SPE 89469

Revitalization of Pilar Field (Sergipe-Alagoas Basin, Brazil) using deviated wells along
fault planes – a successful experience.
C. Borba, Petrobras/Brazil; M. S. Takeguma, The field is made up of hundreds reservoirs that resulted
Petrobras/Brazil; E. J. Souza Filho, Petrobras/Brazil; from deltaic sedimentation and heavy faulted
K. N. Schneider, Petrobras/Brazil compartmentalization. The small values of oil-in-place of the
many reservoirs, as well as high geologic risks, discouraged
drilling new wells either targeting a single reservoir or trying
Copyright 2004, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc. to hit new undiscovered accumulations that might exist within
This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2004 SPE/DOE Fourteenth Symposium on the field.
Improved Oil Recovery held in Tulsa, Oklahoma, U.S.A., 17–21 April 2004.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
information contained in a proposal submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to a proposal of not more than 300
words; illustrations may not be copied. The proposal must contain conspicuous
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O.
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.

Abstract

Pilar oil and gas field, located onshore northeastern region

of Brazil, had the production peak by 1985, when produced
1300 m3 /d of oil, decreasing since then until reaching 350
m3 /d in 1997. Forecasts at that time indicated a very low oil
production of about 200 m3 /d by year in 2002.
A study was launched in 1997, strongly focused on the
characterization of sealing fault planes that control the oil and Figure 1 – Localization of Pilar Oil and Gas Field
gas accumulations, which resulted in the projects of deviated
wells, following the fault planes. This approach has made
possible to drill one single well crossing multiple sets of Pilar Field
reservoirs, increasing the possibility of finding virgin Forecast Ago/94
1600
reservoirs along trends of producing reservoirs.
As a result, the oil rate has been rising since 1998, 1400
History
reverting the declining tendency of the period between 1985 1200
Forecast
and 1997. In 2003 the oil rate reached 1100 m3 /d. In the period
Oil rate (m3/d)

1000

of revitalization, the OOIP has increased 50%. 800

600

Introduction 400

200

Pilar oil and gas field is located at Sergipe-Alagoas Basin, 0

1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018
in the northeastern region of Brazil, 20km from Maceió city year
(Figure 1). Discovered in 1981, the field reached the Figure 2 – Pilar Field Forecast in 1994
production peak of 1300 m3 /d in 1985, after the initial drilling
campaign. A strong declining in oil production then happened
which was slightly attenuated after 1990, due to the beginning Since 1997 several actions have been carried out
of secondary recovery by gas and water injection. successfully reverting the declining tendency. These actions
The field forecast in 1994 pointed to a very low production are: 1) geologic reinterpretation, based on 3D seismic; 2)
around 200 m3 /d by year 2000 (Figure 2). hydraulic fracturing in low permeability reservoirs; 3)
increasing in gas injection; 4) disposal of 100% of produced
2 SPE 89469

water in the reservoirs, improving the secondary recovery; 5)

campaign of production logs searching for oil saturation
behind cased holes).
Among these actions, the first one had the largest impact
in the declining tendency of production. It allowed the refining
of the field structural model and consequentely launching a
successful drilling campaign of wells along fault planes
This work presents and discusses the drilling campaign for
revitalization of Pilar field, based on deviated wells following
the fault planes that control the oil and gas accumulations,
trying to maximize netpays and to decrease risks, and also
discusses the importance of structural geology characterization
for oil field management.
Pilar Field – Main Data
Structure
Pilar Field is an accumulation placed on the anticline
(rollover) related to the basin border fault system. The
anticline apex contains a set of NE-SW conjugate faults
(Figures 3 and 4).
Oil and gas accumulations are located inside the structural
closures at the footwall block of faults. Accumulations can
also occur in the closures related to the hangingwall folding of
strata (rollover).
Although faults are responsible for the entrapping of
accumulations and field compartmentalization, they also
influence the reservoir drainage by the action of internal
permeability barriers as deformation band zones.

Pilar Field holds 29.13 millions m3 OOIP and 17.3 billions

m GIP. The cumulative production were 5.32 millions m3 of
3

oil and 5.3 billions m3 of gas in December/2003. These

volumes are scattered in 718 reservoirs, each one having
different pressures and fluid contacts. The average oil density
is 39o API.
The secondary recovery by gas and water injection has
started in 1990, as suggested by some reservoir simulation
studies. In 1998 was initiated the injection for disposal of
produced water in the reservoirs. To date, 30% of OOIP and
40% of daily oil rate is influenced by gas and/or water
injection, while a considerable volume still remains without
injection due to the small OOIP volume of individual,
scattered reservoirs.

Geology of Pilar Field

Figure 3 – Structural map of one seismic horizon of Pilar Field
Pilar Field is characterized by heavy compartmentalization
produced by deltaic sedimentation that resulted in a stacked
package of more than 100 production zones, and by the
extensional tectonic that produced a huge number of fault
blocks.

