SPE/IADC 107305
Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEMEDT/proceedings-pdf/07MEDT/All-07MEDT/SPE-107305-MS/2778108/spe-107305-ms.pdf by Kazakh-British Technical University user on 08 April 2024
Successful Application of Underbalanced Coiled-Tubing Drilling in Horizontal
Short-Radius Re-Entry Well To Enhance Oil Production in Hassi Messaoud Field, Algeria
Bachir Ben Amor, Ali Ferhat, and Rafik Messas, Sonatrach, and Maurizio Arnone, Michael Stulberg, Rashid Khan, Fritz
Schoch, Charles Fordyce, Hani Qutob, and James Chopty, Weatherford International
Copyright 2007, SPE/IADC Middle East Drilling Technology Conference & Exhibition
This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE/IADC Middle East Drilling Technology
Conference & Exhibition held in Cairo, Egypt, 22–24 October 2007.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE/IADC Program Committee following
review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the
paper, as presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers or
International Association of Drilling Contractors and are subject to correction by the author(s).
The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any position of the SPE, IADC, their
officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers
and International Association of Drilling Contractors is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in
print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied.
The abstract 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 1.972.952.9435.
Abstract
Drilling in the Cambrian Reservoir, in the peripheral zone of
Hassi Messaoud field, specifically the 1A, 1B and 1C zones
(Figure 1) is a real challenge, basically due the petrophysical
reservoir complexity, the low reservoir pressure, the extremely
hard and abrasive sandstone and quartzite formation
associated with numerous vertical and sub vertical fractures
that connect the reservoir with deeper formations leading to
major problems related with the salt saturated water
production. Many of the vertical wells drilled in that zones
have more than 30 years from completed and a large
proportion of them have been shut in since being drilled.
Well E was the 5th re-entry well in the Sonatrach Coiled
Tubing – Underbalanced Drilling campaign. A total of 372 m
from KOP and 316 m from landing point were successfully
drilled in a continuous underbalanced condition inside D1
formation. As a result, the well productivity while drilling, the
Reservoir characterization and rate of penetration was
significantly improved, compared with offset wells, due to the
positive impacts of UBD operations.
The combination of Underbalanced and Coiled Tubing
Drilling technologies has been proven to be a viable solution
to successfully drill horizontal re-entry wells in mature fields
where the reservoir pressure is adequate to induce
underbalanced conditions using single phase or multiphase
drilling fluid.
The experience in this field has validated the benefits of the
combination of these technologies and has been attributed to
the excellent balance between drilling cost and improved
productivity. For example, the drilling cost in the short radius
re-entry wells drilled with coiled tubing are highly reduced
due to the elimination of pipe connection procedures, the
increase in rate of penetration, the prevention of conventional
drilling problems such as fluid circulation loses and related
differential sticking events, the increase in the bit life and
reduction in time and drilled distance to reach the profitable
production level.
This paper describes the technical basis for the design and
implementation of the Coiled Tubing Underbalanced Drilling
project in Hassi Messaoud and highlights the operational key
factors and challenges faced during this particular and
successful application in Algeria.
Introduction
The Hassi Messaoud field (Figure 2), discovered in 1956, is
the largest oil field in Algeria, covering about 2000 Km2 and
currently including over 1000 Wells. The field is divided
aerially into 25 zones that are separated from each other by
low permeability barriers, usually faults. The Cambrian
Reservoir is subdivided into four lithological zones designated
from base to top as R3, R2, Ra and Ri. The Ra sub reservoir
shows the best petrophysical properties with a maximum
thickness of 150 m in the western part of the field. The Ra is
farther subdivided into five sub zones: D1, ID, D2, D3, and
D4 based on reservoir properties and depositional conditions.
This is the first of its kind Coiled Tubing - Underbalanced
Drilling project undertaken in Hassi Messaoud field. The
candidates wells are from a pool of vertical shut in wells
drilled in the western area of the field and have seized to
produce with varying completion string and production casing.
The increase in number of candidates for thru tubing re-entries
added to the depletion of the reservoir have raised the
importance of use the combined technologies Coiled Tubing -
Underbalanced drilling in Hassi Messaoud field. The original
reservoir pressure was 6860 psi and the average permeability
ranges from 0.5 to 1.0 mD but can reach up to 1000 mD in
cases where open fractures are encountered. Production is
