IPA18-584-E

PROCEEDINGS, INDONESIAN PETROLEUM ASSOCIATION

Forty-Second Annual Convention & Exhibition, May 2018

PRECISION PLACEMENT FOR SUCCESSFUL HORIZONTAL WELLS IN HETEROGENOUS

RESERVOIRS: A CASE STUDY IN ALPHA FIELD, CENTRAL SUMATERA BASIN

Usman Jauhari*
Ahmad Syahputra*
Bangun Yulianto*

ABSTRACT production targets. After production for decades of

Producing oils from heterogenous and tight
reservoirs is a common challenge experienced in
most mature oil fields. Oils in good quality reservoirs
generally had been completed first in the early life of
the fields. Meanwhile, major remaining oils are still
locked in unfavorable heterogenous and tight
reservoirs. To produce the oils from the heterogenous
and tight reservoirs with favorable rates, there could
be situations in which conventional directional
drilling completion and even fracturing technology
might be unsuccessful. This paper gives examples of
horizonal wells with precise lateral section
placement that enabled economic production of oil
locked in heterogenous reservoirs.
The precise horizontal placement had been applied in
Alpha Field by targeting a heterogenous and low-
pressure Alpha-sand reservoir. Oil productions from
the horizontal wells have shown encouraging and
stable rates. The production performances also
surpassed those from normal perforation and even
fracturing completion in directional wells. The
success had provided a lesson learned that precise
horizontal well placement can provide an alternative
solution to unlock oils residing in heterogenous and
low-pressure reservoirs. The lesson learned can be
leveraged to improve oil production and recovery
across mature fields in Central Sumatra Basin and
also to other basins in Indonesia.
Keywords: Precise horizontal well placement,
mature fields, heterogenous reservoirs.
INTRODUCTION
Majority of oil fields in Indonesia are mature fields.
Early production of the oil fields generally comes
from homogenous and good quality reservoirs which
are able to produce with encouraging rates and
reserves (Figure 1). Meanwhile, the heterogenous
and tight reservoirs had only become secondary
* Chevron Pacific Indonesia
field life, the condition is reversed. The good
reservoirs have become watered out and produced
with high water cut. Producing oils from the good
quality reservoirs with low oil cut then become
unencouraging. Production targets then shift focus to
heterogenous and tight reservoirs in which most oil
remains. However, producing remaining oil from the
reservoirs may face challenges. Efforts to complete
the reservoirs using normal directional completions
and even fracturing technology could end up not
being successful.
Similar condition is also experienced in the Alpha
field in the Central Sumatra. High quality reservoirs
have been depleted and currently produced with
unfavorable low oil rates and high water-cuts.
However, efforts to produce oils from heterogenous
low-quality reservoirs have shown unsuccessful.
Both normal completion from directional drillings
and even fracturing have produced with short-term
low oil productions (Figure 2).
This paper’s objective is to provide examples of how
precise placement of a horizontal well can provide an
alternative solution to unlock oil in heterogenous and
low-pressure reservoirs in mature Alpha field. The
discussion is arranged according to the following
order: 1) Planning for precise placement of a
horizontal well. The planning includes building
strong geological characteristic understanding of
reservoir target, planning landing point for horizontal
well trajectory, and understanding tool and
equipment constraints that impact to the overall
trajectory plan. The trajectory plan is also
exercised with scenario games as contingency plan
to prepare for potential deviations from plan. 2).
Execution monitoring. The monitoring is proactive
action to any deviations from the planning during
execution. The deviation can be sourced from non-
geological and geological uncertainty factors.
Updating geological model and trajectory plan are
required to ensure achieving horizontal well target
as per plan, 3). Production results. Example of
production results from precise placement of
horizontal wells are shown and compared with those
from normal directional completions and fracturing
technology.
PLANNING for PRECISE PLACEMENT OF A
HORIZONTAL WELL
Understanding Geological Characteristics of
Reservoir Target
Understanding geological characteristics of the
reservoir target is basic for successful planning
and execution of a horizontal well. The more
holistic the understanding of the reservoir target,
the higher the probability of success for the
horizontal well. Key geological factors that need
deep understanding and modeling are of 1). Fluid
risk zone 2). Sweet spot zone 3). Bed dipping trend
and 4). Mapping for marker surfaces above
reservoir target
Fluid Risk Zone
