Challenges, Lessons Learned, and
Successful Implementations of Multilateral
Completion Technology Offshore
Abu Dhabi
Shuichi Kikuchi, SPE, and Abdulla S. Fada’q, SPE, ZADCO, Abu Dhabi, UAE
Summary
Zakum Development Company (ZADCO), with the support from
shareholders and the cooperation of Abu Dhabi Marine Operating
Company (ADMA-OPCO), successfully completed the final
design of the multilateral completion (MLC) system for Reser-
voirs A and B through the Multilateral Tie Back System
(MLTBS) project. Well T-2 in the Upper Zakum field was recom-
pleted as dual lateral/dual producer using a re-entry drilling sys-
tem (RDS) Version 2 and a dual bore deflector (DBD) oriented
and set on a latch coupling in the 7-in. liner hanger assembly.
According to Technology Advancement Multilateral (TAML)
level specification, the final MLC is categorized as TAML Level-
4 E-2-PN-D/4-TR-SEP (Level-4, existing well application, two
junction, producer with natural lift, dual completion, tubing re-
entry, separated flow). The multilateral liner hanger (MLLH) sys-
tem (i.e., accommodating a latch coupling in 7-in. liner hanger
assembly to have a certain access to the upper lateral) was the first
successful application of that kind in the world.
The teamwork and integrated approach for the trial planning
and implementation, as well as lessons learned from a predesign
trial (TAML Level-4 E-2-PN-D-TR-SEP using straddle assembly)
for Well T-1 completed in 2000, have led to reaching the final
goal of the MLC in Well T-2, which provides ZADCO with the
following reservoir benefits:
- Independent coiled tubing access to the upper (Reservoir A)
and lower laterals (Reservoir B) through a dual completion to
perform effective stimulation and reservoir monitoring.
- Full bore access to each lateral immediately after pulling out
the completion, which is an additional feature to the predesign of
an MLC for Well T-1.
- Allow selective water shutoff to cope with water break-
through into the upper-cased lateral.
- Possibility of extending well life by drilling a secondary
lateral through a window joint installed in the upper-cased lateral.
Moreover, another MLC trial, installed in the quadrant multi-
lateral well RL-2 in 2005, has been successfully implemented by
using mechanically selective through tubing re-entry equipment.
This success was largely because of the lessons learned from a
similar MLC design implemented in well RL-1 in 2001.
These successful trial implementations proved the MLC
system is applicable for any new/re-entry wells in ZADCO reser-
voirs, which provides new methods of reservoir management, and
creates new completion strategies for ZADCO field development.
This paper covers the MLC strategies, lessons learned through
the successes and failures and the additional challenges planned
for the future of the MLTBS project.
Copyright ã 2009 Society of Petroleum Engineers
This paper (SPE 101385) was accepted for presentation at the Abu Dhabi International
Petroleum Exhibition and Conference, Abu Dhabi, UAE, 5–8 November 2006, and revised
for publication. Original manuscript received for review 6 September 2006. Revised manu-
script received for review 9 June 2008. Paper peer approved 21 August 2008.
March 2009 SPE Drilling & Completion
Introduction
The Upper Zakum Field in offshore Abu Dhabi consists of three
main reservoirs, namely Reservoirs A, B, and C, as shown in
Fig. 1. Reservoirs A and B were developed simultaneously imple-
menting five spot water injection patterns and horizontal drilling
technology. This was done in conjunction with a dual-completion
system applied for both producers and water injectors.
Water breakthrough initially occurred from Reservoir A in the
middle of 1991. Since then, the number of water-cut string has
increased. A high-permeability layer at the bottom of Reservoir A
caused premature water breakthrough. It was then recognized that
along with an optimized junction placement, a new dual-completion
system that provides upper lateral access, could be introduced to
improve the well’s performance. This system does not only allow
the monitoring of the upper lateral’s productivity and amount of
water breakthrough, but also ultimately provides several options to
reduce or delay water production from Reservoir A.
TAML Level-1 and Level-2 multilateral junctions, with dual-
completion systems, were applied in producers of Reservoir C,
which is divided into several subreservoir units.
One of the producers of this category, completed with the short
string in the upper three laterals (subreservoir units-1, 2, and 3)
and the long string into subreservoir unit-4, showed unexpected
flow behaviors during the cleanup operation of the short string. In
this well, a huge loss (3,300 bbls) was encountered during the
drilling phase, and a significant amount of 15% hydrochloric acid
(2,000 bbls) was bullheaded through the short string into the top
three laterals during the stimulation. Any spent acid and water
could not be recovered at surface, and dry oil production was
immediately observed during the cleanup operation.
It was considered that the phenomena occurred because of the
majority of water loss and acid having converged into the lateral
of subreservoir unit-1, which is more permeable and subject to
much lower reservoir pressure compared with subreservoir units-2
and 3. During the cleanup operation, this may lead to no-flow
contribution from the lateral of subreservoir unit-1 and dry oil
production from the laterals of subreservoir units-2 and -3.
This situation meant that effective stimulation and clean up, as
well as a full-flow contribution from each lateral aided by its
independent flow-testing and reservoir-monitoring capability,
then became essential for the multilateral well of Reservoir C.
These reservoir situations, briefly described, have highlighted
the limitations of conventional dual completions, (no independent
lateral access); and emphasized the importance and advantages
of the MLC systems, which allow re-entering any service tool,
including a drilling assembly through the junction and coiled
tubing (C/T) access through the completion as well—which is
what defines an MLC.
MLC Strategy for the MLTBS Project
With an objective of developing optimum MLC systems for the
Upper Zakum reservoirs, an MLC project, namely, the “MLTBS
Project” commenced in May 1996. The project team included Abu
Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC), Japan Oil Development
Company (JODCO: a subsidiary of INPEX Corporation), Japan
181
 Fig. 1—Dual-lateral and multilateral applications in Upper Zakum reservoirs.

