow
ECD / ESD
Standpipe pressure
Temperature
15:00
16:00
5000 psi 0
100 C 0
Effect of drillpipe
rotation on hole
cleaning. The ECD (red
curve), shown in track
6, increasesindicat-
ing cuttings are resus-
pended in the drilling
fluidat 16:15 as
rotation recommences
after a slide-drilling
interval is completed.
5. Hutchinson M and Rezmer-Cooper I: Using Downhole
Pressure Measurements to Anticipate Drilling Problems,
paper SPE 49114, accepted for presentation at the SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New
Orleans, Louisiana, USA, September 27-30, 1998.
>
>
>
46 Oilfield Review
Improving Efficiency in
Extended-Reach Drilling
BP encountered severe wellbore instability prob-
lems when drilling development wells in Mungo
field in the Eastern Trough Area Project (ETAP) of
the North Sea. These instability problems were
due in part to large cavings formed while drilling
the flanks of salt diapirs. Long S-shaped 12
1
4-in.
[31-cm] sections are generally the most problem-
atic. The volume of cavingscoupled with highly
inclined wellbore trajectoriesresults in poor
hole-cleaning conditions. The main cause of the
poor hole cleaning is believed to be the formation
of cuttings and cavings beds on the highly
inclined 60 section. These beds are manageable
while drilling, but present a major hazard when
tripping and running in casing. Most of the early
wells experienced extreme overpulls, packing off
and stuck-pipe incidents when pulling out of the
hole. In addition, severe mud losses had been
encountered when drilling inadvertently into the
chalk at total depth.
Based on this experience with borehole insta-
bility, BP revised its drilling program with a com-
bination of better fluid management and
hydraulics monitoring aimed at improving both
hole cleaning and drilling practices. The results
were impressive. In the first well in the second
phase of the Mungo development, nonproductive
time was reduced from 34%the average expe-
rienced on earlier wellsto 4%, with estimated
cost savings of over $500,000. Drilling rate per-
formance increased 10%, while the incidence of
stuck pipe decreased.
The logs from this well exemplify how new
hole-cleaning practices, supported by APWD
monitoring, led to a successful drilling program
(above). The pumps were switched on at 19:05,
and the flow rate increased to 1000 gal/min [3785
L/min]. The standpipe and the downhole annular
pressure responded almost instantaneously and
after a few minutes, the driller started rotating
the pipe. The increased downhole weight on bit
indicates that drilling commenced just before
19:10. The first part of the stand was rotary drilled
at approximately 100 rpm until 19:27. At this time,
the drillstring was raised to set the necessary
toolface for the next sliding period. Sliding
beganshown by zero surface rotation rateat
19:30 and continued until 19:45.
Block
position
Drilling cycle 1
Drilling cycle 2
Pumps on
Pipe
reciprocating
m 0 50
Hookload
klbf 0 400
ROP
m/hr 200 0
Bit depth
value, m
Downhole
weight on bit
klbf 0 80
Surface
weight on bit
klbf 0 80
19:00
Time
20:00
21:00
Downhole
torque
kft-lbf 0 20
Surface torque
kft-lbf 20 60
Surface
rotation
rpm 0 200
Total pump
flow
gal/min
0 1500
Turbine
rotation
rpm 0 5000
Standpipe pressure
psi 0 4000
Annulus pressure
psi 0 4000
Annulus temperature
C 0 200
ECD
sg 1.65 1.75
Bit on bottom flag
Cuttings
settling out
Hole surged
Hole swabbed
Surge and
swab
Pumps off
Rotary drilling
Slide drilling
Kelly down
>
Downhole pressure monitoring to improve hole cleaning. Drilling fluid pumps start at 19:05, shown by pump flow rate in track 5. Pipe rotation starts a few
minutes later, seen by the increase in surface rotation rate shown in track 4. The instantaneous increase in standpipe pressure (green curve) and the
delayed downhole ECD (black curve) measurement can be seen in track 6. Rotary drilling stops and slide drilling starts at 19:27, shown by surface rotation
rate (track 4) and weight on bit (track 2). The immediate effect of slide drilling on the downhole ECD (black curve) can be seen in track 6. After Kelly down,
shown by the block position in track 1, the driller starts hole cleaning by reciprocating the pipe in and out. After the hole cleaning is completed, the driller
makes a new connection and starts the next drilling cycle at 20:30.
Winter 1998 47
As the stand was being drilled, the ECD log
showed the effects of rotating and sliding.
During rotary drilling, ECD values were approxi-
mately 1.70 sg. When the drillstring was picked
up to set the toolface for sliding, the hole was
swabbed and the ECD dropped slightly to 1.69 sg.
As the drillstring was lowered, the hole was
surged about the same amount, raising the ECD
to 1.71 sg. Once rotation stopped, the ECD again
fell to 1.68 sg and continued to fall, as the cut-
tings started to settle in the hole, due to the lack
of mechanical agitationreducing the cuttings
contribution to the ECD.
Even though drilling continued during sliding,
and cuttings were being produced at a steady
rate, the ECD did not increase. This demon-
strates that the hole was not being cleaned as
efficiently as it had been with rotary drilling.
This was confirmed by the lack of cuttings over
the shale shakers.
The last part of the stand was also rotary
drilled. Rotation resumed at 19:46, and the ECD
increased immediately and continued to show an
increasing trend. Increasing ECD was caused by
turbulence and axial flow in the mud column in
the annulus as it stirred cuttings that settled on
the bottom of borehole. The cuttings added to the
hydrostatic pressure and increased the ECD. At
19:54 the driller picked up the string and started
the hole-cleaning procedure.
The bell-shaped profile of the ECD curve dur-
ing rotary drilling was formed by the increasing
ECD due to the rotation and stirring of pre-exist-
ing cuttings beds as well as increased cuttings
load resulting from drilling ahead. The ECD
reached its peak value when the stand was
drilled down. As the hole was cleaned by recip-
rocating the pipe (maintaining a constant mud
flow and rotary speed), the ECD decreased.
When the value returned to nearly 1.71 sg, the
hole was deemed to be sufficiently cleaned.
After pipe reciprocation and flow were stopped,
a survey was taken at 20:19. After completion of
this operation, a connection was made and
drilling resumed successfully at 20:30 with good
hole cleaning.
Another exampleusing APWD monitoring
to avoid stuck pipeshows how an indication of
cuttings accumulation during a drilling break can
take several hours to appear in the ECD log
because of the horizontal wellbore traveltime in
extremely long ERD wells. In BPs most recent
record-breaking horizontal well at Wytch Farm,
England, a cuttings cluster traveled along the
horizontal leg of the wellbore for almost five
hours after the drilling break at 12:00 before
reaching the vertical section of the well (above).
6
Finally, at 4:40 the ECD readings started increas-
ingapproaching the fracture gradient of the
formation. The driller, anticipating potentially
severe well problems, decided to stop drilling
early, and clean out the cuttings accumulated in
the borehole by reciprocating the pipe. This is
another success story. Without advance notice
from the APWD measurement, the drillstring
might have become stuck.
5:00
ECD
2000
3000
0
Block position
0 50 m
ROP
100 m/hr
Hookload
0 500 klbf
0 50
Surface torque
kft-lbf
Standpipe pressure
4000
Annulus pressure
3000 psi
1.2 1.3 sg
Total pump flow
2000 0 gal/min
psi
12:00
Drilling
break
1:00
4:00
5:00 ECD
increase
Standpipe
pressure
increase
>
Preventing packoff events. The ECD, shown in track 4, risesdue to cuttings accumulation entering
the vertical section of an extended-reach wellabout five hours after a drilling break.
6. Allen F, Tooms P, Conran G and Lesso B: Extended-
Reach Drilling: Breaking the 10-km Barrier, Oilfield
Review 9, no. 4 (Winter 1997): 32-47.
48 Oilfield Review
Kick Detection
The influx of another fluid into the wellbore due
to unexpected high formation pressure is one of
the most serious risks during drilling. The char-
acter of the fluid influx will depend primarily
upon influx fluid density, rate and volume,
drilling fluid properties and both borehole and
drillstring geometry (right). Simulations per-
formed by The Anadrill SideKick software model
are frequently used to understand the pressure
responses expected downhole and at the sur-
face due to gas influxes. (see Simulating Gas
Kicks, page 50).
7
During gas kicks, ECD
responses for typical boreholes and slim well-
bore geometries are dominated by two phenom-
enareduced density of the mud column as
heavier drilling fluid is replaced by less dense
gas, and increased annular pressure loss due to
friction and inertia when accelerating the mud
column above the gas influx.
The reduced annular gap in slimhole wells
can cause unique drilling problems.
8
For example,
in slim holes the acceleration of the kick fluid
into the wellbore can lead to a sudden increase
in frictional pressure loss in the annulus due to
acceleration of the mud ahead of the kick fluid. In
addition, evidence of the influx may not be seen
until the pumps are shut down. In typical hole
sizes, the hydrostatic imbalance between the
drillpipe and the annulus outweighs any frictional
losses, and a decrease in the bottomhole annular
pressure is evident.
Constant monitoring of all available drilling
data is critical in detecting a downhole kick
event. In an example of a gas kick, an operator
was drilling a 12
1
4-in. hole section in a well in
the Eugene Island field in the Gulf of Mexico
(next page). The formations were sequences of
shales and target sands, and several of the
sands were likely to be depleted by previous
production. In offset wells, the low-pressure
sands led to problems including stuck pipe,
twist-offs and stuck logging tools.
Maintaining a minimum mud weight was
required to avoid differential sticking in the
depleted sands. Due to faulting in the area, zonal
communication was uncertain and the pore pres-
sure limits were difficult to anticipate. Anadrill
was using the CDR Compensated Dual Resistivity
tool for formation resistivity and the Multiaxis
Vibrational Cartridge (MVC), Integrated Weight-
on-Bit (IWOB) tool and APWD sensors for moni-
toring drilling performance. The plan was to set a
liner below a normally pressured zone before
drilling into the underpressured sand beds.
Typical hole
4600
4800
5000
Slim hole
0
4
8
12
16
20
0
1000
2000
Shut-in Kill Shut-in Kill
Time, min
0
200
400
600
800
Time, min
0 10 20 30 40 0 10 20 30 40
Friction pressure loss Pit gain Standpipe pressure Annulus pressure
A
n
n
u
l
a
r