43.7 – 45 º API oil with original average GOR of about 200
m3/m3 and a formation temperature of approximately 120 ºC.
Until 1964, the production mechanism was only depletion
above bubble point. Gas injection and water injection started
after that year to improve the production.
2 SPE/IADC 107305
Original Well E was drilled in September 1977 and completed
with 5” slotted liner in open hole and 4 ½” production tubing.
The first well DST results was 12.35 m3/hr at WHP of 1750
psi and the reservoir pressure was 5775 psi. The well was put
in production until May 1979 and shut in for rapid production
decline due to tubing collapse caused by 7” casing corrosion
and high pressure water invasion. The total oil produced was
52811 m3. In April 2006 the well was re-completed with 4 ½”
cemented casing to surface with shoe at 3424m and
programmed for horizontal thru tubing re-entry in the D1 with
target 3426m-3431m.
Well E is just one of the successful Coiled tubing –
Underbalanced drilling re-entry well drilled in Hassi
Messaoud field during year 2006. The Initial estimated
formation pressure was sufficiently high (4544 psi) to induce
underbalanced conditions with native crude (45ºAPI, 0.80
S.G.) without the necessary injection of any gas phase. For
those Underbalanced Drilling operations that involve a straight
liquid fluid the term reserved is “flowdrilling”. The real
formation pressure calculated while drilling resulted in
approximately 3700 psi being necessary to inject a multiphase
drilling fluid to reach the underbalanced condition (13%
drawdown).
Project Objective
The main objective of this project is to recover and enhance
the oil production from existing shut in vertical wells drilling
horizontal thru tubing re-entries, having better and real time
assessment of the producing zone in the reservoir while
drilling and test flowing the reservoir using the advantages of
the Underbalanced Drilling technology. Due to the proximity
of the 7” casing shoe to target vertical depth and related
aggressive built up rate during drilling the curve section, the
small production casing/tubing available size, the extremely
hard and abrasive formation and inherent formation damage
obtained using conventional drilling techniques, it was
planned to combine Coiled Tubing Drilling with the
Underbalanced Drilling technologies to perform the
operations.
To achieve the objective of the project, it is planned to exit
thru production tubing and drill in underbalanced conditions, a
single horizontal side track open hole using coil tube in
Cambrian Reservoir, predominantly in Ra. Hole lenght target
to be drilled is approximately 400 m depending on the
geological complexity.
Well Selection Criteria
Wells are selected based on following three criteria:
1- Mechanical criteria:
• 35 m was set as requirement for re-entry from Top of
Cambrian/KOP to top of target. Max BUR of 55º/30
m (58º/30 m was obtained in this well)..
• Completion suitable for available whipstock size
• Well – reservoir configuration.
2- Petro-physical criteria:
• Evaluation of formation lithology
• Evaluation of petro-physical properties
3- Reservoir criteria
• 2130 psi (3.68 ppg EMW) of Reservoir pressure was
Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEMEDT/proceedings-pdf/07MEDT/All-07MEDT/SPE-107305-MS/2778108/spe-107305-ms.pdf by Kazakh-British Technical University user on 08 April 2024
set as minimum
• Gas/water breakthrough in well and offset wells
• Performances of fractured, horizontal and short
radius existing offset wells
• Well test interpretation.
Geological / Reservoir Characteristic
Geologically the zone of interest for side track and drilling
lateral is Cambrian sandstone of Ra. These sandstones are
highly heterogeneous in nature. Among the pilling of these
structures shale breaks are encountered, the thickness of which
is 1 to 5 m and lateral extension of 30 m approx.
Ra formation has an average depth of 3400 m, covered with
production liner. Ra is characterized by largely variable petro-
physical properties (Porosity, Permeability and Shaliness)
impacting productivity. Ra is further divided into five drains
that vary in productivity and are classified based on
percentage of permeable sandstone present versus
discontinuous shale lenses relative to overall package. The
target sandstone is extremely hard and abrasive, resulting in
continuous MWD failures due to bottom hole vibrations and
very poor bit performance.
The reservoir is under pressured, resulting in losses when the
first fractures are encountered, damaging formation. The mud
loss also runs the risk of opening up fractures leading to
premature water break through. To limit the formation
damage, and improve the drilling performance, UBD was
made an integrated part of the project.
Drilling Plan
The drilling plan can be divided into 3 basic steps:
1. Exit casing using whipstock: Wells are completed
with three different types of completion string:
a. Casing exit through 4 ½” cemented liner: for casing
exit through 4 ½” cemented liner, a packer type
whipstock is anchored in the well bore through the use
of a permanent style big bore packer. A survey tool is
run down hole to determine the exact orientation of the
packer. An orienting latch assembly is made up to the
bottom of the concave and adjusted to the direction