Fluid risk zone identification is top geological
factor that will determine a successful horizontal
well. The fluid risk is unwanted water or gas that
can give detrimental impact to oil production of
the horizontal well. The fluid risk interval may
include distinctive water and or gas contact or high
water-saturation intervals indistinctively dispersed
in the reservoir target. It is recommended that a
horizontal well is proposed in the reservoir in
which fluid risk distribution is well understood.
Sweet Spot Zone
After fluid risk identification, the next is sweet
spot interval and distribution characterization.
Sweet spot is interval in the reservoirs in which
rock properties and fluid saturations are favorable
for production. A horizontal well that can
optimally stay in the sweet spot interval will
ensure strong production performance. Example of
fluid risk and sweet spot interval identification in
the reservoir target of a horizontal well is shown in
Figure 3. A homogenous thick sweet spot type
reservoir (~50 ft) without fluid risk interval will
give flexibility for horizontal well placement.
Meanwhile, precise and careful planning is
required for a thin sweet spot (10-15 ft) especially
with a water risk zone at the bottom of the reservoir
and also for complex thin sweet spot (10-15 ft)
with indistinct water risk interval dispersed in
heterogenous reservoirs.
Bed Dipping Trend
Bed dipping evaluation is part of structural
geological characterization of the reservoir target. A
horizontal is recommended to be placed in well
understood structural geology area and avoid
uncertain complex faulted area. This is to mitigate
surprises of penetrating unwanted oil saturation,
exiting to shale, also problems in drilling and
completion that those all will put the well into
production risks. The bed dipping will determine the
inclination of both landing point and lateral section
of a horizontal well. A proper plan for landing point
and lateral section trajectory at right inclination and
depth will ensure optimum lateral length in the sweet
spot and avoid unwanted water or gas risk interval.
Otherwise, improper plan for landing point and
lateral section trajectory plan will risk the horizontal
well placement out of the sweet spot and drive into
fluid risk interval that eventually and detrimentally
impact production. In addition, the improper
trajectory plan will also risk actual well trajectory
geometry that can lead to operational problems and
cost overruns.
Mapping for Marker Surfaces above Reservoir
Target
In addition to characterization and modeling for
reservoir target, key markers located above reservoir
target need to be mapped to create marker surfaces.
The marker surfaces are important to give early
warning for structural deviations during drilling
execution prior to entering reservoir target. With the
early warning, geological model and well trajectory
can be remodeled to fit actual drilling data.
Landing Point as the Key for Precise Horizontal
Well Planning
Landing point is the key consideration for a
horizontal trajectory plan in order to precisely place
lateral section inside sweet spot of reservoir target
and avoid unwanted oil or gas interval. Successful
landing point plan and placement will not only
significantly reduce failure probability in
productions but also ensure smooth operations
during drilling in the lateral section. Two key
elements of a landing point that need to be precisely
and carefully planned and executed are: 1) depth of
landing point and 2) inclination angle of landing
point.
Depth of Landing Point (LP)
Depth of landing point is recommended to be tied
with true vertical depth (TVD) below top of sand
target. Recommended TVD of a landing point below
top of sand target depends on the fluid risk and sweet
spot interval characteristics. Example of how fluid
risk and sweet spot characteristics impact to landing
point placement of TVD below top of sand target in
oil-water reservoir system is shown in Figure 4.
Case-1 gives example of a thick sweet spot (~50 ft)
in homogenous reservoir with OWC still located at
the edge of field boundary. This reservoir type gives
flexibility for landing point depth. To mitigate early
water contribution during production, landing point
needs to be placed high away from latest OWC data.
Standoff or distance of wellbore to OWC can delay
the time at which water reaches the well
(Wagenhofer et al.1). Simulation can also be used to
help to generate production sensitivity for optimum
landing point depth. Case-2 gives example of a
reservoir with thin oil column (10-15 ft) on top of
water zone. This reservoir type requires a precise
landing point plan to ensure optimum standoff in the
lateral section. The optimum standoff is intended to
mitigate early water contribution during production.
The approach of maintaining optimum standoff to
mitigate early water break through in thin oil column