p
r
e
s
s
u
r
e
,

p
s
i
P
i
t

g
a
i
n
,

b
b
l
S
t
a
n
d
p
i
p
e

p
r
e
s
s
u
r
e
,

p
s
i
F
r
i
c
t
i
o
n

p
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

l
o
s
s
,

p
s
i
>
Kick detection. In a typical wellbore geometry (top left), the annular pressure (orange curve) can be
seen to decrease as the displacement of heavier drilling fluids by a gas influx dominates the pressure
response. For slimhole geometry (top right) the annular pressure (orange curve) can increase initially
during a gas influx as the inertia of the mud column dominates the response. One major benefit of
downhole annular pressure monitoring is early kick detection. Mud-pit gain (red curves in upper plots),
standpipe pressure (green curves in lower plots), and frictional pressure loss (yellow curves in lower
plots) help the driller identify gas kicks.
120 0 200 300
Block height
Annulus
temperature
ft F 13 18
ECD
lbm/gal 3000 5000
Standpipe
pressure
psi
08:00
Time
Rack back
stand of pipe
Temperature rises,
ECD drops
Flow check
and close in
12:00
11:00
10:00
09:00
>
Gas influx. When gas mixes with drilling fluid, the density of the drilling fluid decreases. Fifty minutes
after the ECD (blue curve), shown in track 3, started to decrease, a flow check confirmed that a small
gas influx had occurred. Note the increase in annular temperature, shown in track 2, as the formation
fluid warmed the borehole.
Winter 1998 49
During drilling through a shale zone just
before 14:00, a few indications of increasing
formation pressure were seen in the APWD data
and several connection and background mud gas
indications were detected in the mud flow. Oil-
base mud weights during this run were
increased from 11.5 to 12.0 lbm/gal [1.38 to 1.44
g/cm
3
]. Just before the sand was entered at
17:10, the real-time ECD measured downhole
was 12.5 lbm/gal [1.50 g/cm
3
]. At this point, the
ROP abruptly increased and drilling was
stopped10 ft [3 m] into the sand zoneto
check for mud flow. Although the potential for a
kick was a concern, the fact that there was no
evidence of a kick or mud flow suggested that it
was safe to proceed.
As drilling progressed after 18:10, the ECD
measurement decreased slowly to 12.35 lbm/gal
[1.48 g/cm
3
] over a period of 90 minutes. Sud-
denly at 19:20, the ECD dropped to 12.0 lbm/gal
[1.44 g/cm
3
] while drilling the next 9 ft [2.7 m] of
the well. The drilling foreman noticed the large
drop in ECD readingssignaling an influx.
Increased pit volumes were noticed at this time
and the well was immediately shut in at 19:50.
The kill took 24 hours with an additional 30 hours
to repair blowout preventer (BOP) damage.
At what point did the kick first become
apparent on the downhole ECD log? The first
ECD drop from 12.5 to 12.35 lbm/gal probably
could be attributed to the decrease in ROP. Such
changes were seen earlier in this well.
Statistical variations in ECD, due to drilling
noise, can be as high as 0.2 lbm/gal. On the
other hand, the systematic change from 12.35 to
12.0 lbm/gal is a clear signal that an influx is
already in the mud column. Monitoring the ECD
constantly, using alarms set to detect the first
sign of ECD changes, and checking corroborating
drilling indications, such as ROP, can provide ear-
lier warning of such occurrences.
In another example, use of APWD data helped
save a well. In this well, drilling was proceeding
without any indication of an influx either from pit
gain or in mud flow rates in or out of the well (pre-
vious page, bottom). However, the ECD started to
decrease at 11:00 and continued for 50 minutes.
At the same time, an increase in the annulus tem-
perature was observed, due to the formation fluid
warming the borehole fluid. Guided by the ECD
response, the driller stopped drilling and safely
circulated out a small gas influx.
14:00
15:00
16:00
17:00
18:00
19:00
20:00
21:00
Block speed
ft/s -2 2
ROP
ft/hr
Bit depth
500 0
ft 0 100
Surface weight on bit
klbf 0 60
Downhole weight on bit
klbf 0 60
Surface torque
kft-lbf 0 25
Bit on bottom flag
Downhole torque
kft-lbf 0 8
Total
pump
flow
gal/min
0 1500
CDR annulus pressure
psi 0 10000
ECD
lbm/gal 9 11
Annulus temperature
F 100 300
Standpipe pressure
psi 0 5000
Time
Axial vibration
G 4 0
Torsional vibration
ft-lbf 4000 0
>
Kick alert in the Gulf of Mexico. A sudden increase in the rate of penetration (ROP) (blue curve),
shown in track 1, at 17:10 alerted the driller that the bit had entered a sand zone and that an influx
was possible. Drilling restarted after having seen no evidence of flow in the mud-flow measurements
or pit volume. However, as drilling progressed into the sand zone, the ECD (pink curve), shown in
track 5, started to decrease slowly at 18:10 and continued until 19:20. At this time, the rate of decrease
suddenly increased. After drilling ahead for 30 minutes with rapidly decreasing ECD and increasing
pit volume, the driller recognized that an influx had occurred and the well was shut in.
7. MacAndrew R, Parry N, Prieur J-M, Wiggelman J,
Diggins E, Guicheney P, Cameron D and Stewart A:
Drilling and Testing Hot, High-Pressure Wells, Oilfield
Review 5, no. 2/3 (April/July 1993): 15-32.
8. In this article, slimhole wells are defined as those with an
average pipe-to-annular radius ratio greater than 0.8.
50 Oilfield Review
The growth in deep-water drilling activities in
many regions of the world is attracting
increased attention to the specific problems of
gas influx and well control. Deep water poses
special problems related to both the depth and
temperature of the water. Reduced margins
between pore pressure and fracture gradient
require accurate understanding of downhole
fluid behavior.
Various definitions of kick tolerance exist and
may be given in terms of pit gain, mud weight
increase or even underbalance pressure. What-
ever way it is expressed, kick tolerance is a
measure of the size and pressure of kick the well
can take and still be controlled without fractur-
ing the formation. Kick tolerance decreases as
drilling proceeds deeper, and once the limit is
reached, additional casing must be set to protect
the formation. Kick tolerance is a complex con-
cept as it varies as a function of the formation
pressure driving the kick, the amount of influx
entering the well and the distribution of the
influx in the annulus. Balancing this complexity
makes a simulator an ideal choice for computing
kick tolerance.
Scientists at BP and Schlumberger Cambridge
Research, England have spent years studying the
behavior of gas kicks.
1
Their work, along with
engineering development at the Schlumberger
Sugar Land Product Center in Texas, has pro-
duced the Anadrill SideKick-PC software model,
which simulates gas kicks and helps plan meth-
ods of detecting and controlling them. SideKick-
PC models include the effects of gas distribution
in the annulus. This produces a more realistic
and less conservative kick tolerance, which
leads to the use of fewer casing strings and sub-
stantial cost savings. Kick tolerance is illus-
trated in user-friendly, automatically generated
plots of safe pit gain versus safe formation pres-
sure (below). The simulator helps engineers
anticipate and meet the challenges of a wide
variety of drilling environments.
The simulator can be used in planning under-
balanced drilling programs, which require esti-
mates of wellbore pressures and fluid produc-
tion rates. In addition, the cost-effectiveness of
using the underbalanced methods must also be
evaluated. Other simulators have helped address
Simulating Gas Kicks
1000
900
800
700
600
500
400
S
h
u
t
-
i
n