Stratigraphy and Reservoirs

The oil producing reservoirs are sandstones of Coqueiro

Seco Formation, between 500m and 2500m depth. Penedo
Formation, between 2000 and 3500m, contains most of non-
associated gas reservoirs. The deposition occurred in the
Lower Cretaceous, during the rift phase of the geologic
evolution of Sergipe-Alagoas Basin.
Coqueiro Seco Formation is composed of intercalations of
deltaic sandstones and shales. The sandstone bodies reach
individual thickness of 50m. Six sedimentological cycles were
Figure 4 – Seismic Section E-W of Pilar Field. Note the conjugate
identified, each one capped by transgressive shales. The pattern of the normal faults.
reservoirs have average porosity of 20% and permeability of
100 mD. Fault Characterization
The Penedo Formation is a fluvial and eolian succession
composed by thick sandstones, containing some shale Faults are observed in 3D seismic (resolution of 30m
intercalations, which can seal gas accumulations. The main displacement), in well logs (more than 600 fault picks
reservoirs are included in deep horizons, about 3000m depth, observed, based on the lack of stratigraphic section, providing
in the PDO IV zone. The average porosity is 10%, but the resolution of 15m displacement), including dipmeter logs. All
eolian facies can reach porosity of 15% and permeability of 30 faults have been correlated, resulting in a dataset that contains
mD.
SPE 89469
about 200 different correlated faults, with total displacements
ranging from 20 to 600m.
Detailed studies of faults have been carried on lately, such
as modeling fault planes (Figure 5), mapping fault attributes as
sealing potential, mapping displacement variation,
justaposition diagrams, and petrographic characterization of
fault gouge.
Figure 5 – Structural map of one sealing fault plane. The
intersection between hydrocarbon accumulations and the fault
plane can be seen in green.
Projects of Complementary Development
The geologic reinterpretation gave rise to complementary
development projects with new wells after 10 without drilling
a single well. The main objective was searching new
accumulations. These reservoirs, according to the
accumulation model for the field, controlled by sealing faults,
should be at the same trend where the producing reservoirs are
located. Therefore, deviated wells were planned and drilled
towards these new reservoirs, but its trajectory was anchored
on the producing reservoirs. This allowed the new well to be
used for improvement of the producing reservoir drainage by
infill drilling, in case of unsuccess in the first target (Figure 6).
This approach has permited to go through a set of multiple
reservoirs using only one well, improving a lot the well
drilling economics when compared to vertical wells.
From 1998 to 2003, 43 wells were drilled, with only two
dry wells (<5%). Before geologic reinterpretation, this
percentage reached 30% mainly due to the structural
complexity.
An additional advantage of deviated wells is that they can
be drilled from already existing locations, minimizing the
environmental impact and the land ownerships compensation.
3
Figure 6 – Map showing the different objectives along the well
trajectory.
Kinds of Deviated Wells
Wells following closures at footwalls
They are the most frequent, drilled under fault planes,
having an average dip of 45 degrees. Sometimes the well
angle may vary, not exactly following the fault plane but
positioned at the best location in the reservoirs.
Normally the well trajectory is anchored in 2-3 well-
known reservoirs, and the new targets are located between
them, above or below, along the trend of closures related to
the fault.
For well planning, a safety distance to the fault is
considered (normally 100 - 150 m) in order to avoid the well
crossing the fault plane towards the hangingwall side, bBut the
distance from the fault must not be so large due to the risks of
the well being placed in the water zone – wells crossing
multiple reservoirs presenting multiple oil/water contacts - are
quite common (Figures 7 and 8).
Wells following closures at hangingwalls
These wells attempt to cross the trends of multiple
accumulations associated to the apex of folding in the fault
hangingwalls (rollover, Figure 7). Some reservoirs in this
situation hold significant oil and gas volumes. The trapping of
accumulations is not made directly by sealing faults, but by
the closure in all directions by strata dipping.
Deviated wells are planed to follow the apex alignments,
dipping about 45 degrees. Sometimes the wells are
programmed to cross the reservoirs dislocated from the apex
in order to avoid gas caps, or they are placed in any strategic
position. This may produce sinuosities in the well trajectory.
4 SPE 89469

Mixed Geometries Other Situations

Deviated wells searching both kinds of traps described
above were also drilled. In this case, part of the well trajectory
was drilled under the fault plane, and the other part was drilled
above it (Figure 7), resulting in more complex trajectories.
Conventional deviated wells, not necessarily following
structural trends, were also drilled. A horizontal well was also
designed to drain a single reservoir that presented difficulty in
produce through vertical or directional wells. Due to the
reservoir low permeability, the area open to flow was not
enough to obtain a significant prodution increase.