reservoirs is also suggested by Xin et al.2
Inclination Angle of Landing Point (LP)
Compared to depth of landing point, inclination
angle is an even more critical element of a landing
point. Failure in the placement of LP depth can still
be corrected by modifying inclination angle of LP
but it would be difficult for vice versa. The
inclination angle is determined by bed dipping of
a reservoir target. The recommended rule is that
inclination angle of landing point needs to be as
close as the reservoir dipping angle. A small gap
between landing point angle and reservoir bed
dipping one will ensure lateral section to stay long
inside sweet spot interval in addition to also
smoothen operations during drilling and
completion installations. The recommended angle
gap between LP inclination and reservoir bed
dipping is in the range of 10-20. With the angle gap
number, the lateral section will be smooth and need
only a maximum dogleg of 10-20 to catch up
reservoir bedding trend. It needs to be noted that
reservoir bed dipping is measured from horizontal
line meanwhile well trajectory inclination angle is
measured from vertical line. Example of plan for LP
inclination angle in relation to bed dipping
characteristics is shown in the Figure 5. A reservoir
with flat or gently bed dipping of ±10 requires LP
inclination angle of 880-890. A reservoir with
downslope bedding of 100 requires LP inclination
angle of 780-790. Meanwhile, a reservoir with
upslope bedding of 20 requires LP inclination
angle of 900-910.
Understanding Tool and Equipment Constraints
It is recommended also to understand constraints
on Logging While Drilling (LWD) / Measurement
While Drilling (MWD) tools, drilling and
completion equipment while planning trajectory
for a horizontal well. The constraints may limit
flexibility of the horizontal well trajectory. Three
typical constraints may include: 1) tangent section
for pump placement interval, 2) casing exit MWD
measurement, 3) maximum dogleg severity in
lateral section. Collaborative works with
multidiscipline teams are required to characterize
the constraints. Example of impacts for tool and
equipment constraints on well trajectory plan is
shown in Figure 6.
Tangent Section for Pump Placement Interval
Electric Submersible Pump needs interval
placement with certain criteria for it to operate
reliably. One criterion is the tangent section
interval in which the allowable maximum dogleg
is required. An example is that dogleg <2 deg/100
ft within minimum of 100 ft MD tangent section.
Impact to the trajectory plan is that the longer the
tangent section required, the deeper the resulting
TVD drop in the trajectory. It needs discussion
with ESP providers to determine the safe allowable
maximum dogleg.
Casing Exit MWD Measurement
MWD requires a minimum distance to casing shoe
to conduct first survey to avoid magnetic
interference with casing steel. The clearance
distance is variable and operator needs to consult
with the MWD provider. For example, a MWD
provider recommends minimum 120 ft MD
distance to conduct first survey after exiting from
casing shoe of landing point. Impact to the
trajectory plan is that the longer the tangent section
required, the deeper the resulting TVD drop in the
lateral section trajectory.
Dogleg Severity in Lateral Section
Dogleg in lateral section is commonly restricted to
a maximum number of dogleg severity i.e. 2
deg/100 ft. A small dogleg in the lateral section
will smoothen not only drilling operations but also
installations of completions. However, the
required maximum dogleg will limit flexibility to
plan and steer lateral section during drilling.
Example of Landing Point and Lateral Section
Plan in Alpha Sand
A horizontal well trajectory planning can be started
after having strong understanding on the above
requirements consisting of geological characteristics
of the reservoir target, key elements of horizontal
well trajectory and constraints on tools and
equipment impacting to the horizontal well trajectory
plan. Example of horizontal well trajectory plan
conducted in Alpha Sand is shown in Figure 7. The
horizontal well is purposed to optimally produce
remaining oils residing in the heterogenous Alpha
Sand. The target zone is oil saturated low-
permeability zone at upper part of reservoir target
while in the same time keeping distance vertically
and laterally from water risk zone in high
permeability part of the lower reservoir target.
Reservoir bed dipping in the lateral section is
estimated 10 downslope in the first quarter and
climbing 10-20 upslope in the rest of lateral section.
The Landing Point (LP) is planned to be landed on 7’
TVD below top of reservoir. LP inclination angle is
planned 890. With this inclination angle, the lateral
section will easily catch up the above bedding
dipping changes. It needs only a maximum dogleg of
2 deg/100 ft to follow the bedding geometry change.
