Baker Oil Tools

Large Monobore Completions Increase Efficiency

for Prolific Gas Reservoirs

By Ken Almond, Michael V. Smith

Large monobore completions (i.e., those using 6 ⁄ -in. and larger tubulars) are increasingly becoming
5
8

the technology of choice for production and injection applications in prolific, high-profile gas reser-
voirs. The larger production tubing provides increased flow volume, while the monobore scheme
reduces flow restrictions. Other benefits include:
◗ Elimination of gas turbulence areas and restrictions during the use of production and
intervention tools
◗ Exploitation of the reservoir through fewer wells and fewer slots on a platform; possible
elimination of one or more platforms
◗ Lower long-term operating expense from quicker depletion of the reservoir and fewer wellbores
◗ Lower topsides and maintenance expenses.1
◗ Earlier return on investment

42
 These advantages can improve net pre-
sent value (NPV) and overall project eco-
nomics by hundreds of millions of dollars.
For example, Conoco has reported that it
improved overall project economics of its
North Sea Heidrun Tension Leg Platform
(TLP) by more than $108 million by using
7-in. rather than 51⁄2-in. tubing and tree.2
Baker Oil Tools has performed large mono-
bore completions in deepwater and
extended-reach wells, in cemented-liner,
openhole, and sand-control applications.
Greater Emphasis on Reliability
Achieving accelerated production with
fewer wells places greater emphasis on
reliability. The negative impact on produc-
tion of one large-bore well that is unable
to flow is significantly greater than in the
conventional completion scenario. Thus, it
is important to gauge reliability for large-
bore completions not only on the basis of
components, but also, and to an even
greater extent, for the entire system. This
systems approach is in stark contrast to the
discrete equipment view or even depart-
mentalized approaches to improving relia-
bility. No longer can reliability be improved
by improving a component’s reliability
without knowledge of its interaction with-
in the system. Similarly, no longer can relia-
bility and cost efficiencies be achieved
wholly through the efforts of the “comple-
tion department” without consideration of
the traditional “wellbore construction/
drilling departments” and “workover
department”. The real opportunity for
reliability and cost efficiencies in monobore
completions is in the integration of these
three disciplines, resulting in a fully inte-
grated, fit-for-purpose, fit-for-life of-the-
well completion.
Classifying Large-Bore Completions
Through the appraisal of more than 350
documented case histories spanning some
20 years, Baker Oil Tools identified four
different methods of large-bore comple-
tions and established these methods, or
“levels,” as the basis of its APEX™ big-bore
classification system. This classification sys-
tem is designed to help operators evaluate
and select the best integrated completion
solution for lowering risk and overall pro-
ject cost in specific large-bore applications.
The various levels are differentiated by
Level 1 Level 2
when the completion occurs, the location Fig.1 Openhole completions
and types of seals used in the upper and
lower (reservoir face) completions, and the
type of the resulting isolation. The classifi-
cation system compares each completion
level according to functionality and risk
to reward.
Tier I:
Openhole completions – all annular barri-
ers, i.e., cement and/or liner top packer,
are installed in an open hole, drilling
environment. Within Tier I, there are
two levels of openhole completions
based on the resulting number of annular
barriers (Fig. 1):
Level 1: One annular barrier,
i.e., cement or packer
Level 2: Two annular barriers,
i.e., cement and packer
These large-bore completion system
levels are classified as wellbore construc-
tion completions, because they are reser-
voir-face completions that take place
during the drilling process. Applicability of
these systems is based on liner top load
analysis and the operator’s completion phi-
losophy. The primary benefit of wellbore
construction completions is their opera-
tional simplicity. Well-specific costs and
risks involve completing in a drilling envi-
ronment. Risk reduction includes contin-
gencies to convert to an isolation
completion, if necessary.
Within this classification, Level 1
large-bore completions are cemented,
with the primary barrier being cement in
the lower completion. Level 2 large-bore
completions add an integral packer in the
lower completion.
43
 Baker Oil Tools
Large Monobore Completions Increase Efficiency
for Prolific Gas Reservoirs
Level 1
Level 3
Fig. 2 Cased hole completions
Tier II:
Cased-hole completions – additional annu-
lar barriers, i.e., liner top packer, installed
in a cased hole, production environment.