d
r
i
l
l
p
i
p
e

p
r
e
s
s
u
r
e
,

p
s
i
0 10 20 30 40
Pit gain, bbl
Static
Circulating
Safe
Unsafe
>
SideKick-PC kick tolerance. The SideKick-PC program computes separate kick tolerances for the shut-in
and kill periods of a simulation. The kick tolerance plot is used to differentiate kicks that can be safely
shut in (static) from those that can be safely killed (circulating). The determination depends on many
factors such as pressures in the well, gas migration, circulating friction and kill-mud hydrostatic pressure.
Kicks in the region to the left and below each curve are considered safe, and those severe enough to be in
the region above and to the right of each curve may cause lost circulation.
these issues, but have looked only at stabilized
steady-state conditions. This simulator is a fully
transient numerical simulator that can deter-
mine the optimum amount of nitrogen necessary
to reach a desired underbalance.
2
The SideKick-PC program also introduces
the concept of the Maximum Allowable Blowout
Preventer Pressure (MABOPP).
3
This gives an
improved indication of the potential for shoe
fracture during a kill using a BOP pressure
measurement to remove uncertainties involved
in fluid properties in long choke and kill lines.
Simulations have shown that a simple tech-
nique can minimize the risk at the end of a
deep-water kill by slowing the pumps when the
choke is wide open to minimize pressure in the
annulus. This technique has been shown to be
preferable to other methods, such as using a
reduced slow-circulation rate over the whole kill
or arbitrarily reducing the flow rate, and is now
an integral feature of the simulator.
The SideKick-PC program has proved effective
in allowing engineers to run many complex sim-
ulations easily and quickly. Coupled with defin-
ing safe operating envelopes in minutes rather
than hours or days of well planning, gas-kick
simulation is helping to enhance overall per-
formance by improving efficiency and reducing
well construction costs.
1. Rezmer-Cooper IM, James J, Davies DH, Fitzgerald P,
Johnson AB, Frigaard IA, Cooper S, Luo Y and Bern P:
"Complex Well Control Events Accurately Represented by
an Advanced Kick Simulator," paper SPE 36829, pre-
sented at the SPE European Petroleum Conference, Milan,
Italy, October 22-24, 1996.
2. A fully transient simulator is one that allows for the
temporal development of fluid behavior in the borehole as
the fluids are circulated, or while the well is shut in. This
has the advantage over steady-state models, where the
imposed state does not change fluid properties
over time, and cannot allow for effects such as gas
solubility as the gas cloud migrates after circulation has
stopped. Furthermore, such a transient simulator can
indicate whether steady state can even be reached.
3. James JP, Rezmer-Cooper IM, and Srskr SK: MABOPP
New Diagnostics and Procedures for Deep Water Well
Control, paper SPE 52765, submitted for presentation at
the 1999 SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, Amsterdam, The
Netherlands, March 9-11, 1999
Winter 1998 51
Deep-Water Wells
Unconsolidated sediments typically encoun-
tered in deep-water formations tighten the
wellbore stability window between pore pres-
sure and formation fracture pressure. At a given
depth, fracture gradient decreases with increas-
ing water depth, and can result in a very narrow
pressure margin.
9
Additionally, cooling of the mud in the deep-
water riser can cause higher mud viscosity,
increased gel strength, and high frictional
pressure losses in choke and kill lines during
well-control procedures. Combined, these fac-
tors increase the likelihood of lost-circulation
problems, and drilling engineers must take
appropriate steps to avoid exceeding formation
fracture gradients.
Staying within the pressure window
Keeping the ECD within the pressure window is
a constant struggle, especially in deep water and
HPHT applications. In a well in the Gulf of
Mexico, EEX Corporation experienced a kick
while drilling at near-balance conditions in Zone
A (right). After the kick was taken and the well
was under control, increased mud weight was
needed to continue safely. A 13
3
8-in. [34-cm] cas-
ing string was set because the heavier mud
weight exceeded the previous leakoff test.
The next two hole sections were drilled
without incident. However, as drilling pro-
ceeded deeper into the third section, the
increasing pore pressure eventually approached
the pressure exerted by the heavier mud and
another kick was experienced in Zone B. A
9
5
8-in. [24-cm] casing was needed to permit
another increase in mud weight. As drilling con-
tinued, increases in the cuttings load caused the
mud pressure to exceed the overburden pres-
sure in Zone C, resulting in some lost circulation
over a period of several days. Lost-circulation
material helped minimize mud losses, and
drilling continued successfully thereafter. At the
narrowest point shown in this example, the
pressure window was only 700 psi [4827 kPa].
Dynamic kill procedureReal-time analysis
of downhole annular pressure helped BP
Exploration monitor a dynamic kill procedure
used to stop an underground flow in a deep-
water well in the Gulf of Mexico. Drilling unex-
pectedly entered a high-pressure zone, where a
water influx fractured the formation at the casing
shoe. Real-time APWD measurements were
combined with standpipe pressure to monitor the
process of the dynamic kill.
The procedure circulated kill-weight mud fast
enough to outrun the influx and obtain a suffi-
cient hydrostatic gradient to kill the well. Drilling
fluid used in this well weighed 11.8 lbm/gal
[1.41 g/cm
3
], and the kill-weight mud was
17.0 lbm/gal [2.04 g/cm
3
]. During the kill
procedure, BPs Ocean America operating crew
monitored the standpipe pressure to determine if
Zone A
Zone B
Zone C
20
Casing, in.
16
133
/
8
113
/
4
95
/
8
Overburden gradient, lbm/gal
Resistivity pore pressure estimate, lbm/gal
ECD, lbm/gal
Seismic pore pressure estimate, lbm/gal
10.00 17.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
Kick
Kick
75
/
8
>
Staying within the pressure window. A gas kick was observed in Zone A, where the ECD (blue curve)
dropped significantly below the pore pressure gradientestimated from resistivity logs (red curve) or
seismic time-to-depth conversions (black curve). The well was brought under control with an increase
in mud weightshown by the increased ECD. However, a second kick was experienced in Zone B
as pore pressure again increased above the ECD in this deeper section of the well. After another
increase in mud weight, some mud losses were experienced in Zone C, where the ECD increased
slightly above the overburden gradient (purple curve).
9. Brandt W, Dang AS, Mange E, Crowley D, Houston K,
Rennie A, Hodder M, Stringer R, Juiniti R, Ohara S
and Rushton S: Deepening the Search for Offshore
Hydrocarbons, Oilfield Review 10, no. 1 (Spring
1998): 2-21.
52 Oilfield Review
kill weight mud was outrunning the influx fluid by
filling the annulus (below). However, under flow-
ing conditions, the standpipe pressure could not
be used to accurately determine bottomhole
pressure. APWD measurements showed that
bottomhole pressure was increasing due to the
kill mud, and confirmed that the new dynamic kill
procedure was working. This process, monitored
with downhole annular pressure measurements,
has been incorporated into BPs recommended
drilling practices.
Shallow-water flowAccording to a recent
Minerals Management Services survey covering
the last 14 years, shallow-water flow occurrences
have been reported in about 60 Gulf of Mexico
lease blocks involving 45 oil and gas fields or
prospects.
10
Problem water flow sands are typi-
cally found at depths from 950 to 2000 ft [290 to
610 m], but some have been reported as deep as
3500 ft [1067 m] below the seafloor. Frequently,
these problems are due to overpressurized and
unconsolidated sands at shallow depths below
the seafloor.
11
They can lead to formation cave-in
when uncontrolled water production occurs. If an
influx is severe enough, wells can be lost due to
continuous water flow. Extensive washouts can
undermine the large casing that is the major sup-
port structure for the entire well.
Bit depth
ft 0 100
Block speed
ft/s 2 2
Annulus pressure
psi 7000 9000
ECD
lbm/gal 12 13
Annulus temperature
F 50 150
Hookload
klbf 400 600
ROP
ft/hr 500 0
Surface torque
kft-lbf 0 25
Standpipe pressure
psi 2000 4000
Surface rotation
rpm 0 200
Total pump flow
0 gal/min 1000 18:00
Time
19:00
Kill starts
Kill stops
>
Monitoring dynamic kill procedure. A water influx was encountered in a Gulf of Mexico deep-water well that was strong enough to fracture the
casing shoe, resulting in an underground flow. In track 6, both the standpipe pressure (green curve) and downhole annulus pressure (purple curve)
showed a steady increase at 18:30 while the kill mud was being circulated in the wellbore.
Sand
Sand
With riser
Without riser