required from the information provided from the
wireline survey. The whipstock and starting mill
assembly can now be run in the hole and latched into a
matching profile inside the casing packer. Once the
assembly is latched into the packer, the whipstock face
will be oriented to the desired direction automatically.
SPE/IADC 107305
b. Casing exit through 4 ½” slotted, un-cemented liner:
in this type of casing exit, liner is first squeeze
cemented to have cement behind the liner. The cement
is drilled out and an anchor is run with whipstock,
motor and gyro tool on coil to orient the whipstock
concave in desired direction prior to setting.
c. Casing exit through 5” slotted, un-cemented liner:
for these wells, an anchoring assembly is run in and set
with cement prior to wire line survey. Whipstock is run
conventionally on coil.
Milling of window is done in single run using diamond speed
mill and water melon string mill.
Original Well E is adjusted to case “a”, casing exit through
4 ½” cemented liner set at 3424 m TVD. Original well and
final sidetrack configuration is depicted on Figure 3.
2. Controlled Pressure Drilling BUR and land as per
the targets provided by operator:
The build section is kicked off with steering gyro and
3 ¾” monocone / tri-cone bit on low RPM – High
Torque motor. The AKO angle of the motor is adjusted
as per requirement. The build section is planned to be
drilled with 2 monocone bits. Under-balance condition
can be induced by single phase of multi phase fluid.
Formation in certain areas of Hassi Messaoud has
unconsolidated shale sections. To avoid hole problems,
underbalanced condition is avoided during of BUR. The
MWD tool is 4.5m away from the bit.
3. Controlled Pressure Drilling of single
horizontal/slanted drain to TD specified by
operator:
The lateral is drilled using 3 ¾” impregnated bit and
high speed motor with thruster added in the BHA.
Thruster pushes MWD tools by 1m away from the bit,
resulting in survey readings with a lag time of 5.5 m
drilling. This is acceptable in drilling lateral as the
unwanted change in hole inclination and azimuth are
not expected.
Equipments and Services
1. Coiled Tubing Drilling Rig
The drilling rig is fit for purpose, newly designed coiled
tubing drilling rig with 2 3/8” coil having capillary and
e-line inside. The capacity of the rig is of 200 Tons,
equipped with two numbers of hydraulic injectors with
100 Tons of continous lifting capacity, CAT engines
and SCR, providing electric supply to most of the
equipment, two number triplex mud pump. The coil
control cabin is fully automated with hydraulic controls
for injector and coil drum. It has coil life monitoring
capabilities and integrated display system for the
display of critical well parameters. All the major loads
are trailerized for fast moving in desert condition. The
lease area required is similar to that of any conventional
rig of similar capacity and tower can be rigged up on
existing cellar.
3
2. Controlled Pressure Services
The Controlled Pressure Drilling Services includes
provision of equipments for pressure control, nitrogen
generation, separation, storage and cleaning of the fluid.
The flow parameters are measured and analyzed using
computer based flow model.
3. Casing Exit Services
Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEMEDT/proceedings-pdf/07MEDT/All-07MEDT/SPE-107305-MS/2778108/spe-107305-ms.pdf by Kazakh-British Technical University user on 08 April 2024
It includes provision of anchor packer, whipstock and
mills required for casing exit.
4. Directional Drilling Services
Includes provision of mud motors and directional
drilling services.
5. MWD Tools and Services
Includes provision of MWD tools and spares. The tools
are maintained in field by the MWD crew.
6. Bits
The project has tried bits from 3 different
manufacturers. The bits are selected depending upon
the area to be drilled and performance.
Drilling Fluid Selection
All the candidates selected for this project are planed to be
drilled with native crude oil. This drilling fluid was chosen
over diesel or other fluid because it is the natural reservoir
fluid. It would minimize chances of formation damage in the
event of pressure transient and/or from fluid imbibitions. The
native crude oil is readily available and is supplied by the
Sonatrach production facilities in the Hassi Messaoud field.
As the real reservoir pressure observed while drilling was less
than the expected, the injection of single phase drilling fluid
was not a viable option. Nitrogen generated in situ was
combined with the native crude oil in order to achieve the
underbalanced condition.
Flow Modeling
Operating Envelope – Bottom Hole Circulating Pressure
Underbalanced conditions simulations are perform in the
planning as well as during the drilling phase of the project to
achieve the following objectives:
• Maintaining underbalanced conditions at all times
while drilling the reservoir
• Achieving good hole cleaning in the horizontal and
vertical hole sections.
• Maintaining Equivalent Liquid Volume (liquid + gas)
flow inside the optimum operating values for down
hole motors and to obtain the minimum directional
drilling parameters to reach the reservoir targets.
The Flowdrilling Hydraulic planning phase examined the