Oil, Gas, and Metals National Corporation (JOGMEC), ZADCO,
ADMA-OPCO, and Halliburton-Sperry Sun. Initially, the focus
was given to developing the most suitable MLC system for Reser-
voirs A and B.
The strategy for developing MLC for the Upper Zakum reser-
voirs was designed to: 1) enhance the production and injection
potential, 2) achieve effective reservoir management, 3) advance
MLC technology, 4) develop possible applications for other fields,
and 5) generally improve overall well quality. The specific goals
are as follows:
• Because of the limited availability of open slots for drilling
new wells on offshore platforms, the application of an MLC is not
only for new horizontal wells but also for existing wells, with
horizontal recompletion being the target.
• Acquire C/T access to each lateral through both single- and
dual-completion systems to perform effective stimulation and
reservoir monitoring.
• Introduce cased and perforated completion for the Reservoir A.
• Provide options for selective water shutoff.
• Extend well life cycle by drilling secondary laterals.
• Assure consistent and reliable lateral access, zone isolation,
and integrities for the lateral junctions (i.e., mechanical connec-
tion to the parent casing and hydraulic isolation at each junction).
• Create a technical basis for the final goal of MLC systems,
multireservoir contact (MRC) with full access functions.
With the objective of achieving the MLC strategy, comprehen-
sive completion designs, associated research and development
(R&D) works, extensive prejob planning, and the executions of
four MLC trial wells, namely, T-1 (1999, Re-entry well) , RL-1
(2001, Re-entry well), T-2 (2004, Re-entry well), and RL-2 (2005,
New well) were accomplished as part of the MLTBS project.
2. DBD, designed to: deflect the short string of a dual comple-
tion into the upper lateral of Reservoir A, while connecting the
long string to access the lower lateral of Reservoir B, all in a
single trip.
The development of the new systems as well as utilization of
field-proven technologies (e.g., a precut window joint, mechani-
cally selective through tubing re-entry equipment, etc.) made the
MLC design realistic.
Three years were necessary for the R&D, which included the
engineering of designs, prototype laboratory and field testing
detailed completion designing, and the planning and execution of
the first field trial.
MLC Trial in Well T-1 (MLTBS Phase-1). TAML Level-4 E-2-
PN-D/4-TR-SEP (Level-4, existing well application, two junc-
tions, producer with natural lift, dual completion, tubing re-entry,
and separated flow), using straddle assembly, was designed for the
first trial of the MLC (MLTBS Phase-1) for Reservoirs A and B.
The additional features of MLTBS Phase-1 compared to con-
ventional dual completions were (Fig. 2):
• Introduction of cased and perforated liner completion for the
upper lateral of Reservoir A.
• Using a straddle assembly to install an orientation device,
with the aid of a latch coupling as the reference point for the
window milling in parent casing and an approach to the upper-
cased lateral.

Applications of Dual MLC for Reservoirs A and B

R&D Before MLC Trial. The main concern and technical chal-
lenge for the MLC of Reservoirs A and B were to use existing
deviated wells for horizontal recompletions. In the 1990s, MLC
technology was applicable only in new wells, thus MLC tech-
nology for re-entry wells, which could allow re-entering into a
lateral through a junction in preset cemented casing, was not
available in the industrial market. Consequently, R&D became
mandatory for the MLC application in a re-entry well. The
following two new systems were delivered to the project team
(Smith et al. 1996):
1. RDS, designed to: (1) cut a precise window in the preset
plain casing, (2) drill out a lateral through this window using a
drilling whipstock, (3) place a cemented liner, and (4) remove the
cemented liner extension and the drilling whipstock to create the
Level-4 junction. Fig. 2—Well T-1 MLC (MLTBS Phase-1) design.