water

mud

mud
>
Riserless operations. During typical offshore drilling (left), drilling mud is circulated
through a riser back to the surface and the APWD tool measures an average ECD for the
entire interval. During riserless operations (right), the pumped drilling fluid does not return
to the surface, but rather carries its drilling solids only as far as the seafloor.
Winter 1998 53
In many deep-water wells, the first casing
or conductor pipe is usually 30 or 36 in. [76 or
91 cm] in diameter. The next hole section, typi-
cally 24 or 26 in. [61 or 66 cm], is often drilled
without a riser. In these wells, spent drilling fluid
and cuttings are returned to the ocean floor
around the wellhead (previous page, top). Since
the drilling fluid is not recovered under these
conditions, expensive synthetic- or oil-base muds
typically are not used. Instead, either seawater
or inexpensive water-base mud is used.
Standard operating practices in deep-water
wells use a remote operating vehicle with a cam-
era at the mud line to monitor flow coming out of
the wellhead. At a connection, the driller will
hold the drillpipe stationary and turn off the
pumps for a few minutes, to allow fluid u-tubing
oscillations to stabilize, and to observe whether
there is flow at the wellhead.
Downhole pressure measurements detect
shallow-water flowMonitoring ECD helps the
operator assess both the depth and severity of
the water flow, and decide whether the flow is
serious enough to stop drilling. Most conven-
tional hydraulics models do not consider the
effects of mud returns to the seafloor, and thus
cannot accurately predict the expected ECD in
these wells. A direct measurement of downhole
mud pressure solves this problem.
Operators are starting to use downhole pres-
sure measurements as a way to detect the onset
of and prevent serious damage from shallow-
water flows.
12
In a deep-water well in the Gulf of
Mexico, a water sand in Zone A was encountered
at X090 ft (right). The ECD suddenly increased in
this zone as the sand was penetratedindicat-
ing water and possible solids entry. The rise in
annular pressure and an ensuing visual confirma-
tion of the mudline flow confirmed water entry.
The flow was controlled by increasing mud
weight and drilling proceeded. The same
trendsincreased ECD with a corresponding
annular temperature increasewere seen in the
lower section of the next sand, Zone B, and in the
sand in Zone D below. The influxes were not
severe and were safely contained by the increas-
ing ECD of the drilling fluid. Knowledge of the
location and severity of the contained water
influxes and quick response to early warning
from annular pressure measurements made it
possible to continue drilling successfully to the
planned depth for this hole section.
Improving Drilling Efficiency
With higher rig costs on many drilling projects,
such as extended-reach and deep-water wells,
time savings and precise measurements are
critical. Accurate leakoff tests (LOT) are essential
to enable efficient management of the ECD
within the pressure window, and the correspon-
ding mud program.
Leakoff TestingA LOT is usually performed
at the beginning of each well section, after the
casing has been cemented, to test both the
integrity of the cement seal, and to determine
the fracture gradient below the casing shoe. In
general, these tests are conducted by closing in
the well at the surface or subsurface with the
BOP after drilling out the casing shoe, and
slowly pumping drilling fluid into the wellbore at
a constant rate (typically 0.3 to 0.5 bbl/min [0.8
to 1.3 L/sec]), causing the pressure in the entire
hydraulic system to increase. Downhole pres-
sure buildup is traditionally estimated from
standpipe pressure, but can be monitored
directly with APWD sensors. If pressure meas-
urements are made in the standpipe, then com-
plex corrections must be made for the effects of
temperature on mud density, and other factors
on downhole fluid pressure.
13
Pressures are recorded against the mud vol-
umes pumped until a deviation from a linear
trend is observedindicating that the well is
taking mud. This could be due either to failure of
the cement seal or initiation of a fracture. The
point at which the nonlinear response first occurs
Depth
m
Attenuation resistivity Gamma ray
0
A
150 0 10 8 9
500 0 0 10 2000 3000
0 2 50 100
Phase-shift resistivity
ohm-m
Phase-shift resistivity
ohm-m
ECD
Annulus pressure
psi
Annulus temperature
F
Rate of penetration
ft/hr
lbm/gal ohm-m API
C
D
B-upper
B-lower
Water influx
Water influx
Water influx
X000
X100
X200
X300
X400
X500
X600
X700
X800
X900
>
Shallow water flow in a deep-water well. Sand zones at A, B, C and D are indicated by decreasing
gamma ray (pink curve), shown in track 1, and resistivity responses shown in track 2. Increasing
annular pressure (green curve) and ECD (blue curve), shown in track 3, indicate that a water influx
occurred in three of these sands.
11. Smith M: Shallow Waterflow Physical Analysis, pre-
sented at the IADC Shallow Water Flow Conference,
Houston, Texas, USA, June 24-25, 1998.
12. APWD measurements are just one of the aids to mini-
mize the hazards of shallow water flow. For additional
information: Alberty MW, Hafle ME, Minge JC and Byrd
TM: Mechanisms of Shallow Waterflows and Drilling
Practices for Intervention, paper 8301, presented at the
1997 Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas,
USA, May 5-8, 1997.
13. Adamson et al, 1998, reference 4.
10. The Department of Interior Minerals Management
Services manages the mineral resources of the Outer
Continental Shelf and collects, verifies and distributes
mineral revenues from Federal and Native American
lands. They can be located at URL:
http://www.mmm.gov/.
54 Oilfield Review
is the leakoff test pressure used to compute the
formation fracture gradient. Sometimes, the pro-
cedure is to stop increasing the pressure before
the actual leakoff pressure is reached. In such
cases, the planned hole section requires a lower
maximum mud weight than the expected fracture
pressure, and the test pressures only up to this
lower value with no evidence of fracture initia-
tion. This is called a formation integrity test (FIT).
If pumping continues beyond the fracture initia-
tion point, the formation may rupture, pressure
will fall, and the fracture will propagate.
APWD measurements helped monitor down-
hole pressure in a leakoff test performed by BP
Exploration in a deep-water well in the Gulf of
Mexico (below). As the pumped volume
increased to 3.5 barrels, the standpipe pressure
increased to 520 psi [3585 kPa]. Downhole ECD
increased from 9.8 lbm/gal (hydrostatic) to
10.9 lbm/gal [1.17 g/cm
3
to 1.31 g/cm
3
]. At
this point, the pumping stopped, and the
ECD dropped exponentially to 10.7 lbm/gal
[1.28 g/cm
3
], indicating that the formation was
taking fluid. The pressure margin determined
from this test was sufficiently high to allow
drilling to proceed without incident.
Before a well is pressure tested, in order to
estimate downhole pressures from surface
measurements, the drilling fluid is often circu-
lated to ensure that a homogeneous column of
known density mud is between the surface and
casing shoe. However, the downhole annular
pressure measured at the casing shoe provides a
direct measurement, and therefore the mud con-
ditioning process is not requiredsaving the
cost of additional circulations. Downhole pres-
sure measurements remove uncertainties caused
by anomalies in mud gel strength or inhomo-
geneities in the mud column density due to pres-
sure and temperature effects.
Technologies from Schlumberger Wireline &
Testing, Anadrill and Dowell were combined to
perform a real-time downhole formation integrity
test in a deep-water well in the Gulf of Mexico.
During this test, an Anadrill CDR tool was
included in the BHA used to drill the casing shoe.
The CDR tool contained an APWD sensor to mon-
itor downhole pressure. In typical logging-while-
drilling (LWD) applications, sufficient mud is
pumped to enable the BHA to communicate to
the surface through mud-pulse telemetry. This is
not the case with slow pumping rates used dur-
ing a typical LOT or FIT. However, downhole pres-
sure can be monitored in real time through the
use of a wireline-operated LINC LWD Inductive
Coupling tool that sits inside the CDR tool and
transmits pressure data to the surface.
With this arrangement, the operator can
simultaneously view the surface and downhole
pressure buildup as the test proceeds. In the
absence of compressibility and thermal effects,
the rate of pressure rise downhole would be the
same as that at the surface. The operator can use
downhole pressure measured with the APWD
sensor to calibrate formation integrity while using
the pressure buildup differences to monitor the
compressibility of the drilling fluid. Because of
shallow water flow concerns in deep-water wells
with narrow wellbore stability margins, differ-
ences of a few tenths of a lbm/gal can make the
difference between one or two extra strings of
casing being needed to protect shallow intervals.
Real-time downhole annular pressure meas-
urements offer at least three advantages during
LOT and FIT testing. First, the operator does not
want to overpressure downhole too farleading
to formation fractures or a damaged casing shoe.
A change in the slope of the pressure buildup
curve with pumped volume is a signal to stop the
test. This is the pressure used to determine the
fracture gradient of the formation. The use of
real-time annular pressure measurements pro-
vides the operator with an instantaneous signal
to stop the test.
Bit depth
ft 0 100
Block speed
ft/s 2 2
Hookload
klbf 0 500
Surface torque
kft-lbf 10 30
Annulus pressure
psi 0 10000
ECD
lbm/gal 9 12
Surface weight on bit
klbf 0 80
Total pump
flow
0 1500
gal/min
14:00
Time
Surface
rotation
rpm
16:00
15:00
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
1 1 2 3 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Volume, bbl Time, min
S
u
r
f
a
c
e