In addition, this small dogleg tolerance is intended
also to smoothen drilling operation and completion
installation.
The LP depth and angle plan will provide sufficient
standoff (~18’) from water risk zone. The thin tight
streak zone (~1’) with close to zero permeability
dispersed in the heterogenous sand is also expected
to provide vertical sealing from the water risk zone.
Tangent section interval for pump placement is
planned 170’ in length prior to landing the well. The
trajectory plan also considers 130’ tangent section
from LP prior to acquire first directional survey as
recommended by MWD tool provider.
Trajectory Sensitivity Exercises for Contingency
Plan
The above trajectory plan then is exercised in various
scenarios as contingency plan to mitigate potential
deviations to plan. The scenarios serve as early
guidance of how far deviation window to plan that is
acceptable and not harmfull to future production of
the hrorizontal well. Figure 8 illustrates exercises
conducted for trajectory plan in Alpha sand. The
exercise is conducted by generating sensitivity to 1).
LP depth relative to top Alpha Sand, 2). LP
inclination angle.
For LP depth sensitivity, a deeper LP than base case
(i.e. 5’ deeper) will push the lateral section closer to
water risk zone. This closer to water risk zone will
potentially impact to earlier water production
contribution than base case. If this case occurs during
execution, then lateral section needs to be
aggressively optimized to build angle up from the
plan.
For LP inclination angle sensitivity, base case
trajectory’s LP of 890 is compared with 870 and 850.
If during execution the well has to land at 870 instead
of 890 as plan, then some section of the lateral section
will close to water risk zone. The lateral section
needs aggressive re-plan to ensure stay away from
the water risk. If the well forcefully lands at 850, then
the lateral section will physically touch water risk
zone. This scenario is probably destructive to the
well production. To avoid this, sidetrack plan is
needed to correct the well to land at 890 as plan.
From the above sensitivity to LP depth and
inclination angle, it is known that precision in LP
angle is highly critical and more critical than LP
depth. The failure to land the LP at inclination angle
plan will put the horizontal well into high risk of
production.
PROACTIVE EXECUTION MONITORING
Close monitoring is required to ensure successful
execution of the horizontal well plan. Immediate
actions are needed for any deviations from plan for
both geological model and trajectory plan.
Deviations to plan are not always caused by
geological uncertainty factors and non-geological
ones need also to be carefully considered. The
following section is illustration of deviations and
required immediate responses to ensure précise
placement of a horizontal well. This illustration is
shown in Figure 9 and 10.
Non-Geological Factors
During monitoring of drilling execution for a
horizontal well, key markers are identified
surprisingly coming low in the range of ~10 ft
(deeper than prognosis) in relatively consistent
manners. Existing well data are enough dense to
control gridding of surface model and to estimate key
marker depth along trajectory plan. If surfaces of the
key markers are updated using the actual marker
depths, then very local low structure will be
generated. The big miss-depth and coming low of the
key markers is thought as geologically unreasonable.
The phenomena could be caused by non-geological
factors. The non-geological factors needed to
consider may include errors in surface elevation and
coordinate measurements, directional survey
accuracy, drillpipe tally measurement, other
operational parameter related uncertainties or
combination of the all factors. Operational parameter
uncertainties that impact to depth measurement in
horizontal wells had been discussed and published in
several papers (Brooks et al.3, Cheatham et al.4,
Dashevskiy et al.5, DeVerse et al.6, Grindrod et. al.7,
Stockhausen et al.8,).
After ensuring root causes as non-geological factors,
dummy marker surfaces need to be generated by bulk
shifting in the amount of coming low (10’ as stated
above) for marker surfaces ahead of drilling bit. The
new dummy marker surfaces are then utilized to re-
plan the horizontal well trajectory. The re-plan
results in a new LP coordinate which is located 10’
below top dummy Alpha Sand with the same
inclination angle as previous plan. The new LP
position will ensure lateral section penetrate
reservoir properties as original plan. Without
updating LP target in respect to the dummy surfaces,
the horizontal well will land on shale above top
Alpha Sand and lateral section will spent long in the
shale section. Trajectory sensitivity exercises
conducted during planning is helpful in anticipating
this scenario (see Figure 8).
Geological Uncertainty Factors