182 March 2009 SPE Drilling & Completion

 • Creating a mechanical connection and hydraulic seal at the
upper junction.
• Installing a high-pressure/high-torque aluminum window
joint in the upper-cased lateral.
• Adding an access function to the upper lateral through dual
completion.
The MLC trial (MLTBS Phase-1) in Well T-1 was commenced
in October 1998, but temporarily suspended that December
because of the failure of the RDS milling tool (Ver. 1). It was
restarted in Feburary 1999 after reviewing the root cause of the
failure and optimizing the action plan for the second attempt.
The second attempt proceeded smoothly, followed by the
installation of DBD and dual completion. The well was success-
fully completed in April 1999 in accordance with the original
design. The trial then became the first successful MLC application
for a re-entry well in the world (Kikuchi and Fada’q 2000).
MLC Trial in Well T-2 (MLTBS Phase-2). With an objective of
further enhancement of the MLC system for Reservoirs A and B,
another MLC trial (MLTBS Phase-2) was commenced for re-entry
well of Well T-2 in January 2004.
The main changes from the previous MLC design (MLTBS
Phase-1) were as follows (Fig. 3):
• Use the upgraded RDS milling tool (Ver. 2) and the revised
procedure for window milling and dressing operations.
• Replace the straddle assembly from the previous MLC
design (MLTBS Phase-1) with the newly developed 7-in. MLLH
assembly. The assembly includes a latch coupling used for the
window opening and an access to the upper lateral in addition to
the conventional liner hanger mechanism.
The successful trial implementation in Well T-2, being recom-
pleted as dual-lateral/dual-producer using the RDS (Ver. 2), a
DBD and 7-in. MLLH, was successfully completed in February
2005. This MLC design (MLTBS Phase-2) was then considered as
the final design of the MLC for Reservoirs A and B.
According to the TAML level specification, the final design is
categorized as TAML Level-4 E-2-PN-D/4-TR-SEP (Level-4,
existing well application, two junctions, producer with natural lift,
dual-completion, tubing re-entry, and separated flow).
It is important to highlight that the use of MLLH to create and
allow access to the upper lateral was the first successful applica-
tion in the world.
Reservoir Benefits, Future Options, and Well Integrity
Obtained in Wells T-1 and T-2. The successful implementations
of MLC trials for Wells T-1 (MLTBS Phase-1) and T-2 (MLTBS
Phase-2) have provided the following reservoir benefits and future
options, without deteriorating well integrity:
• Dry oil production was re-established by optimizing the lat-
eral placement. An increase in production rates (a maximum of six
Fig. 3—Final MLC design for Reservoirs A and B.
March 2009 SPE Drilling & Completion
times) and wellhead flowing pressure (a maximum of three times)
were noticed during flow testing for upper and lower laterals.
• Independent C/T access to the upper-cased lateral and lower
lateral was obtained through the dual completion, which allowed
performing effective stimulation and reservoir monitoring. The
effective stimulation in the upper-cased lateral of Well T-1 was
confirmed by monitoring the flow distribution over the horizontal
section using a production logging tool conveyed by C/T.
• Options for selective water shutoff to cope with water break-
through into the upper-cased lateral of Reservoir A.
• The possibility of extending the well life by drilling a sec-