p
r
e
s
s
u
r
e
,

p
s
i
Pumping-up
phase
Leakoff
phase
Formation taking
drilling fluid
Leakoff test
80
165
260
350
430
480
520
460
445
435
430
420
415
410
408 405 400
A
B
>
Leakoff testing. A leakoff test was conducted in a deep-water well in the Gulf of Mexico. During
the pumping-up phase, the standpipe pressure increases linearly as the pump volume increases
(top). At point A, the formation fractures and starts to take on some of the drilling mud. After the
pumping stops at point B, the standpipe pressure decreases rapidly at first, then more slowly as the
formation fractures close. The ECD log (bottom) from the APWD measurements, shown in track 6,
increases from the hydrostatic pressure to 10.9 lbm/gal [1.31 g/cm
3
] during the pump-up phase. After
pumping stops, the pressure starts to fall, and the ECD drops back.
14. Hutchinson and Rezmer-Cooper, reference 5.
15. Rojas JC, Bern P and Chambers B: Pressure While
Drilling, Application, Interpretation and Learning, BP
Internal Report, December 1997.
Winter 1998 55
Next, monitoring surface pressure alone can
lead to incorrect estimates of bottomhole pres-
sure because of uncertainty in correcting for
the compressibility of the drilling fluid, particu-
larly significant when synthetic- or oil-base
muds are involved.
Finally, the unsteady nature of surface pres-
sure data can lead to errors in LOT estimates of
fracture gradient. An accurate measurement of
fracture gradient is required to determine the
ability of the formation and casing cement to
support the drilling fluid pressure during the
next section of drilling. The use of stable and
accurate downhole annular pressure measure-
ments helps makes drilling ahead a more exact
and safer process.
The Big Picture
In wireline logging, the log represents a state of
the wellshowing the more-or-less static for-
mation properties, such as lithological beds and
fluid saturations. Getting the data is most impor-
tant, but decisions made at the time of acquisi-
tion are not necessarily critical. However, logs of
downhole annular pressure and other drilling
performance parameters show a process
a process that is evolving with time. The evolu-
tion of the log in real time must be monitored as
downhole conditions are dynamic, and timely
decisions are essential. Delay or indecision can
lead to serious risks and added costs.
The format of drilling performance logs is dif-
ferent from wireline logs. Drilling problems gen-
erally result in slower rates of penetration and
data are compressed on a depth scale.
Therefore, a time-based presentation is often
better suited for detailed analysis during prob-
lematic drilling intervals. Still, depth-based pre-
sentations are important for assessment of
drilling events in the context of BHA position rel-
ative to lithological boundaries.
Drilling parameters should be presented in
relation to one another on the log. Wireline logs,
such as the triple-combo used for formation eval-
uation, have a standard layout that helps ana-
lysts learn how to quickly spot the important
productive zones. A standard layout for drilling
performance logs has recently been proposed
(previous page).
14
The proposed layout enters geometric param-
eters such as bit depth, ROP, and block speed in
track 1, followed by weight parameters such as
hookload and downhole weight-on-bit in track 2.
Time or true vertical depth (TVD) are shown in the
next column. Next, torque parameters in track 3,
rotation rates along with lateral shock and motor
stall in track 4, and flow parameters such as mud
flow rates, differential flow, total gas, mud pit
level and turbine rotation rate in track 5. Finally,
pressure measurements such as ECD, ESD, annu-
lar pressure, annular temperature, swab-and-
surge pressures, estimated pore and fracture
pressure limits and standpipe pressure are all
shown in track 6.
Downhole annular pressure interpretation is
an evolving technique. All possible downhole
events have not yet been observed. Sometimes
the data are enigmatic. Nonetheless, certain
clearly identifiable and repeatable signatures
can be used to help diagnose problems (left).
Combining the information gleaned from down-
hole annular pressure logs with other drilling
parameters creates an overall assessment, or the
big picture. This global view helps decipher the
individual measurements used to detect drilling
problems downhole.
Downhole real-time annular pressure meas-
urements have a significant impact on todays
drilling practices with applications in every
aspect of drilling. For example, many of the les-
sons and efficiency improvements made in high-
cost ERD and deep-water wells can be applied to
simpler wells. Monitoring downhole annular
pressure along with other drilling parameters
provides an integrated view of a healthy drilling
environmentone that puts emphasis on antici-
pation and prevention rather than reaction and
cure.
15
Such improved operational procedures
will lead to decreases in nonproductive time and
increases in drilling efficiency. RCH
Event or procedure ECD change Other indications Comments
Mud gelation /
pump startup
Sudden increase
possible
Increase in pump pressure Avoid surge by slow
pumps and break rotation
(rotation first)
Cuttings pick-up Increase then leveling
as steady-state
reached
Cuttings at surface Increase may be more
noticeable with rotation
Plugging below sensor Sudden increase as
packoff passes sensor
none if packoff remains
below sensor
High overpulls
Steady increase in
standpipe pressure
Monitor both standpipe
pressure and ECD
Plugging annulus Intermittent surge
increases
Standpipe pressure
Surge increase?
Torque/RPM fluctuations
High overpulls
Packoff may
blow-through
before formation
breakdown
Cuttings bed formation Gradual increase Total cuttings expected
not seen at surface
Increased torque
ROP decreases
If near plugging, may get
pressure surge spikes
Gas migration Shut-in surface pressures
increase linearly (approx.)
Take care if estimating
gas migration rate
Running in hole Increase magnitude
dependent on gap,
rheology, speed, etc.
Monitor trip tank Effect enhanced if
nozzles plugged
Barite sag Decrease in static
mud density or
unexplained density
fluctuations
High torque and
overpulls
While sliding periodically
or rotating wiper trip to
stir up deposited beds,
use correct mud rheology
Gas influx Decreases in
typical size hole
Increases in pit level
and differential pressure
Initial increase in
pit gain may be masked
Liquid influx Decreases if lighter
than drilling fluid
Increases if influx
accompanied by solids
Look for flow at mudline
if relevant
Plan response if shallow
water flow expected
Pulling out of hole Decrease magnitude
dependent on gap,
rheology, speed, etc.
Monitor trip tank Effect enhanced if
nozzles plugged
Making a connection Decrease to static
mud density
Pumps on/off
indicator
Pump flow rate lag
Watch for significant
changes in static mud
density
Increase if well is
shut-in
>
Interpretation guide. Monitoring ECD with downhole annular pressure measurements along with
other drilling parameters helps the operator know what is happening downhole in the wellbore. Some
of the known, clearly identifiable, and repeatable signatures of ECD changes are shown along with
secondary or confirming indications, such as those seen in surface measurements.
Walt Aldred is currently on secondment from
Anadrill to Schlumberger Cambridge Research in
England, where he is working on the Real-Time Well-
bore Stability project and projects related to drilling
learning. Part of this involves leading the PERFORM
team, which is dedicated to reducing drilling costs
and improving drilling efciency. He joined the com-
pany in 1980, working in the eldin West Africa and
the North Sea. He later spent ve years in Sugar
Land, Texas, USA, developing drilling interpretation
products and then was in Nigeria for more than four
years involved in drilling engineering and optimiza-
tion. Holder of a patent in drilling motor optimization,
Walt received a BS degree (Hons) from the University
of Durham in England.
Peter Bern is a senior engineer in the BP Exploration
Technology Provision Group in Sunbury-on-Thames,
England. He joined BP in 1978 and has worked in a
number of areas related to uid technology. He
recently accepted a temporary assignment to work
with BPX in Alaska, USA on issues related to uids
and extended-reach drilling. Peter holds a degree in
physics from the University of Bristol, England.
Steve Bosworth, Drilling Manager-Land, for Union
Pacic Resources (UPR) Company ofce in Fort
Worth, Texas, is responsible for Austin Chalk drilling
in Texas and Louisiana, USA, and also supervises
some operations in the Rocky Mountains area. He has
worked for UPR (formerly called Champlin Petroleum
Company) since 1978 and has been drilling manager
since 1998. In 20 years with the company he has held
various drilling superintendent jobs in Texas, Okla-
homa, New Mexico, Colorado, Kansas, Wyoming and
the Gulf of Mexico, with international drilling experi-
ence in Argentina, Venezuela and Canada. He earned
a BS degree in natural gas engineering at Texas A&I
University in Kingsville. An SPE member, he serves as
2nd vice-president for the American Association of
Drilling Engineers Dallas-Fort Worth chapter.
Tim Bourgeois, Senior Petrophysical Engineer
with Shell Deepwater Production Inc., is assigned
to the Ram-Powell team. Previously, he worked
for a major service company and held various posi-
tions in engineering and sales. Tim has a BS degree