effect of different surface choke pressure on the
underbalanced bottom hole conditions using different native
crude oil injection rates. This type of hydraulic simulation is
realized at total depth planned (worst case scenario)
considering the effect on the bottom hole circulating pressure
induced by a variety of wellhead pressures and different native
crude oil injection rates in cases for no production events
4 SPE/IADC 107305
(Figure 4). Production case was also evaluated, assuming
expected average values for oil production, 4 m3/hr, and Gas
production, 10000 m3/day (Figure 5). These plots are
normally referred to as the operating envelope. Various
constraints that must be fulfilled during the underbalanced
drilling operations were plotted on this operating envelope.
These constraints include: a minimum and maximum
drawdown at the bit level to ensure adequate underbalanced
conditions in the well and at the same time minimizing any
near wellbore depletion effect; minimum annular fluid
velocity in the vertical and horizontal section of the well; and
the maximum down hole positive displacement motor flow
rate limitation.
From the initial simulations, the optimum liquid rate and
wellhead pressure in no production scenario were selected to
be 350 l/min – 50 psi (10% drawdown), and for Oil / Gas
production scenario in 370 l/min – 200 psi (10% drawdown).
Hole cleaning simulations
In horizontal wells, hole cleaning is an important issue. Thus,
in a low viscosity scenario, liquid velocity is the critical
parameter that controls a circulation system’s ability to
transport solids. The criteria used is based on the annular fluid
velocity that for operational experience is set in 55 m/min for
annular liquid velocity in the vertical portion of the well and
65 m/min in the horizontal section. Hole cleaning could also
be a concern, upon the degree of washout encountered. The
use of appropriate hole cleaning practices such as wiper trips
and viscous sweeps minimizes the risk of having severe hole
cleaning problems. Figure 6 depicts the velocity profile
obtained using specialized hydraulic simulators.
The design parameters used for UBD modeling can be
summarized as follow:
• Drilling fluid: native crude oil (0.80 S.G.).
• Injection rates: 100 – 450 l/min.
• Wellhead pressure variation: 0 – 400 psi.
• Reservoir pressure: 4544 psi.
• Minimum drawdown: 10%.
• Maximum drawdown: 20%.
• Maximum motor equivalent flow rate: 450 l/min.
• Minimum annular liquid velocity in horizontal
section: 55 m/min.
• Minimum annular liquid velocity in vertical section:
65 m/min.
• Coiled tubing and BHA dimension: 2 3/8” x 3 1/8”.
Results obtained
A total of two legs were drilled. The first leg was of 54 m
open hole length and drilled with a single phase fluid,
continuous circulation losses were experienced. This leg was
plugged back with cement and a second leg was sidetracked.
Due to the lower reservoir pressure encountered, the sidetrack
was drilled with a multiphase drilling fluid system (Nitrogen
plus Crude Oil). The nitrified drilling fluid reduced the
bottom hole circulating pressure from 3900 psi obtained on the
first leg to 3200 psi in average.
• Bottom Hole Circulating Pressure (BHCP)
The nitrified drilling fluid reduced the bottom hole
circulating pressure from 3900 psi obtained on the first
leg to 3200 psi in average. Hydraulic simulations were
performed on location during the complete UBD
operation (flow drilling and Multiphase sections). The
Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEMEDT/proceedings-pdf/07MEDT/All-07MEDT/SPE-107305-MS/2778108/spe-107305-ms.pdf by Kazakh-British Technical University user on 08 April 2024
difference between the calculated and real pressure data
obtained from the Pressure While Drilling (PWD) tool
was within the expected tolerance of 5%. In Figure 7 is
represented the real and simulated BHCP.
• Production while drilling
The complete second leg was drilled underbalanced
using the D1 crude oil and nitrogen as the gasified
drilling fluid. The multiphase flow operation started at
3482.5 m MD and the first traces of oil and gas
production were observed at 3520 m MD, 70 m after the
landing point. A higher oil production rate was obtained
at 3600 m MD and the well produced 7 m3/hr of oil
steadily for the rest of the drilling operation. During the
UBD operation in second leg, a total of 806.83 m3 (5076
bbl) or crude were produced. Figure 8 shows the oil
production behavior while drilling.
• Rate of penetration (ROP) and hole cleaning
In average, the rate of penetration for Well E was 2.5
m/hr. The first 212 m including cement, built and
horizontal section were drilled with an average ROP of
2.1 m/hr. The following 167 m of horizontal section was
drilled with an average ROP of 2.8 m/hr. In Figure 9 is
represented the ROP behavior versus depth.
No drilling problems due to bottom hole cuttings
accumulation was reported in the UBD operation.
During most of the operation, the liquid velocity in the
annular space varied between 100 – 110 m/min and 95 –
105 m/min for the horizontal and vertical hole intervals
respectively. No hole cleaning issues were foreseen and
experienced.
• Productivity index while drilling (PIWD)
The purpose of calculating productivity index while