Figure 7 – Geologic section of South area of Pilar Field showing the kinds of well trajectory. In blue, well following closures at footwall. In
red, well following closures at hangingwall. In yellow, mixed situation.
SPE 89469 5

Cumulative Production
Forecast x Real Production - New Wells
800

700

600

Np (mil m3)
500

400

300

200

100

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004
Figure 10 – Oil cumulative production forecast (green) and real
Figure 8 – Tridimensional vision of different fault planes and the production (black) of the projects.
well geometries and targets.
Results
Forecast
Production increase
Due to the difficulty in estimating the recoverable volumes
and rates for reservoirs not yet discovered, and considering the The projects of complementary development, mainly
risks of their non-occurrence, a typical well was used for drilling new wells, are the major reasons for the oil production
forecasting. The recovery volume as well the expected oil increasing, reverting the declining oil production trend
rates were based on the production behavior of an average observed since 1986.
well from an area of the field. Nowadays, according to the forecast of 1994, Pilar Field
First, it is estimated the ultimate recovery, based on the would be producing less than 200 m3 /d. However, in
typical well, and limited to 40,000 m3 for each well (the range October/2003, the oil rate has reached 1000 m3 /d (Figure 11).
is 25,000 to 40,000m3 , depending of the location and the risks To date, the new wells have been contributing to 70% of total
involved). Then, the initial oil rate is estimated (25 m3 /d or 40 production of Pilar, and 15% of the field cumulative
m3 /d, based on the block/reservoir location and the objectives. production (figure 12).
Oil rates are obtained using an exponential decline. Gas and The Pilar field revitalization had also the contribution of
water rates are based on correlations. In the infill drilling gas and water injection rate increasing, and a campaign of
situations, the reservoir GO R and WOR are used. hydraulic fracturing performed during the period of the
For one individual well, the initial production rate and the projects of drilling new wells.
ultimate recovery may not fit the forecast exactly, but for a
group of wells that compose a project, the production history
matched close to the forecast, with real production being a Pilar Field
little larger than the forecast (Figures 9 and 10). This Oil Forecast 1994 x 2002
difference is due to the production anticipation using (dual
completion – two tubings) and estimulation operations that
1600
were not taken into account in the original forecasts.
1400
1200
New Wells - Forecast x Real Production
Qo (m3/d)

1000
1000
800
900
600
800
400
700
200
Qo (m3/d)

600
500 0
400 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
300
200
Figure 11 – Production history and comparison of 1994 and 2002
forecasts.
100
0
1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

Figure 9 – Oil rate forecast (curve in green) and production

history (in black) of the projects.
6 SPE 89469

Conversion Factors
1600

1400 Meters (m) = 3.281 feet (ft)

1200
Cubic meters (m3 ) = 6.290 barrels (bbl)
Cubic meters (m3 ) = 0.028 cubic feet (ft 3 )
1000
Qo (m3/d)

800

600
New Wells
Np = 720.000 m3
400
Old Wells
200

0
dez/81

dez/82

dez/83

dez/84

dez/85

dez/86

dez/87

dez/88

dez/89

dez/90

dez/91

dez/92

dez/93

dez/94

dez/95

dez/96

dez/97

dez/98

dez/99

dez/00

dez/01

dez/02

dez/03
Figure 12 – Oil Production history, showing the contribution of
the projects for the total oil rate.

Reserve increase

The projects of complementary development provided a

significant increase of the proved oil volumes and the
replacement of reserves. The OOIP has risen from 18,9
millons m3 in 1996 to 29,3 million m3 in 2002. The proved oil
reserves has increased from 1,29 to 1,38 millions m3 , in spite
of the cumulative producion of 1,3 millions m3 in this period.

Conclusion

A structural characterization of reservoirs and fault planes

defined the rigth strategy for the revitalization of Pilar Field.
The technique using deviated wells along fault planes that
control the accumulations proved to be the right approach for
Pilar Field development.
Mature Fields like Pilar, with complex structural and
stratigraphic geology, can still hold reservoirs or portions of
them not yet drained, having original pressures and fluid
contacts, due to the heavy compartimentalization.

Acknowlegements

We would like to thank Gilvan Soares Feitosa for

discussion and revision of this paper. Thanks to Farid Salomão
Shecaira, coordinator of Pravap (Petrobras Program of
Advanced Petroleum Recovery) for the incentive to submit
this paper to SPE, and Petrobras to allowing publication.

References
Borba, C.: Heterogeneidades Estruturais em Reservatórios -
Geometria e Distribuição de Falhas, MSc. Dissertation,
Unicamp, Campinas, Brazil (1996).

Nomenclature

GIP = gas in place

GOR = gas oil ratio
OOIP = original oil in place
WOR = water-oil ratio
mD = millidarcies