in petroleum engineering from Texas A&M University
in College Station.
Ken Bramlett has been the Shell deep-water project
geologist for the Ram-Powell project since early 1994.
His efforts have focused on reservoir characterization
and development planning. Previously, he held vari-
ous technical and managerial positions in the Rocky
Mountains, Permian Basin and the Gulf of Mexico.
Ken earned an MS degree in geology from the Univer-
sity of South Carolina at Columbia, USA.
Darrel Cannon, Scientic Advisor and Interpretation
Mtier Leader, is based at the Sugar Land Product
Center in Texas. Since 1965 his various assignments
in the eld organization and within engineering have
included eld engineer, district manager, sales engi-
neer, interpretation department manager and engi-
neering department manager in California, Alaska,
Canada, Texas and Louisiana. Darrel obtained a BA
degree in physics from the University of California at
Berkeley, USA.
Bill Carpenter, the Anadrill North American logging-
while-drilling (LWD) Business Development Manager
based in Sugar Land, Texas, is responsible for mar-
keting, training and support in LWD and drilling
performance measurements. He held a number of
management and sales positions in the US Gulf Coast
prior to his current assignment. He began his career
with Schlumberger in 1975 as a wireline eld engi-
neer in Louisiana. Author of several papers on gravel-
pack evaluation and on LWD technology, Bill received
a BS degree in electrical engineering from Memphis
State University in Tennessee, USA.
Franois Clouzeau is Drilling Ofce* sales coordina-
tor at GeoQuest in Houston, Texas. He joined Anadrill
in 1984 as a directional driller with assignments in
West Africa and Italy. He was drilling service engineer
in the Congo (1988 to 1989); eld service manager
offshore Libya (1989 to 1990); and district manager
in Libya (1990 to 1992). He spent the next year in
Sugar Land as staff engineer responsible for eld
introduction of the PowerPak* motor. He has also
been manager in China, Congo, Angola and south
Europe. Franois has an engineers degree from
Institut National Polytechnique in Grenoble, France,
with a specialty in signal processing.
John Cook is program manager for the geomechan-
ics group in the well construction department,
Schlumberger Cambridge Research in England. He
has been at SCR since 1983. An SPE editor and mem-
ber of the program committee for EUROCK98 held in
Trondheim, Norway, John obtained a PhD degree in
physics from University of Cambridge, England.
Pete Craig, a geologist for Shell Deepwater Produc-
tion, has worked on the Ram-Powell project for the
past two years. He is a graduate of Cornell University
in Ithaca, New York, USA and received an MS degree
in geology from University of California in Los Ange-
les, specializing in sedimentology and stratigraphy.
Hussein S. El-Sayed, Anadrill Marketing Manager
for the Middle East-Gulf Region, is based in Dubai,
United Arab Emirates (UAE). His responsibilities
include marketing analysis and studies, business
development and overseeing bids, tenders and con-
tracts for major operating companies. He joined
Schlumberger in 1982 as a wireline engineer and
worked in Oman, Pakistan, India and Kuwait. In 1989
he became operations manager in Islamabad, Pak-
istan. The following year he joined the newly formed
LWD group in Sugar Land, Texas; and from 1991 to
1993, he was LWD business development manager for
the Middle East. Hussein has also served as Gulf Area
sales manager and then Anadrill operations manager
for the UAE, responsible for Abu Dhabi and the north-
ern emirates. He assumed his current post in 1997.
Author of several technical papers on LWD applica-
tions, he holds a BS degree in mechanical engineering
from Ain Shams University in Cairo, Egypt.
Randolph (Randy) Hansen, Manager of PowerPlan*
coordination, is in charge of implementing this soft-
ware throughout the company. He has had 19 years
of managerial experience in Schlumberger Wireline
& Testing and Anadrill operations. His positions have
included UK District Engineer in Aberdeen, Scotland;
District Manager Norway in Bergen, Norway; Division
Technical Manager Africa/Middle East in Pau, France;
Manager LWD Europe in Aberdeen, Scotland; Unit
Technical Manager Europe/Africa in London, Eng-
land; and Division Manager UK in Aberdeen, Scotland.
Randy has a BS degree in physics from the University
of Kansas at Lawrence, USA.
Ray Harkins, principal petrophysicist at ARCO
British Ltd., is responsible for the petrophysics func-
tion at ARCO British and ARCO Europe/North Africa.
His varied experience has included petrophysics man-
agement, evaluation of oileld development plans,
wireline operations management, personnel manage-
ment, and nancial and business planning. His career
with Schlumberger (1977 to 1986) included serving as
a eld engineer in Europe; a production engineer in
The Shetlands; and location manager in South Oman.
Before his current position, he was a reservoir evalua-
tion specialist with the Oil and Gas Division of the
Department of Trade & Industry in London, England
(1989 to 1996). Ray received a BS degree (Hons) in
physics and mathematics from University College in
Dublin, Ireland, and an MBA degree in nance from
City University Business School in London.
Kyel Hodeneld, who is in LWD New Technology
Marketing at Anadrill in Sugar Land, Texas, is respon-
sible for product introduction of the VISION475* and
ISONIC*IDEAL sonic-while-drilling tools. He joined
the company in 1985 as a Schlumberger Wireline &
Testing (W&T) eld engineer and worked in Bakers-
eld and Sacramento, California. From 1990 to 1994,
he was a W&T sales engineer in Bakerseld. Before
assuming his current position in 1997 he was district
manager in Evanston/ Rock Springs, Wyoming, USA.
Kyel has a BS degree in petroleum and geological
engineering from University of North Dakota in
Grand Forks, USA.
Mark Hutchinson, Performance Drilling Service
Champion for Anadrill in Sugar Land, is responsible
for worldwide marketing of drilling-related mea-
surements and the Perform service. He joined
Schlumberger in 1977 as a wireline field engineer,
and then worked as a dipmeter interpretation spe-
cialist. In 1982 he moved to the Conoco interna-
tional well-planning department as a pore pressure
specialist, and two years later transferred to Conoco
research to develop reservoir log interpretation soft-
ware and coordinate an international research con-
sortium for testing and evaluating MWD and LWD
technology. In 1991 he joined Teleco/Baker Hughes
to market LWD and drilling performance services,
and in 1996 returned to Anadrill to market reentry
drilling and performance drilling services. Mark
received an MS degree (Hons) in aeronautical and
electrical engineering from University of Cambridge
in England. He is currently serving as the MWD
Technical Interest Group Chairman for the SPE.
Gamal Ismail, Lead drilling Engineer for Zakum
Development Co. (ZADCO) in Abu Dhabi, United Arab
Emirates, is responsible for planning and preparing
drilling programs of new sidetrack wells (140 horizon-
tal wells including 50 multilateral wells), and for well
duration and cost estimation, operations monitoring,
follow-up and evaluation. Before joining ZADCO in
1994, he served 14 years with Belayim Petroleum
Company (PetroBel) in Egypt, involved in offshore
and onshore drilling operations and engineering
studies in the Gulf of Suez, Mediterranean Sea,
Sinai Peninsula and Nile Delta. His last position with
PetroBel was offshore drilling operations department
manager. Author of several technical papers, Gamal
earned a BS degree in petroleum engineering from
Suez Canal University in Egypt.
Contributors
56 Oileld Review
Pearl Chu Leder, Deep-water Drilling Specialist
at Anadrill in Houston, Texas, provides technical sales
support for Anadrill deep-water services, including
improving drilling performance through the use of
Anadrill measurements and real-time pore pressure
prediction at the wellsite. She began as a development
engineer at Anadrill engineering in Sugar Land in 1990.
Six years later she became a marketing specialist for
Anadrill marketing, also in Sugar Land. Before her cur-
rent assignment she was a client services engineer for
Anadrill sales, at the BP ofce in Houston. She has a
BS degree from Texas A&M University in College Sta-
tion and an MS degree from Georgia Institute of Tech-
nology in Atlanta, both in mechanical engineering.
John Lovell is currently marketing manager for
Anadrill Measurement Services in Sugar Land, Texas.
He joined the company as a research scientist at
Schlumberger-Doll Research (SDR), Ridgeeld, Con-
necticut, USA, in 1984. While at SDR, he developed
electromagnetic forward and inverse algorithms based
upon nite-element and spectral methods. In 1993, he
completed a PhD degree in electrical engineering at
Delft University, The Netherlands and later that year
transferred to Anadrill to develop answer products for
the RAB* Resistivity-at-the-Bit tool, including imaging,
dip and invasion analysis. John joined the Anadrill
marketing department in 1996 and manages the mar-
keting and business development of Anadrill MWD and
LWD services. He holds MA degrees in mathematics
from the University of Oxford, England and Cornell
University, Ithaca, New York.
Dominic McCann, Department Manager for the
drilling engineering and planning department in the
Sugar Land Product Center, is in charge of develop-