drilling (PIWD) is to quantify the reservoir deliverability
during the drilling phase. During UBD, the reservoir will
flow at various rates depending on the amount of
drawdown and the reservoir characteristics. If there is
limited effective hydrocarbon in the reservoir from
compartmentalized formations, then the reservoir’s static
bottom hole pressure may change over the period of the
drilling of the well and will affect the PIWD plot of the
well.
Hydrocarbon production was first recorded at 3520 m
MD (70 m after the landing point). From this depth, the
productivity index was relatively constant at an average
value of 0.008 m3/day/psi. However, at 3600 m MD, 185
SPE/IADC 107305
m away from the original vertical well, the PIWD started
to increase gradually up to 0.14 m3/day/psi at the total
depth of 3766 m MD. Figure 10 shows the PIWD
behavior.
• Flow Test
At total depth (3766 m MD), a 99 hours flow test was
conducted with a ½” choke diameter. During this period,
the well produced 1179.85 m3 (7421 bbl) of crude oil with
a rate of 11.65 m3/hr. Figure 11 depicts the wellhead and
production values behavior versus time seen during the
flow test.
Performance review – issues and solutions
• Bit – motor incompatibility during curve section
drilling:
High RPM motors were incompatible with tri-cone bits
and resulted in premature bit failure. The use of 3 1/8”
low RPM - high torque motor address the issue
• Excessive vibrations:
Excessive vibrations coming from motor was identified as
the cause behind MWD failure and loss of cutting
structure of impregnated bit causing premature gauge
failure and resulted poor life. Weight transferred to bit in
horizontal drain sections, as the bit drill off formation was
second major contributor to damaging vibrations. The
use of large motor diameter (3 1/8” OD compared to 2
7/8” OD) to make BHA assembly stiffer thereby reducing
vibrations. After introduced “Thruster” in the BHA,
string vibrations were appreciably reduced, improving bit
life. Thruster is a down hole tool that provides Pump
Open Force (POF) to apply hydraulic Weight On Bit
(WOB) during drilling operations. Thruster also absorbs
weight transfer from the drill string and keeps the positive
displacement motor from stalling out. It is also improved
the impregnated bit life making possible to drill 150 m of
horizontal drain with single bit.
• MWD failure:
A new design, more robust MWD tools with better tool
stabilization and robust electronics were tried, improving
MWD performance.
• Bit performance:
Tried 3 ¾” monocone bit with dramatic improvement in
bit life. The gauge retention is very robust and none of
the bit had bearing failure. The bit gave desired build
rates and excellent direction control. The combination of
3 1/8” low RPM motor and monocone bit reduced the
vibration and associated MWD failures.
5
Conclusions
• Coiled Tubing and Underbalanced Drilling
technologies have obtained successful results applied
together in this well. Rate of penetration was
improved (comparing the 2.5 m/hr obtained in UBD
Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEMEDT/proceedings-pdf/07MEDT/All-07MEDT/SPE-107305-MS/2778108/spe-107305-ms.pdf by Kazakh-British Technical University user on 08 April 2024
with 1 m/hr during the overbalanced periods in the
first leg) and from the production point of view, this
re-entry well is considered as a good producer in
Hassi Messaoud field.
• Proper planning and design phases are demonstrating
the success obtained during field application.
• UBD operations were maintained during the
complete production section drilling in second leg,
using the same D1 crude oil (0.8 S.G.) and Nitrogen
as multiphase fluid system (nitrified fluid). A total
production section length of 316 m (from landing
point) was drilled.
• No bottom hole cuttings accumulation events was
obtained during the UBD operation.
• It was possible to drill short radius with the required
build rates (58º/30m as in this well) using coiled
tubing, drilling 372 m of 3 ¾” production hole
section.
• After start this project in Hassi Messaoud field, the
combination of Underbalanced and Coiled Tubing
Drilling technologies has been proven to be a viable
solution to successfully drill horizontal re-entry wells
where the reservoir pressure is adequate to induce
underbalanced conditions using a single phase
drilling fluid and where the reservoir pressure is
extremely low, requiring the use of gasified fluids.
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to extend their appreciation to the
management of Sonatrach in Algeria and to Weatherford
International Ltd. for the permission to publish this paper. The
authors also thank the many individuals within Sonatrach and
Weatherford who have contributed to the success of this work.
References
1. Moore, D., Bencheikh, A., and Chopty, J. (2004):
“Drilling Underbalanced in Hassi Messaoud”, SPE/IADC
91519.
2. Durst, D., Hart, S., Brown, W., (2001): “Drilling,
Completion, Isolation and Thru Tubing Re-entry of
Multilaterals in Hard Open Hole Formations”, OTC
13285.
3. IADC Underbalanced and Managed Pressure Drilling
Operations Committee “IADC Fluid selection for
Underbalanced Operations”, adopted by the IADC boards
of directors August 2005.
 6 SPE/IADC 107305