In combination with non-geological factors,
geological uncertainty factors need to be reviewed
when deviations to plan are identified during
executions. Trajectory re-planning could be required
to accommodate the deviations. However, if ranges
of geological uncertainties are incorporated in the
horizontal well trajectory planning, deviations to the
plan could be still within the uncertainty ranges and
only minor re-planning is needed. Therefore, it is
recommended to have a holistic understanding on the
geological characteristics and uncertainty ranges of
the reservoir target. The more holistic our
understanding, the less re-planning and intervention
efforts during execution the horizontal well will be.
PRODUCTION RESULTS
Precise horizontal planning and placement execution
have been applied to Alpha sand in the Alpha field.
Production from the horizontal wells have shown
encouraging results. The resulted initial productions
have beaten the forecasts and proved superior in the
range of 3-4 times higher than normal completions
and fracturing technology (Figure 11). The initial
production from horizontal wells are in the range of
450 to 700 BOPD compared to 100-180 from
fracturing and perforation in directional wells. The
production from horizontal wells also show
sustainable rates through time
CONCLUSIONS
Precise placements of horizontal wells applied in the
Alpha Sand have been proven to become a strong
alternative solution to produce oils locked in the
typical heterogenous reservoirs. Other completions
(perforation and fracturing in directional wells) have
been tried in the Alpha Sand but the production
results are unsuccessful. The horizontal wells show
strong production performance in the range of 3 to 4
times than perforation and fracturing in directional
wells. A holistic understanding to the reservoir target
especially characterization to fluid risk and sweet
spot intervals integrated with careful planning and
execution is the key for precise placement of the
horizontal wells. This lesson learned can be
leveraged to improve oil productions and recoveries
across mature fields not only in the Central Sumatra
Basin but also in other mature basins in Indonesia.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would like to acknowledge Management of PT
Chevon Pacific Indonesia for releasing permission to
publish the work results. I would to thank all Teams
in PT Chevron Pacific Indonesia who have
contributed and supported this work starting from
maturation of the horizontal well pilots until to the
works are completed.
REFERENCES
Brooks, A.G., Gurden, P.A., and Noy, K.A., 1998,
Practical Application of a Multiple-Survey Magnetic
Correction Algorithm. Presented at the 1998 SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. New
Orleans, Lousiana, 27-30 September. SPE 49060.
Cheatham, C.A., Shih, S., Churchwell., Woody, J.
M., and Rodney, P. F., 1992, Effets of Magnetic
Interference on Directional Surveys in Horizontal
Wells. Presented at the 1992 IADC/SPE Drilling
Conference. Lousiana, 18-21 February. SPE-23852.
Dashevskiy, D., Dahl, T., Brooks, A. G., Zurcher, D.,
Lofts, J. C., and Dankers, S., 2006, Dynamic Depth
Correction to Reduce Depth Uncertainty and
Improve MWD/LWD Log Quality. Presented at the
2006 SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition. Texas, 24-27 September. SPE 103094.
DeVerse, S., and Maus, S., 2016, Improving
Directional Survey Accuracy through Real-Time
Operating Centers. Presented at the 2016 IADC/SPE
Asia Pacific Drilling Technology Conference and
Exhibition. Singapore, 22-24 August. SPE-180652-
MS.
Grindrod, S. J., Clark, P.J., Lightfoot, J. D.,
Bergstrom, N., and Grant, L. S., 2016, OWSG
Stardard Survey Tool Error Model Set for Improved
Quality and Implementation in Directional Survey
Management. Presented at the 2016 IADC/SPE
Drilling Conference and Exhibition. Fort Worth,
Texas, 1-3 March. SPE-178843-MS.
Stockhausen, E., Ball, R., Clark, P., Mongan, R., and
Rice, P., 2016, Placement Matters: Improving
Survey Accuracy by Using Continuous Directional
Data and Drilling Parameter Setting. Presented at the
AAPG Annual Convention and Exhibition. Alberta,
Canada, 19-22 June. Article #41856 (2016)
Wagenhofer, T., and Hatzignatiou, D. G., 1998,
Optimization of Horizontal Well Placement.
Presented at the 1996 SPE Western Regional
Meeting. Alaska, 22-24 May 1996. SPE 35714.
Xin, S. Y., Lin, D. H., Qing, L., Hua, Z. Z.,
Halomoan, P. M., Bin, Y., Mi, Z., Yang, L., and
Koon, L. T., 2010, Thin Oil Columns Horizontal
Wells Optimization Through Advance Well
Placement Application in West China. Presented at
the 2010 SPE Production and Operation Conference
and Exhibition. Tunisia, 8-10 June 2010. SPE
133660.
Figure 1 - Common challenges in mature fields. Homogenous high-quality reservoirs have been produced and watered-out. Remaining oils reside in the heterogenous
reservoirs.