ondary lateral (i.e., drilling a smaller lateral through a precut
window joint situated in the upper cased lateral).
• The introduction of the MLLH into the MLC (MLTBS
Phase-2) design allows full bore access to the upper-cased lateral
and the lower barefoot lateral of Reservoir B when the dual
completion is pulled.
• Hydraulic seal at the junction was confirmed by pressure
and/or dry testing. In addition, zonal isolation between Reservoirs
A and B was also assured for Wells T-1 and T-2.
Best Practices and Procedures Through Lessons Learned—
MLC Application for Reservoirs A and B. The integrated
approach among the project team, combined with the lessons
learned from the successes and failures of the trial wells has led
to optimized operational procedures for the MLC to be applied for
Reservoirs A and B.
Predrilling. After the well is killed, the existing completion is
pulled, and cement evaluation/corrosion logs are run to review the
casing and cement integrity of the mother bore. This is then
followed by squeezing off the existing perforations. Before com-
mencing the MLC installation, remedial actions must first be con-
ducted to fix any well integrity problem, such as unwanted
communication between zones behind casing and/or the the pre-
sence of high pressure in the outer annulus, etc.
Drilling 8½-in. Hole, Running, and Cementing 7-in. Liner
With MLLH. An 8½-in. lateral is drilled to the landing point after
setting a 95/8-in. permanent whipstock at the top of the Reservoir
B. The 7-in. liner, along with the nonrotating MLLH, is run.
Before setting, the latch coupling is oriented to the high side of
hole using a surface readout gyro to open a window for the upper
lateral in the high side. The 7-in. liner is then cemented, cleaned
out, and scraped followed by running the cement evaluation logs
(Fig. 4).
Special caution should be taken when cementing the 7-in.
lateral liner, which prevents cement from entering and remaining
in the MLLH assembly, specifically the latch coupling. This
occurrence may be caused by viscous fingering and gravity
segregation of the returned cement above the top of the liner or
any pressure leak in the 7-in. liner.
Opening and Dressing Window for Upper Lateral. First, a
brushing tool is run to cleanout the latch coupling, ensuring there
is no cement or debris inside. The RDS milling tool (Ver. 2) is
run, with a single latch assembly, to create the 7½-in. wide
pilot window. The single latch assembly orients the milling tool,
enabling it to cut the window at the high side of hole (Fig. 5).
The window is then enlarged from 7½ in. to 8½ in. using
a single trip dressing assembly, consisting of a drilling
whipstock run on bolted mills. In this operation, high-viscosity
pills are used to ensure an efficient return of metal cuttings
(Fig. 6).
The original RDS milling tool (Ver. 1) was designed to mill a
window in three different passes by indexing (i.e., positioning
each latch key into the corresponding notch of the latch coupling
three times using a “J” slot mechanism) and string rotation. In
Well T-1, it showed a high rate of milling and a full recovery of
metal cuttings by hydraulic optimizations. However, the triple
latch of RDS milling tool (Ver. 1) was parted at the upper key slot
during the second pass cut (Fig. 7) resulting in extensive fishing
operations.
The root cause of the failure was caused by the concentration
of torsional stress on the top part of the triple latch assembly. In
183
 Fig. 4—Running and cementing 7-in. liner with MLLH.