ment of drilling engineering products used by both
Anadrill and the IPM eld organizations. These include
real-time drilling interpretation products and drilling
data and process management tools for use at the well-
site and in the project-planning phase. He joined
Schlumberger in 1984 in the drilling and rock mechan-
ics department at Schlumberger Cambridge Research
in England. In 1988, he transferred to Sedco Forex in
Montrouge, France to work on the MDS* management
drilling system. Four years later he moved to Anadrill
engineering in Sugar Land as section manager for the
Drilling Interpretation Products group. He became
department manager in 1998. Dominic holds a BS
degree in physics and computer science and PhD
degree in physics from the University of Wales, Cardiff.
Gilles Michel started his career with Schlumberger
Wireline & Testing as an R&D project engineer in
1978. He then occupied several managerial positions
in the development of computer systems for data
interpretation and management in Houston and
Austin, Texas. He joined Dowell in 1987 as vice-
president of Engineering and Manufacturing in cement-
ing and acidizing. In 1994 he developed the well engi-
neering and operations activities of Schlumberger
Integrated Project Management (IPM). Since 1996, he
has occupied positions as IPM marketing manager and
Oileld Services well construction marketing manager.
Gilles has a degree in physics from Ecole Suprieure
de Physique et de Chimie Industrielles de la Ville de
Paris, France, and a PhD degree in computer science
from the University of Paris VI.
Diane Neff, who manages GeoQuest E&P consulting,
in Houston, Texas, has been responsible for data man-
agement and workow solutions for the past two years.
In her 10 years with GeoQuest she has primarily been
involved in product marketing, and managed this
group for ve years. She has also spent three years
with Terra Mar Resources providing technical support
for petrophysical and geological PC-based applica-
tions, and four years with an independent oil company
(Canada Northwest) as exploration geologist. Dianes
BS degree in geology is from Michigan State University
in East Lansing, USA.
Herv Ohmer, Department Head of Multilateral Sys-
tems Product Development at Camco in Rosharon,
Texas, manages an engineering group responsible for
design and development of multilateral junction tech-
nology. He joined the company in 1977 in Clamart,
France as project engineer on wireline downhole tools
and subsequently had several assignments as project
manager with Schlumberger Wireline & Testing in
France and then in Texas. In 1995 he became part of a
new engineering team in Sugar Land, Texas, charged
with developing multilateral well technology. He
assumed his current position in January 1999. Herv
has a degree in mechanical engineering from Institut
National des Sciences Appliqus (INSA) in Lyon,
France. He helped develop several wireline tools and
has patents pending on several new concepts for Level
3 and Level 6 multilateral applications.
Ian Pigram is a Senior Petrophysicist with ARCO
British Limited covering the UK and Europe. He joined
ARCO in 1979 initially as a contractor working on pro-
jects ranging from reservoir volumetrics, log analysis
and log database management to well planning and
then subsequently as an employee mainly involved in
development projects. His later projects concentrated
on formation evaluation, petrophysics and reservoir
description including some dedicated gas eld work.
He has also had short assignments in exploration and
commercial groups. Since 1995 Ian has concentrated
on petrophysical issues for the company both in the
UK and in Europe and the North Africa region. He
holds a BS degree (Hons) in geology from University
College of Wales, Aberystwyth, and an MS degree in
structural geology and rock mechanics from Imperial
College, London, England.
Laurent P. Prouvost has been Department Head of
Process & Software products in the Dowell Well Con-
struction Services group in Clamart, France since
1993. There he manages several product development
teams involved in physical modeling, validation and
commercial software development. He joined Dowell
Well Production Services in St. Etienne, France in
1985 and later became section head for the Modelling
& Software group in the Well Construction Services
group. Three years later he started and led the Drilling
Fluids Services (DFS) Engineering group in St. Eti-
enne concurrently with the startup of Dowell DFS in
Aberdeen, Scotland. This group developed wellsite
mud monitoring equipment, mud reporting and data-
base applications. Holder of several patents and
author of many technical papers, Laurent has an Engi-
neers degree from Ecole Centrale de Paris and a PhD
degree from University of Bordeaux, France.
Albertus Retnanto is a production enhancement engi-
neer for Schlumberger Oileld Services in Jakarta,
Indonesia. He began his career in 1990 in petroleum
engineering software development for PERTAMINA,
Indonesia. From 1990 to 1994, he worked on eld reha-
bilitation and enhanced oil recovery projects in
Indonesia. After graduate study on horizontal and mul-
tilateral well production optimization at Texas A&M
University in College Station, he joined the Schlum-
berger Production Enhancement Group in Lafayette,
Louisiana. He moved to Schlumberger Wireline & Test-
ing in Sugar Land in 1998. Albertus earned a BS
degree from Bandung Institute of Technology in
Indonesia, and MS and PhD degrees from Texas A&M
University, all in petroleum engineering.
Iain Rezmer-Cooper is section manager of the Drilling
Interpretation Products group in the Sugar Land Prod-
uct Center, responsible for well control, and predictive
and real-time drilling hydraulics and mechanics
answer products. He began his career at Schlumberger
Cambridge Research in 1992 working on the Sedco
Forex MDS management drilling system. He subse-
quently helped develop the SideKick* gas-kick simula-
tor, and worked with Sedco Forex and the Norwegian
Petroleum Directorate on the Voring Plateau Deep-
Water Well Control Study in 1994. He joined Anadrill
in 1994, developing the hydraulics application within
the PowerPlan directional well-planning system. Iain
holds a BS degree in mathematics and physics from
the University of Bristol, and a PhD degree in numeri-
cal weather prediction from the University of Reading,
both in England.
Graham Ritchie, who is the Drilling Ofce champion
for GeoQuest, is responsible for the coordination of
commercial drilling software development in Schlum-
berger. He began his career with BP Exploration as a
drilling engineer in the North Sea and later with Pro-
drill Engineering as engineering manager. He joined
Schlumberger in 1994 as well engineering team leader
for the BP Machar early production scheme and BP
Clair extended well-test projects. He next served as
well engineering manager in the North Sea (1995 to
1996), responsible for well engineering support for a
number of major eld development projects. He was
also a participant in the Schlumberger Forum 2005
team charged with developing a ten-year vision for the
company. Before assuming his current position in 1998,
he was worldwide engineering manager for Schlum-
berger Integrated Project Management. Graham
earned a BS degree in mining engineering from the
University of Nottingham, England, and an MBA degree
from the University of Aberdeen in Scotland.
Mark Stracke, Multilateral Technology Business
Development Manager for the Schlumberger Camco
Advanced Technology Group, is based in Rosharon,
Texas. He began his career at Kerr McGee in drilling
and for the next seven years had responsibilities rang-
ing from drilling engineer to drilling superintendent.
He spent the next 12 years with ARCO working on pro-
duction engineering, completion engineering in the
Houston district (now Vastar) and in drilling and com-
pletion engineering and materials technology in the
ARCO technology department. He joined Anadrill in
1995 as completion and drilling engineer in the
RAPID* Reentry and Production Improvement Drilling
group. Mark holds BS degrees in bioengineering and
mechanical engineering from Texas A&M University in
College Station.
Chris West is senior drilling engineer for multilateral
drilling projects at Anadrill and is based in Sugar
Land, Texas. His management and engineering experi-
ence has included planning and supervising wells, and
designing well stimulation and optimization programs.
Prior to this (1995 to 1998), he was operation & asset
drilling engineer at ARCO/BP Shared Services Drilling
in Anchorage, Alaska. He began with Amoco Produc-
tion Company in 1982 as a drilling and production
engineer in Casper, Wyoming, USA. Five years later he
joined Conley and Associates, as drilling engineer and
superintendent in Manila, The Philippines. He next
spent two years as sales manager and drilling engineer
with Eastman Christensen in Denver, Colorado, USA.
He joined Schlumberger in 1990 as technical sales
manager of the Horizontal Integration Team, in Lon-
don, England, and subsequently served as location
manager in Al Khobar, Saudi Arabia and senior drilling
engineer in Houston, Texas. Chris obtained BS degree
in geological engineering from New Mexico Institute of
Mining and Technology, Socorro, New Mexico, USA.
An asterisk (*) is used to denote a mark of Schlumberger.
Winter 1998 57
Coming in Oileld Review
Cement Technology. Oileld cementing