150000

9
4

8 Algiers
140000

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEMEDT/proceedings-pdf/07MEDT/All-07MEDT/SPE-107305-MS/2778108/spe-107305-ms.pdf by Kazakh-British Technical University user on 08 April 2024

1C 10
3 12
11
1A 6 13 Hassi Messaoud
130000

20B 15
2

23 2X 20A
19 17 16 14
ALGERIA
1B
120000
24

25

110000
790000 800000 810000 820000 830000 840000

Figure 1: Hassi Messaoud field, producing zones

Figure 2: Hassi Messaoud field location

Coiled tubing
OD 2 3/8 in
ID 2.026 in

BHA
OD 2 7/8 in
Motor 7:8, 3.6 stg
BIT
OD 3 3/4 in
7" casing shoe at 3380 m

KOP = 3394 m TVD

BUR = 58°/30 m

Production Casing
OD 4 1/2 in
Set Depth 3424 m 56 m
316 m
landing point= 3428 m TVD slant section (90° inc)
TD = 3430.41 m TVD
= 3450 m MD
= 3766 m MD

Figure 3: Well E original and Re-Entry configuration

SPE/IADC 107305 7

4900

65 m/min 450 lpm 150 psi WHP

4700 minimum flow maximum flow
100 psi WHP
velocity through motor
Reservoir Pressure = 4544 psi 50 psi WHP

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEMEDT/proceedings-pdf/07MEDT/All-07MEDT/SPE-107305-MS/2778108/spe-107305-ms.pdf by Kazakh-British Technical University user on 08 April 2024

4500

4300
BHCP (psi)

10% Draw dow n = 4095 psi

4100

3900 15% Draw dow n = 3868 psi

WHP = 50 psi
350 lpm crude injection
3700
flow range BHCP = 4089 psi (10.1% DD)
recommended Min. Horizontal velocity = 89 m/min
Min. Vertical velocity = 72 m/min
3500
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Crude Injection Rate (lpm)

Figure 4: Initial UBD Operating Envelop with planned injection rates and wellhead pressure for no production case

5000

65 m/min 450 lpm

4800
minimum flow maximum flow
velocity through motor
4600 Reservoir Pressure = 4550 psi

4400

4200
10% Draw dow n = 4095 psi
BHCP (psi)

4000
15% Draw dow n = 3868 psi
3800
20% Draw dow n = 3640 psi
3600
200 psi WHP WHP = 200 psi
370 lpm crude injection
150 psi WHP
3400 BHCP = 4090 psi (10% DD)
100 psi WHP flow range Min. Horizontal velocity = 96 m/min
recommended Min. Vertical velocity = 100 m/min
3200 50 psi WHP