Fig. 5—Mill and open pilot window for upper-lateral using RDS
milling tool (Version 2).

addition, the RDS milling tool (Ver. 1), using the triple latch
assembly and “J-slot” indexing mechanism, was not operationally
feasible for several reasons; specifically, the latch key position
was difficult to identify because of a pipe stretch of 4 to 5 feet,
which was three times longer than the distance between latchkeys,
and the difficulty of torque transmission to the “J” slot when
indexing.
Considering the previously discussed failure and lessons
learned during the second pass cut of Well T-1, the three-latch
system became obsolete, and the new RDS milling system

Fig. 6—Window enlargement by single trip dressing tool. Fig. 7—Failure of RDS milling tool (Version 1).

184 March 2009 SPE Drilling & Completion

(Ver. 2), using the single latch, adopted. The system was success-
fully tested during the trial of the MLC (MLTBS Phase-2) in Well
T-2 and became a field-proven technology.
Drilling 8½-in. Hole and Running/Cementing 7-in. Liner
With Transition Joint in the Upper Lateral. An 8½-in. lateral
hole is drilled using a steerable drilling assembly, along with
either measurement while drilling or logging while drilling, to
the required total depth. The horizontal section for the upper
lateral is usually within the 1,500 to 2,000-ft range. At bit tech-
nology, along with rotary steerable drilling, can be used to ensure
a smooth hole in the horizontal section, which facilitates running
the 7-in. lateral liner to the bottom (Fig. 8).
It is essential to know the exact depth of the whipstock before
running the 7-in. lateral liner. Knowing the exact is necessary to
place the transition joint at the required 10 in. below the top of the
whipstock. If the transition joint is positioned above the drilling
whipstock in the deviated hole, it can lead to a difficulty to wash-
over and swallow the whipstock and the cemented transition joint
remnant in the later stage.
Torque and drag analysis for the 7-in. lateral liner is conducted
to ensure its safe running into the upper lateral. The liner is run to
the bottom while checking the orientation of 7-in. window joint,
which is to be aligned with a universal borehole orientation
(UBHO) sub installed above the 7-in. liner-running tool. Before
commencing the liner cementing, the orientation of the window
joint is to be adjusted to a required direction by a single-shot gyro.
Cementing the 7-in. liner is then performed using a surfactant,
fresh water, light weight cement slurry for the lead slurry and a
high-density slurry for the tail followed by a displacement fluid.
The displacement fluid is to be equivalent to the density and
viscosity of the tail cement slurry returned above the transition
joint, which prevents the slurry from downward migration. Any
slurry migration may cause difficulty in retrieving the drilling
whipstock or lead to the formation of a cement sheet across the
latch coupling, which then requires additional trips for cleaning,
as experienced in Well T-2.
Meanwhile, it is necessary to ensure that clear pressure humps
caused by shearing the liner wiper plug and bumping the com-
bined plug (i.e., wiper plug and pump down plug) on the float
collar, are noticed during the displacement of the cement slurry. A
Fig. 8—Running 7-in. liner with transition joint in upper lateral.
March 2009 SPE Drilling & Completion
failure to shear the liner wiper plug can result in an emergency
release of the liner running tool.
A 7-in. window joint was installed in the upper 7-in. lateral
liner in Wells T-1 and T-2. This installation enabled a secondary
lateral to be drilled through the window joint in case water break-
through occurs in the upper-cased lateral in the future.
A 7-in. aluminum, high-pressure, high-torque window joint
was installed instead of a composite wrapped window joint. The
latter needs a pressure sleeve to increase its pressure rating to
prevent burst or collapse during cementing and pressure-testing
operations. This decision was made because of a potential risk of
trapping the combined cementing plug across this pressure sleeve
and the elimination of additional trips for setting and retrieving it.
Zinc centralizers, with 8¼-in. outside diameter (OD), were
selected to be run with the 7-in. liner in both Wells T-1 and T-2.
This selection was in case the liner got stuck high and a centrali-
zer happens to be laying against the drilling whipstock when
cemented. This situation would mean the centralizer eventually
needs to be milled during the washover/whipstock retrieval opera-
tion and thus being zinc, would be easier to mill than if made of
steel. A 20–30-ft spacing between the centralizers was adopted to
obtain a high standoff ( 80%) for cementing.
Before running the 7-in. liner into the upper lateral in Well
T-1, a torque and drag simulation was conducted to evaluate the
tension, critical buckling loads, and axial stress in the 7-in. liner.
The simulation results suggested that a 7-in. (L-80, 29 lb/ft) liner
with the centralizers can be successfully run to the bottom. This
result was based on if: 1) the compression load did not exceed the
critical buckling load over the actual well profile, and 2) the total
axial stress, including the bending stress, does not exceed the
stress rating of L-80 material. In Well T-1, the 7-in. liner was run
successfully with approximately 20% less running load compared
with the simulated one.
Running Cement Evaluation Logs, and Perforated 7-in.
Upper-Cased Lateral. After cleaning out the mother bore and the
7-in. liner, cement evaluation tools are run, followed by a pressure
test to confirm junction integrity. The liner was then perforated
using 27/8-in. tubing-conveyed perforating guns in 100-ft perfora-
tions followed by 100-ft blank sections in sequence. The blank
sections allow for future selective water shutoff and flow monitor-
ing across the individual perforated sections. The perforation
strategy was based on results from a 3D reservoir simulation using
local grid refinement (LGR), which suggested that perforating
50% of the horizontal section with matrix acidization, provides