Within Tier II, there are four levels of cased
hole completions based on placement of
an additional packer with and without
seals stabbed into a Tier I completion.
Level 1: Tier I, Level 1 with upper pack-
er or in the case of cemented casing
without a liner, a stand-alone packer
installed in a production environment,
resulting in one annular barrier
Level 2: Tier I, Level 2 with upper pack-
er resulting in one annular barrier
Level 3: Tier I, Level 1 with seals tied
back to upper packer resulting in two
barriers
Level 4: Tier I, Level 2 with seals tied
back to upper packer resulting in three
barriers
44
Level 2
Level 4
The second two large-bore completion
system levels are classified as isolation com-
pletions. These are run as upper comple-
tions to protect and/or repair the lower
completion. Applicability of these systems
is based on trapped volume analysis and
operator completion philosophy. The pri-
mary benefit of isolation completions is the
additional well protection they provide.
Well-specific costs and risks include installa-
tion of additional components. Risk reduc-
tion includes use of single-source, fully
integrated completion components.
Within the isolation completions classi-
fication, Level 3 large-bore completion sys-
tems provide single-zone isolation by
adding an annular barrier in the upper
completion to a Level 1 cemented comple-
tion system. Level 4 large-bore completion
systems provide dual-zone isolation by
adding an annular barrier in the upper
completion to a Level 2 integral packer
completion system.
Application Experience
The following are experience summaries
for the four levels of large-bore completion
systems.
Tier I, Level 1: Cemented Completion
Objective Liner top completion
Completion Cemented liner tied
back to surface
Experience Colombia, UK
Applications Monobore, cemented
liner, remote location
In this most basic of completions, the
liner is run, hung and cemented. Another
trip is made to clean and polish the pol-
ished bore receptacle (PBR). The integrity
of the liner top then can be tested by a
variety of means. If the integrity test fails,
subsequent remedial cementing may be
required, or the scheme can be converted
to a Level 3, using a liner top isolation
packer. After a successful integrity test,
the completion string, consisting of subsur-
face safety valve and seal assembly, are run
in the well and the seals are stabbed into
the PBR.
Tier I, Level 2: Integral Packer Completion
Objective Reduce total time to
drill and complete a
well
Completion Cemented liner with
integral isolation packer
Experience East coast of Canada,
Mexico, UK
Applications Monobore,
cemented liner,
harsh environments,
horizontal/extended reach
As with Level 1, the completion occurs
during the drilling process. Two options are
available for completion liner cementation:
(1) conventional cementation, as described
in the APEX Level 1 completion; or (2) inner
string cementation. In either case, after
cementation, the integral liner packer is
weight-set, using the drill pipe. An integri-
ty test can then be performed and the
completion assembly run and tested.
Tier II, Level 3: Single-Isolation Completion
Objective Protect cemented liner
top
Completion Liner top isolation with
compression-set packer
Experience Qatar, East coast of
Canada, Oman,
Australia, Egypt
Applications Monobore, cemented
liner, HP/HT, horizon-
tal/extended reach
After a Level 1 completion is installed,
a compression set packer is run, stabbed
into the existing liner top, and set with
compression of the drill pipe. On the final
trip, a completion-type anchor seal assem-
bly is run on the completion string, along
with the safety valve. After the necessary
space-out is determined using the snap-
in/snap-out feature, the tubing is landed
and the seal assembly is anchored in place.
No rotation is required during this comple-
tion process. The seal assembly can be
furnished with rotational and/or shear
release, for redundant methods of retriev-
ing the tubing, should the well require
workover.
Many Level 3 completions have been
run in Colombia, Norway, and the United
Kingdom using a hydraulic set packer in
place of the compression set packer.
Tier II, Level 4: Dual-Isolation Completion
Objective Minimize completion
time associated with
lower completion
isolation
Completion Dual isolation with
remotely actuated
upper packer
Experience Philippines
Applications Monobore, deepwater,
cemented liner, inter-
ventionless
After a Level 2 completion is installed,
a PBR, interventionless hydrostatically set
packer, landing nipple, and tieback stem
are run and located in the top of the liner
PBR. Applying pressure to a rupture disk
allows the packer to hydrostatically set.
Several days of rig time are saved using
remotely actuated packers.
45
 Baker Oil Tools
Large Monobore Completions Increase Efficiency
for Prolific Gas Reservoirs