3000
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Crude Injection Rate (lpm)

Figure 5: Initial UBD Operating Envelop with planned injection rates and wellhead pressure for production case
(4 m3/hr Oil – 10000 m3/day Gas)
8 SPE/IADC 107305

Liquid Velocity (m /m in)

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
0

500

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEMEDT/proceedings-pdf/07MEDT/All-07MEDT/SPE-107305-MS/2778108/spe-107305-ms.pdf by Kazakh-British Technical University user on 08 April 2024

1000

Vertical Depth (m) 1500 No production case

Production Case
2000 Minimum Vertical Velocity
Minimum Horizontal Velocity
2500

3000

3500

4000

Figure 6: Annular fluid velocity

5000 500

Initial Reservoir Pressure

4500 450

4000 Real Reservoir Pressure 400

WHP (psi); Liq. inj. (lpm); N2 Inj. (m3/min)

3500 350
Bottom Hole Circulating Pressure (psi)

3000 300
BHCP (sensor)

2500 BHCP (simulated) 250

WHP
2000 Liq. inj. 200
N2 Inj.
1500 150

1000 100

500 50

0 0
3380

3400

3420

3440

3460

3480

3500

3520

3540

3560

3580

3600

3620

3640

3660

3680

3700

3720

3740

3760

3780

3800

Measured Depth (m)

Figure 7: Real and Simulated BHCP

SPE/IADC 107305 9

1950
During Drilling Operations During Flow Test
1850

1750

1650
Flow Drilling Nitrogen Injection
1550
1450

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEMEDT/proceedings-pdf/07MEDT/All-07MEDT/SPE-107305-MS/2778108/spe-107305-ms.pdf by Kazakh-British Technical University user on 08 April 2024

1350
1250

1150
Gain / Loss (m3)

1050

950
850
750
650

550
450

350
gain/losses

250
150
50

-50
-150

-250

01 Jun

02 Jun

03 Jun

04 Jun

05 Jun

06 Jun

07 Jun

08 Jun

09 Jun

10 Jun

11 Jun

12 Jun

13 Jun
14 May

15 May

16 May

17 May

18 May

19 May

20 May

21 May

22 May

23 May

24 May

25 May

26 May

27 May

28 May

29 May

30 May

31 May
Time

Figure 8: Oil Gain and Losses curve

Vertical Section (m)

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
12 3000

ROP 3100
10
Trajectory

3200
8

True Vertical Depth (m)

3300
ROP (m/hr)

3400

4
3500

2
3600

0 3700
3388 3408 3428 3448 3468 3488 3508 3528 3548 3568 3588 3608 3628 3648 3668 3688 3708 3728 3748 3768 3788
Measured Depth (m)

Figure 9: Rate of penetration behavior versus depth

10 SPE/IADC 107305

Vertical Section (m)

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
3000 0.25

3050

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEMEDT/proceedings-pdf/07MEDT/All-07MEDT/SPE-107305-MS/2778108/spe-107305-ms.pdf by Kazakh-British Technical University user on 08 April 2024

3100 0.2

3150
PIWD
Trajectory
True Vertical Depth (m)

3200 0.15

PIWD (m3/d/psi)
3250

3300 0.1

3350

3400 0.05

3450

3500 0
3400
3410
3420
3430
3440
3450
3460
3470
3480
3490
3500
3510
3520
3530
3540
3550
3560
3570
3580
3590
3600
3610
3620
3630
3640
3650
3660
3670
3680
3690
3700
3710
3720
3730
3740
3750
3760
3770
3780
Measured Depth (m)

Figure 10: Productivity Index While Drilling versus depth

700 70

600 60

500 50

e3 m 3/day Gas; m 3/day Oil

Pressure (psi)

400 40

WHP
300 Gas Production Rate 30
Oil production rate

200 20

100 10

0 0
08/06 08/06 08/06 08/06 09/06 09/06 09/06 09/06 10/06 10/06 10/06 10/06 11/06 11/06 11/06 11/06 12/06 12/06 12/06 12/06
00:00 06:00 12:00 18:00 00:00 06:00 12:00 18:00 00:00 06:00 12:00 18:00 00:00 06:00 12:00 18:00 00:00 06:00 12:00 18:00
Flow Test Tim e

Figure 11: Flow test result