more than 90% of the originally expected performance index (PI)
of the barefoot (Fig. 9).
In Wells T-1 and T-2, the cement evaluation tools indicated
good-to-excellent bonding over the entire 7-in. liner and transition
joint. Hydraulic optimization, as well as the high standoff of the
liner, is what led to obtaining this good cement bond.
Washover to Mill and Swallow Transition Joint Remnant and
Drilling Whipstock/Check Re-Entry Into Upper-Cased Lateral.
In a successful washover operation, it is important to observe
colored rubber cuttings (i.e., green, red, and yellow) on the shale
shakers that are being milled from the centralizers and trash seal
of the whipstock. Thus, if the colored markers are observed, it
confirms the washover pipe is milling the transition joint and
swallowing the whisptock and not deflecting up into the lateral
(Fig. 10). When the washover assembly reaches the stop ring, a
slackoff weight is applied to shear out the stop ring that releases
the slip ring. The washover pipe is then picked up to engage the
slip ring, and the transition joint remnant and whipstock can be
pulled to the surface. The result is the creation of a TAML
Level-4 Junction (Fig. 11).
A workover whisptock run on a hydraulic running/retrieving
tool (HRT) is set into the latch coupling. This has a latch assembly
similar to that of the RDS milling tool (Ver. 2) and the
drilling whipstock; thus, it assures the workover whipstock face is
oriented toward the window. The HRT is released allowing a 6-in.
slick assembly to be run into the lateral to ensure smooth access.
In case there is a suspected pressure leak at the junction from
the cement evaluation logs or related operations, such as an
185
 Fig. 9—Cement evaluation log and perforating 7-in. lateral liner.
observation of no cement indication in the recovered remnant, a
7-in. composite bridge plug is to be set above the window joint,
and a dry test (drillstem test in the closed system) is performed by
applying a 1,000 psi drawdown against the junction. If any flow is
noticed from the dry testing, a 7-in. lateral packer is installed in the
Fig. 10—Washover transition joint and whipstock.
186
upper-cased lateral during completion phase to establish hydraulic
isolation across the junction (TAML Level-5 completion).
The washover operation, which recovers the transition joint
and the drilling whipstock, was considered as one of the most
critical tasks during the trials for Wells T-1 and T-2. However,
the operations proceeded with no difficulty and was completed in
approximately only 1 day. Good cement bonding and accurate
positioning of the transition joint helped to cut the transition joint
smoothly and symmetrically, resulting in easy re-entry to the
upper-cased lateral (Fig. 12). A latch-cleaning tool is run to
Fig. 11—Establishment of Level-4 junction.
March 2009 SPE Drilling & Completion
ensure the free passage across the Level-4 junction if any abnorm-
ality is noticed on the recovered remnant and whipstock.
Drilling 6-in. Horizontal Section in Reservoir B. After dril-
ling out the shoe of the mainbore 7-in. liner, a 6-in. horizontal
section is drilled in Reservoir B using a steerable or rotary steer-
able drilling assembly along with measurement while drilling or
logging while drilling. At bit technology can be used for geosteer-
ing purposes. After reaching total depth, the well is displaced with
brine followed by spotting enzyme over the horizontal section.
A wiper trip is then made and debris deposited by the reaction
between the enzyme and mudcakes is to be circulated out to sur-
face. The horizontal section of the lower lateral is approximately
3,000 ft long and completed with barefoot.
Setting 7-in. Permanent Packer and Installation of DBD. The
7-in. mainbore permanent packer with the tail pipe, including a
glass disc sub, is run on drill pipe. After conducting the depth
correlation by gamma ray casing-collar locator logs, the packer is
set hydraulically by dropping a ball. If a Level-5 completion is
required for hydraulic isolation at the upper junction, a 7-in.
packer would be set in the upper lateral by first installing a work-
over whipstock for re-entry.
A locator seal assembly (for the permanent packer), a swivel
sub with spacer tubing, the DBD (with latchkeys at bottom) are
run on a hydromechanical running/retrieving tool (HMRT). After
the DBD is set into the latch coupling, aligning it in the correct
orientation, the HMRT is then released and pulled out (Fig. 13). A
dummy run, consisting of a bullnose on tubing run into the low
side bore of the DBD, is required to confirm that the DBD is
properly oriented.
The DBD was successfully run in both Wells T-1 and T-2;
however, it was only realized, after some difficulty on Well T-1, Fig. 13—Running permanent packer and DBD.
while stinging the seal assembly into the 7-in. packer sealbore
during latch in, that a swivel joint was necessary between the
locator seal assembly and DBD. In addition, the dummy run was the PBR of the DBD), the pumping is stopped, and the dual string
included in the operational procedure based on an unexpected continues to be lowered until the tubing hangers land in the tubing
misaligning of the DBD in Well T-2. spool (Fig. 15). The tubing hangers are then tightened by
Running Dual Completion and Assurance of Running C/T
Into Upper-Cased Lateral. The dual completion is drifted and
pressure tested while being run to depth. When slacked off, a
specially designed muleshoe deflects the short string up the DBD
and into the lateral. Meanwhile, the long string, having a seal
assembly on bottom, is guided and stung into the polished bore
receptacle of the DBD (Fig. 14).
While keeping the short string tail pipe inside the 7-in. upper-
cased lateral, the dual string is pulled up to install subsurface
safety valve nipples, followed by control line installations and
associated testing. After attaching a dual-tubing hanger and land-
ing joints, the dual string is run again to depth while circulating.
When the circulation pressure is increased or loss of return is
noticed (i.e., the seal assembly on the long string is entering into