Over 70% of all large-bore completions

to date have been Level 4 completions
using either a compression set or hydraulic
set upper packer. These completions have
been utilized routinely in Indonesia,
Australia, the East Coast of Canada,
Norway, Myanmar, Holland, United
Kingdom, Denmark, China and Peru.
Growing Portfolio
Most current experience in large-bore com-
pletions has been with 7-in. tubulars.
However, 95⁄8-in. completions have been run
since the early 1990s in Western European
gas storage caverns and in the prolific land-
based gas fields of Indonesia. These com-
pletion schemes were very simple, relying
on wireline-retrievable safety valves or, in
the case of remote land-based locations, no
UltraSlimline safety valve at all.
Later in the decade, as interest in 95⁄8-in.
completions increased, Baker Oil Tools
expanded its portfolio of equipment for
these completions. Much of the activity
centered on the development and qualifi-
cation of a 95⁄8-in. tubing retrievable safety
valve. Knowing these valves would most
likely be used exclusively in high-rate gas
wells, the capability of the flapper to slam
shut against high flows was a critical con-
cern. These valves passed extensive and
Slimline rigorous validation testing, including
multiple slams against maximum flow
rates of 480 MMscf/D and at a velocity of
255 ft/sec.3 (Fig. 3). By reviewing wellbore
construction and completion economics,
Baker Oil Tools became the first service
company to provide a 95⁄8-in. in. safety valve
that could fit inside 135⁄8-in. casing instead
of 16-in. casing. As a result, operators can
now reduce wellbore construction costs
while increasing production rates using
smaller casing designs.
Large-Bore Progression
Wedge An example of how large-bore monobore
completions have evolved is Qatar’s off-
shore Khuff field, estimated to contain 504
Tcf, the single largest accumulation of nat-
ural gas in the world.4 In the early 1990s,
wells into the formation were
completed using 51⁄2-in.-in. x 5 in. produc-
tion tubing to produce approximately
50 MMscf/D (Fig. 4). Subsequently, the
completions were upgraded to 7-in., Tier II,
Fig. 3. Curved flapper technology improves production rates using smaller casing programs.
Level 3, weight set packer, producing

46
90 MMscf/D. The field is now on the thresh-
old of its first 95⁄8-in. x 75⁄8-in. Tier 2, Level 3
weight set packer completion with an
anticipated production rate
of 150 MMscf/day.
Conclusions
Large monobore completions are the tech-
nology of choice for prolific reservoirs.
The larger production tubing provides
increased flow volume and the monobore
design reduces flow restrictions. A two-tier,
four-level classification scheme is available
to aid the operators selecting the appropri-
ate completion design according to func-
tional complexity and risk.

References:
1. Smith, Mike: “Large bore monobore completions
prevent high-volume gas well flow restrictions,”
Offshore (December 2001, p 44).
2. Landrum, William R.: “Economics & Case Study
of a Change to Big Bore Wells”, paper OTC 11877,
presented at Offshore Technology Conference,
Houston, Texas, 1-4 May 2000.
3. Aldridge, D.S., Shaw, B.S. and Shirzi S.A.:
“Economic, Safety, and Performance Considerations
for Safety System Design for Large-Bore Gas
Completions”, paper OTC 11881, presented at the
Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas,
1-4 May 2000.
4. Martin, Ben L. III: “7” Monobore Completion
Design for Qatar’s Offshore North Field”, paper
SPE/IADC 39272, presented at SPE/IADC Middle
East Drilling Technology Conference, Bahrain,
23-25 November 1997.
Additional information on this topic is available at
www.bigborewells.com

About the Authors:

Ken Almond is a Critical Well Project Manager for
Baker Oil Tools. Mr. Almond obtained his BAT
degree in Industrial Technology from Sam Houston Fig. 4 95⁄8-in. x 75⁄8-in. Tier II, Level 3 large-bore monobore completion in Qatar
State University in 1983 and joined Brown Oil Tools (approximate production of 150 MMscf/D).
as a Marketing Support Supervisor in 1984. In 1987,
he joined Baker Oil Tools. He assumed his present
position in 1997 after serving as a Senior
Pricing/Quotations Specialist and Senior
Applications Specialist.
Michael V. Smith assumed his present position in
2002 after serving as a Senior Applications Engineer,
Applications Engineering Group Supervisor, and
Product Strategist for Baker Oil Tools. Mr. Smith
obtained his BSc. degree in Petroleum Engineering
from The University of Texas in 1985 and joined
Baker Oil Tools as a region engineer based in
Oklahoma City. In 1990, he was promoted to
Technical Services Manager in Houston. He assumed
his present position in 1998 after serving as a Senior
Applications Engineer and Application Engineering
Group Supervisor.

47