has critical roles in well construction,
production and wellbore abandonment.
In the past, slurry characteristics have
not always been compatible with the
mechanical properties that are required
after cement hardens. Today, we can
optimize pumpability and compressive
strength as well as zone isolation and
slurry dependability. This article covers
the latest advances in oilwell cements.
Multicomponent Seismic Method. By
combining compressional and shear
waves, the multicomponent seismic
method reveals more about reservoir
structure and properties than surveys
that use only compressional waves.
Advanced technology now allows this
method to be applied in both marine
and land surveys, with dramatic results
in imaging and property mapping.
Production Services. Operators need
cost-effective ways to maximize oil
and gas output. Production services
today range from well completion,
monitoring and diagnosis to remedial
workovers. This article discusses new
developments in production logging
and analysis, completion services and
well interventions, and how economic
solutions are being found to keep wells
producing at the highest rates possible.
Articial Lift. Less than a fourth
of producing oil wells ow naturally.
The majority use rod pumps to bring
uids to surface, but more than 100,000
wells use gas to lighten the uid column
or an electrical submergible pump
(ESP) for higher rates of ow. We look
at todays broader gas lift and ESP
applications, and strategies that are
used to determine the most economic
system orcombination of methods.
Oileld Review 1998 Index
ARTICLES
Coiled Tubing Drilling on the
Alaskan North Slope
Gantt LL, Leising L, Oba EM, Stagg T, Stanley M,
Walker E and Walker R.
Vol. 10, no. 2 (Summer 1998): 20-35.
Deepening the Search for
Offshore Hydrocarbons
Brandt W, Crowley D, Dang AS, Hodder M, Houston K,
Juiniti R, Magne E, Ohara S, Rennie A, Rushton S
and Stringer R.
Vol. 10, no. 1 (Spring 1998): 2 -21.
The Evolution of Oileld Batteries
Hensley D, Milewits M and Zhang W.
Vol. 10, no. 3 (Autumn 1998): 42-57.
From Pore to Pipeline,
Field-Scale Solutions
Beamer A, Bryant I, Denver L, Mead P, Morgan C,
Rossi D, Saeedi J, Sharma S and Verma V.
Vol. 10, no. 2 (Summer 1998): 2-19.
The Giant Karachaganak Field,
Unlocking Its Potential
Elliot S, Hsu HH, OHearn T, Sylvester IF and Vercesi R.
Vol. 10, no. 3 (Autumn 1998): 16-25.
High-Pressure, High-Temperature
Well Construction
Adamson K, Birch G, Gao E, Hand S, Macdonald C,
Mack D and Quadri A.
Vol. 10, no. 2 (Summer 1998): 36-49.
High-Pressure, High-Temperature Well
Logging, Perforating and Testing
Baird T, Drummond R, Fields T, Langseth B, Martin A,
Mathison D and Silipigno L.
Vol. 10, no. 2 (Summer 1998): 50-67.
Innovations in Wireline Fluid Sampling
Crombie A, Halford F, Hashem M, McNeil R,
Melbourne G, Mullins OC and Thomas EC.
Vol. 10, no. 3 (Autumn 1998): 26-45.
Key Issues in Multilateral Technology
Bosworth S, El-Sayed HS, Ismail G, Ohmer H,
Retnanto A, Stracke M and West C.
Vol. 10, no. 4 (Winter 1998): 1428.
Localized Maps of the Subsurface
Chang C, Coates R, Dodds K, Esmersoy C, Foreman J,
Hoyle D, Kane M and Watanabe S.
Vol. 10, no. 1 (Spring 1998): 56-66.
New Directions in Sonic Logging
Brie A, Codazzi D, Denoo S, Endo T, Esmersoy C, Hoyle D,
Hsu K, Mueller MC, Plona T, Shenoy R and Sinha B.
Vol. 10, no. 1 (Spring 1998): 40-55.
Planning and Drilling Wells in
the Next Millennium
Clouzeau F, Hansen R, McCann D, Michel G, Neff D,
Prouvost L and Ritchie G.
Vol. 10, no. 4 (Winter 1998): 213.
Pushing the Limits of Formation
Evaluation While Drilling
Bourgeois TJ, Bramlett K, Cannon D, Craig P,
Harkins R, Hodeneld K, Lovell J and Pigram I.
Vol. 10, no. 4 (Winter 1998): 2939.
Seismic Integration to Reduce Risk
Hope R, Ireson D, Leaney S, Meyer J,
Tittle W and Willis M.
Vol. 10, no. 3 (Autumn 1998): 2-15.
Streamlining Interpretation Workow
Beardsell MB, Buscher H, Denver L, Gras R,
Tushingham K and Vernay P.
Vol. 10, no. 1 (Spring 1998): 22-39.
Using Downhole Annular Pressure
Measurements to Improve
Drilling Performance
Aldred W, Bern P, Carpenter B, Cook J, Hutchinson M,
Leder PC, Lovell J and Rezmer-Cooper I.
Vol. 10, no. 4 (Winter 1998): 40-55.
NEW BOOKS
Environmental Geology
Murck BW, Skinner BJ and Porter SC.
Vol. 10, no. 1 (Spring 1998): 70.
Fossil Hydrocarbons:
Chemistry and Technology
Berkowitz N.
Vol. 10, no. 3 (Autumn 1998): 58.
Geophysics for Sedimentary Basins
Henry G.
Vol. 10, no. 1 (Spring 1998): 70.
A Handbook for Seismic Data Acquisition
in Exploration
Evans BJ.
Vol. 10, no. 2 (Summer 1998): 70.
McGraw-Hill Dictionary of
Geology & Mineralogy
Parker SB (ed).
Vol. 10, no. 3 (Autumn 1998): 58.
Micropaleontology in
Petroleum Exploration
Jones RW.
Vol. 10, no. 2 (Summer 1998): 70.
The MIT Guide to Science and
Engineering Communication
Paradis JG and Zimmerman ML.
Vol. 10, no. 3 (Autumn 1998): 58.
Modern Geophysics in Engineering Geology
McCann DM, Eddleston M, Fenning PJ and
Reeves GM (eds).
Vol. 10, no. 2 (Summer 1998): 70.
On the Rocks: Earth Science for Everyone
Dickey JS Jr.
Vol. 10, no. 1 (Spring 1998): 70.
Petroleum and Basin Evolution
Welte DH, Horseld B and Baker DR (eds).
Vol. 10, no. 3 (Autumn 1998): 58.
58 Oileld Review
Name
Company
Address
City State Postal Code
Country
Telephone
Fax E-mail
Method of Payment: JMasterCard JVisa JCheck
Account Number-Please include all digits
VATnumber (EEC countries only)
Please print name as it appears on credit card
Expiration Date
Order Date Signature
Statement Address (if different from above)
MORA or Oilfield Review Services Order Form
Viewgraph and Slide sets of Oilfield Review Illustrations
Oilfield Review Back Issues and Articles
Multimedia Oilfield Review Archive
Platform: JMacintosh JWindows JUNIX
Computer Model
Quantity Ordered @$25.00 each = Total $
Back-issue price:$15. Call for article reprint price.
Issue date Price Quantity Subtotal
1.
2.
3.
4.
Call for added cost of delivery. Total $
Specify: JCourier JAir mail
ORDER TOTAL
Article title No. of sets Subtotal
(call for prices)
1.
2.
3.
4.
Specify: JViewgraphs: $16 each JSlides: $14 each Total $
Oilfield Review Services
Barbour Square, High Street, Tattenhall,
Chester CH3 9RF England
(44) 1829-770569 Fax: (44) 1829-771354
E-mail: [email protected]
Call or Copy and FAX this form.
$
Multimedia
MORAthe Multimedia Oilfield Review Archiveprovides
quick and easy access to issues published from 1992 to 1996.
MORA preserves the look of the printed magazine in a cross-
platform format. Full-color articles can be printed or explored
on-screen using key-word searches and cross-document links.
Color 35-mm slides and viewgraphs
The ideal way to prepare high-quality sales presentations and
lecturesOilfield Review Services offers color 35-mm slides
and viewgraphs of illustrations from Oilfield Review and The
Technical Review. The cost of a slide or viewgraph set ranges
from $120 to $450. Please call for more information.
Article reprints and back issues
Reprints of Oilfield Review articles can be supplied. Minimum
order is 500. Back issues of the Oilfield Review and The
Technical Review can also be ordered, subject to availability.
Exhibition posters
Special display materials such as posters or large transparencies,
incorporating illustrations from Oilfield Review, can be ordered.
Oilfield Review Services also creates tailor-made multimedia
presentations for exhibitions, conferences and seminars, and can
provide staff and equipment to run the presentations.
Browse Oilfield Review Services online at www.t-e-s.co.uk
Multimedia, graphics and
reprints from
Oilfield
Review
Oil from upper sands only
Oil from lower sands only
Commingled oils A B C D E F G H I J K L
%
up
p
er sand
p
rod
uction, steam
flood
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Well
Before steamflood
After steamflood
1.0
0.5
1.5
2.0
2.5
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Lower sands
(3 wells)
Upper sands
(2 wells) Producing
well
Production
water Steam
Injection
wells
Steamflooded
upper sands
Waterflooded
lower sands
0 ft 300
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
1993 1994
1996 1995
1992
Available from Corporate Express/Ross-Martin
Available from Oilfield Review Services:
Corporate Express Document and Print Management
3635 Willow Bend, Suite 300
Houston, Texas 77054
1(713)660-7226 Fax 1(713)660-0362
E-mail: [email protected]
Oilfield Review
Point your browser to
www.connect.slb.com to find:
technical presentations, forums and
publications, including Oilfield Review
detailed service information,
applications and case studies
log interpretation charts and
nonexclusive seismic maps
an oilfield dictionary, mnemonics
database and other oilfield links
location and telephone directory
DataLink* secure data transfer
InterACT* real-time data transmission
from wellsites
SuperVision* project monitoring.
Connect Schlumberger is the Internet
communications resource for Schlumberger
clients. Updated daily, this password-protected
interface is growing rapidly, providing timely
and interactive access to the information, data
and tools needed by the E&P industry.
You can also visit the public
Schlumberger Web site at
www.slb.com.
* Mark of Schlumberger
Did you know that
Oilfield Review can
be found on-line?
MP-6063
S
C
H
L
U
M
B
E
R
G
E
R

O
I
L
F
I
E
L
D

R
E
V
I
E
W
W
I
N
T
E
R

1
9
9
8
V
O
L
U
M
E

1
0


N
U
M
B
E
R

4
Winter 1998
Integrated Drilling Software
Multilateral Well Technology
Formation Evaluation While Drilling
Annular Pressure While Drilling
Oilfield Review