 
Figure 2 – Typical log of heterogenous reservoir of Alpha Sand. Most oil remains in the low-perm interval meanwhile the high-perm interval was watered-out. Efforts
to produce oils in the typical heterogenous reservoir using normal perforation completion have shown unsuccessful.

 
Figure 3 - Example of fluid risk and sweet spot interval identification as reservoir target of a horizontal well. Fluid risk is unwanted fluid to be produced, in this case
is water.

 
Figure 4 - Example of fluid risk and sweet spot characteristics impacting to landing point placement (TVD below top of sand target). A reservoir without or away
from water has flexibility to place landing point below top sand target. In contrast, a reservoir with thin oil column requires a precise placement for landing
point with optimum standoff.

 
Figure 5 - Example of plan for landing point (LP) inclination angle in relation to bed dipping characteristics. The landing point inclination angle needs close to bed
dipping angle trend. It is intended to easily stay lateral section away from potential water risk zone during drilling execution.

 
Figure 6 - Example of impact of tool and equipment constraints on a well trajectory plan. The constraints will limit flexibility of well trajectory during planning and
execution.

 
 Figure 7 - Example of horizontal well trajectory planning in the Alpha Sand. The lateral section is targeting oil residing in the low quality part of Alpha.

 
Figure 8 – Trajectory sensitivity conducted for contingency plan to anticipate deviations during executions. The sensitivity is conducted by varying LP depth and
inclination angle. The sensitivity gives guidance in the case immediate decisions are required during executions.

 
Figure 9 - Illustration of deviations to plan caused by non-geological factors and required immediate responses to update geological model and trajectory plan. The
update is to ensure the horizontal well to be landed on the targeted reservoir properties.

 
Figure 10 - Illustration of deviations to plan caused by non-unique geological model factors. Sensitivity in planning phase will give guidance of window whether the
the actual geological deviations during lateral section drilling are acceptable or need intervention.

 
  
Figure 11 - Example of productions resulted from précise placement of horizontal wells in the Alpha Sand compared to perforation and fracturing completions in
directional wells.