Fig. 12—Recovered transition joint remnant and drilling whip-

stock from Well T-2. Fig. 14—DBD mechanism.

March 2009 SPE Drilling & Completion 187

holddown screws, and the long string is pressure tested against the
glass disc sub.
A spray nozzle on the C/T is then run through the short string
to confirm full accessibility to the upper-cased lateral. In addition,
a flat bottom mill on a slim motor is run in the long string to
ensure the free passage and mill out the glass disc sub. The
procedure of using the mill and motor to break out the glass disc
sub is selected based on the failure of breaking it by pressure
initially trialed in Well T-1.
After confirming dual-string integrity by an injection test, a
95/8-in. dual-hydraulic packer is set by running a wireline plug in
the short string. Blowout preventers (BOPs) are nippled down
after laying down the landing joints of both strings and installing
back pressure valves in tubing hanger profiles. The dual Christ-
mas tree is then installed and tested.
After the rig is moved off location, the upper-cased lateral and
lower barefoot laterals are stimulated using C/T and Nitrified 15%
HCL acid, cleaned up, and flow tested by a multipurpose barge.
Actual Durations for MRC Trials for Reservoirs A and B in
Wells T-1 and T-2 and Future Performance Target. The total
duration of the MLC (MLTBS Phase-1) trial in Well T-1 was 139
days. There were 50 days of nonproductive time (NPT), which
was equal to 36% of the total well duration. On the other hand, a
total of 105 days, including 29 days of NPT was spent for the
second MLC (MLTBS Phase-2) trial in Well T-2.
By reducing NPT by 42% and core operational time by 15%,
there was a clear improvement in performance going from Well
T-1 to T-2. Overall, the principle factors of NPT of these trials
were the failure of the original RDS milling tool (Ver. 1), diffi-
culties pulling the existing completion (caused by scale deposition
and extensive tubing corrosion), additional cleanout trips caused
by debris accumulated in the latch coupling, measurement-while-
drilling tool failures and waiting on weather (WOW) time.
Currently, 57 days (excluding the duration for data acquisition)
is the normal duration for a dual lateral, dual producer for Reser-
voirs A and B, which completed with barefoot laterals with no
Fig. 15—Running and landing dual completion.
188
access to the upper lateral. It is our challenge to deliver the MLC
well in 65 days without compromising on well integrity (Fig. 16).
Applications of Quadrant MLC for Reservoir C
In addition to the MLC for Reservoirs A and B, the MLTBS
project team also successfully completed the first quadrant multi-
lateral completion system in Reservoir C. Using multiple comple-
tion windows, along with mechanical through tubing re-entry
tools, Well RL-2 was completed in February 2005.
Using field-proven technologies, a similar MLC design,
TAML Level-4 E-3-PN-D-TR-SSEP (Level-4, existing well
application, three junctions, producer with natural lift, dual
completion, tubing re-entry through long string, and semisepa-
rated flow) was attempted in Well RL-1 in 2001 using field-
proven technologies. Because of the unsuccessful 4½-in. lateral
liner cementing operation, which resulted in the failure to
retrieve the drilling whipstock, the trial was terminated and
the well was completed as a dual-lateral, dual-producer without
mechanical through-tubing re-entry equipment. The lessons
learned from the trial in Well RL-1 led to the successful imple-
mentation of the quadrant MLC in Well RL-2. They were also
incorporated into the operational procedures of the MLC for
Reservoirs A and B.
During the trial in Well RL-2, extensive remedial cementing
operations were performed around the mother casing in Reser-
voir C. Consisting of several reservoir sub-units, each with a
different reservoir pressure and production performance, it was
essential to restore this zonal isolation. In addition, hole-cleaning
problems and difficulty positioning a tubing whipstock for C/T
entry, were encountered because of the high inclination of the
mother hole (approximately 80 ).
The completion of Well RL-2 is categorized as TAML Level-2
N-3-PN-D-TR-SSEP (Level-2, new well application, three junc-
tions, producer with natural lift, dual completion, coiled tubing
re-entry, and semiseparated flow).
The successful installation of the MLC in Reservoir C pro-
vided the abilities to selectively re-enter laterals of subreservoir
units 1, 2, and 3 through the long string to effectively stimulate
and run production logging tools using C/T. In addition, the sys-
tem allows selective flow and shutting-in using a mechanical
isolation sleeve (Fig. 17). The effective stimulation for each sub-
reservoir obtained 1.5-times higher production than the original
estimation, with nil water cut.
A total of 68 days NPT excluding WOW time, was recorded
during the trial of Well RL-2. The remedial cement job to
Fig. 16—Well durations of MRC trials for Reservoirs A and B.
March 2009 SPE Drilling & Completion
 Fig. 17—Quadrant MLC for Reservoir C.

establish zonal isolation, hole cleaning, and a difficulty to set the
tubing whipstock, which resulted in a modification of the latch-
keys, were the primary causes. The time breakdown analysis
suggested that 65% of the NPT was not directly related to the
MLC trial.
Future Challenges for MLC
The following are planned/potential applications and challenges
for MLC technology in offshore ZADCO fields:
• An MLC application (TAML Level-4 E 2-PN-D-TR-SEP) is
scheduled in the fourth quarter of 2007. The candidate well is a
producer, and the MLC applied is for dual-opposed laterals drilled
in the same reservoir.
• Water breakthrough has been observed in the upper-cased
lateral of Well T-1. Several water shut-off technologies are applic-
able, such as: chemical treatments, a cement squeeze off against the
perforations, running solid expandable casing inside the 7-in. liner,
or even drilling a secondary 6-in. lateral, which would exit out the
preset window joint installed in the 7-in. upper-cased lateral.
• Existing technologies, such as a surface-splitter system and
extend-reach/horizontal drilling, along with MLC technology
developed and tested through the MLTBS project assists in
achieving the MRC concept with full access to each lateral on
demand through the final completion string. The combined tech-
nology (Fig. 18) provides several options for field development in
a cost-effective manner.
any new or re-entry wells in Reservoirs A, B, and C. These
systems provide new methods of reservoir management
by enabling lateral re-entry to effectively stimulate each lat-
eral, selectively monitor each reservoir’s performance, as
well as providing options for selective shutoff and future
remedial work.
3. Junction integrity and zone isolation are one of the major con-
cerns for MRC applications. There was no compromise of well
integrity during the MLC trials. Intensive testing and the assur-
ance of hydraulic isolation at the junction as well as remedial
actions to establish zone isolation led to delivering quality
wells.
4. The best practices and procedures for the MLC (TAML Level-
4 E-2-PN-D-TR-SEP) for Reservoirs A and B have been estab-
lished through the lessons learned from the four trials. It is our
challenge to deliver an MLC in Reservoirs A and B within 65
days, without compromising well integrity. The best practices
learned from the MLC trials, further performance improvement
in the predrilling phase, and minimizing conventional NPT,
lead to attaining this performance target.

Conclusions
1. MLC technology is continuing to mature to provide several
methods for reservoir management and enhance field produc-
tion and injection potential. An integrated approach for the
system design, R&D, and prejob planning are essential to the
development and optimization of an MLC system. The key
issues for the successful implementation of the technology is
reliability, supported by thorough risk analysis, contingency
planning, and optimization of operational procedures through
previous lessons learned.
2. Four MLC trials for the wells T-1, RL-1, T-2, and RL-2 were
implemented as part of the MLTBS project. Three out of four
trials were successfully installed while following the MLC
strategy for the project. The successful implementation of
the MLC designs proved the systems are applicable to Fig. 18—MRC through combined technologies.

March 2009 SPE Drilling & Completion 189

5. Existing technologies (e.g., a surface splitter system) and
extend reach/horizontal drilling, along with the developed
MLC technology assists in achieving MRC concept with full
access to each lateral on demand through the final completion.
This combined technology, namely “MRC system,” provides
several options for field development in a cost-effective
manner.
By introducing real-time monitoring/control technologies into
the MRC system, this is a “real smart well.”
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to express their appreciation to the management
of ADNOC, JODCO/JOGMEC, and ZADCO for their support of
MLTBS project and the permission to publish this manuscript. The
authors thank ADMA-OPCO drilling division and Halliburton/
Sperry Sun for their cooperation and good assistance during the
planning and implementations. We also thank Mr. S. Hamdan and
NDC crew for their continuous cooperation and hard work
on the rig.
References
Kikuchi, S. and Fada’q, A.S. 2000. MLTBS Project Challenging for
Reservoir Benefits. Paper SPE 59433 presented at the SPE Asia Paci-
fic Conference on Integrated Modelling for Asset Management, Yoko-
hama, Japan, 25–26 April. DOI: 10.2118/59433-MS.
190
Smith, R., Smith, B., and Lowson, B. 1996. Multilateral drilling and
completion systems and their applications in wellbore asset manage-
ment. Paper presented at the IADC Middle East Regional Conference,
Abu Dhabi, UAE, 6–9 October.
SI Metric Conversion Factors
ft  3.0488* E – 01 = m
in.  2.54* E + 00 = cm
psi  6.894757 E + 00 = kPa
*Conversion factor is exact.
Shuichi Kikuchi has 29 years of experience in conventional/
horizontal/multilateral well construction, drilling/testing in
exploration wells, and workover operations. He worked for 12
years in R&D and designs/field trials of multilateral completion
systems. He is a secondee from JODCO to ZADCO, where he is
currently Business Performance Improvement Team Leader.
He holds a BS degree in engineering from Touhoku University
in Japan. He is a member of SPE and JAPT. Abdulla S. Fadaq
has 33 years of experience in petroleum engineering and well
construction. He is a secondee from ADNOC to ZADCO,
where he worked as Subsurface Engineering Manager for 9
years and acts as Well Service Manager at present. He holds
a BSc degree in petroleum engineering from Cairo University,
and is a member of SPE.
March 2009 SPE Drilling & Completion