Perf Analy MHAsset Nov 03

Performance Analysis of horizontal wells of Mumbai High Asset
PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF HORIZONTAL WELLS OF MUMBAI HIGH ASSET

Executive Summary
Mumbai High is the most prolific oil field in India, with L-III as the main reservoir. The field was initially
developed with vertical and deviated wells, however, horizontal wells (in L-III) were drilled in the recent
past, with primary purpose of recovering the by passed/untapped oil. Most of the horizontal wells have
come up since 2000, as a part of the Mumbai High Redevelopment Plan.
In view of production problems like high water production and low influx, faced in some of these
horizontal wells, IOGPT was assigned the task of analysing the performance of the existing horizontal
wells, with special emphasis on completion & workover options and future strategies. This report
includes a detailed analysis of 45 horizontal wells (15 in MH North and 30 in MH South) based on their
production, pressure and stimulation history, along with that of nearby horizontal/ conventional wells.
Their performance was compared with calculated well potential and vis-a-vis performance of horizontal
wells worldwide.
Case histories reveal that horizontal wells, in the initial phase, produce 2-3 times that of conventional
wells! but exhibit a faster decline. Further, well trajectory has a significant impact on well productivity
and needs to be designed to minimise sumps, that often cause production decline.
The completion philosophy adopted for the horizontal lateral not only has a direct bearing on well
productivity, but also plays a vital role in planning intervention for diagnostics and repair. Various
completion techniques in vogue have been reviewed and it is felt that openhole completion is still
preferable in areas with good reservoir facies. In low permeability areas, warranting future stimulation
(like WA area), cased, cemented and perforated completion may be tried.
Based on well-wise analysis, actions suggested include -CT based stimulation in 4 wells (for uniform
coverage of lateral) and CT based PLT with multi-arm caliper in 3 wells, followed by zonal isolation.
CT reach needs to be improved through use of larger diameter CT (1 1/2" or more), kickoff tools and
simulation software before or during CT operation. Use of Tractor to facilitate CT run has been suggested
for future horizontal wells, which need to be completed with 3 landing nipple.
Workover in horizontal well has not been a common practice worldwide, especially due to high costs
associated with diagnostic requirements, incompatibility of completion philosophy and need for
technological innovations. However, some case histories involving different techniques, e.g. openhole
clads, have appeared recently.
Openhole clad application has been found to be a popular and cost effective option for zonal isolation.
With a sustained oil gain of even 200 bopd, the payback period would be about an year.
Head IOGPT
http://www.infraline.com - Your Information Gateway to Indian Energy Sector
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to Sh. N.K. Mitra, GGM-Surface Manager, MH asset, Sh. J.L. Narasimham,
GGM-Sub Surface Manager, MH Asset, Sh. R.D. Chaurasia, DGM (Geophy-Wells), Area Manager, SST,
MH North and Dr. S. Ramanan, DGM(R), Area Manager, SST, MH South for their valuable comments.
Special thanks are due to Sh. R.K. Sinha, CE (P), coordinator of this project, for his excellent support,
Sh. S. Basu, SE(P), Sh. K. Bora, DGM(R) and his team, Sh. O.K. Saxena, CE(D) for assistance in data
collection.
Our sincere thanks to Dr. Kewal Krishan, CM(R) & Sh. U.B. Singh, M(R) of SST, MH South and
Sh. R. Bahuguna, M(R) of SST, MH North, for their inputs during technical discussions. We would also
like to thank Sh. S.K. Anand, CG (Wells), Sh. N.A. Siddiqui, CE(P) and Sh. N.K. Tyagi, DGM(Cementing)
for useful suggestions regarding well logging, well completion and cementation aspects respectively.
1.0 Introduction
Mumbai High, located about 160 kms. W-NW of city in the Arabian Sea on the continental shelf, is the
largest and most prolific oil field in India, having an areal extent of approximately 1200 sq. km. It has
been divided into two blocks -the North and the South. L-III is the largest oil-producing reservoir of this
field.
The field was developed with vertical and deviated wells. However, horizontal wells in L-III reservoir
were drilled since 1997, with primary purpose of recovering the bypassed/ untapped oil. Most of the
horizontal wells have come up since 2000, as a part of the Mumbai High Redevelopment Plan.
However, some of these wells started facing production problems, mainly because of high water
production and low influx. The present study was taken up to firstly analyse the performance of the
horizontal wells and to search for workover options, that could be applied in the Mumbai High wells.
Accordingly, an exhaustive literature survey has been done to scout for new technology, in the areas of
well completion, well diagnostics, well cleanup and well workover. Case histories of successful
applications and the experience of the E&P companies were also studied. Attempts have been made to
indicate the feasibility of a new technique and the associated cost (wherever available).
This report includes an in-depth analysis of the existing horizontal wells (in Chapter-2), identifying the
problematic wells and the possible causes, in conjunction with the remedial options. Chapter-3 pertains
to the well potential aspects of a horizontal well and the effect of well trajectory and other parameters on
it. Formation damage due to mud cake and mud filtrate invasion and the various stimulation techniques
in vogue in Mumbai High are described in Chapter-4. A review of the various completion techniques
have been included in Chapter-5, that will help in formulating a completion philosophy for the future
wells. Chapter-6 covers the various intervention techniques for diagnostics as well as work over, together
with the related issue like CT reach, well tractors, etc. Finally, economic analysis for water 'shut-off
technique has been covered in Chapter-7.
2.0 Well Analysis
The list of horizontal wells considered for this study is as per the Production Plan of Feb, 2003. The recent
production data has been quoted from the recent well test data. The wells analysed include:
MH North -Nl-6H, WI4-5H, WI4-6H, N2-9H, N2-10H, N2-2zH, N3-7H, N3-8H, ND-6H, NE-lzH, N8-10H,
NH-6H, LC-10AH, LC-11H, LD-11H
MH South -WA-3zH, WA-8H, WA-7zH, WI6-P3H, WI6-P4H, IU-7zH, IU-2zH, IU-1zH, IQ-9H, IQ-8zH,
ZA-7H, ZA-8H, ZA-4H, ZA-SH, ZA-9H, ZA-3H, WB-3zH, WB-8zH, WB-10H, WB-11H, WB-12H, EE-7H,
EE-8H, EE-9H, Sl-6-6H, Sl-6-SH, Sl-6-P1H, ED-8H, ED-6zH, SS-9H.
Multi-lateral wells have not been included as also LC-9 Hr which was earlier drilled as horizontal well in
'C', but was plugged back (after producing 100% water) and completed in 'B' as a conventional well.
The horizontal wells have been analysed on the basis of their past production trend (i.e. liquid rate, water
cut and GOR) trend of reservoir pressure, as measured in these wells or in nearby wells and the
production/ injection trend of nearby conventional/ horizontal wells. The well-wise production plots
have been generated as per allocated production data, while the liquid rate, oil rater w/c and GOR
mentioned against each well is as percent well test data. Cumulative oil production (till 2/03) has been
calculated for each well based on allocated production data.
The comparison of horizontal well performance with that of the nearby conventional wells had been
mainly related to the productivity aspect. The aspects like horizontal well potential and formation
damage in horizontal wells, which emerged as some of the key issues, have been covered in detail in the
subsequent chapters.
MUMBAI HIGH NORTH
Well: N1-6H
Well came on production in -12[00 in Ai layer. ,

Test 3/03 : QI = 1608 BLPD, w/c = 35%, Cum. Oil = 0.96 MMbbl
Lateral length = 418m, Hole size= 8 1/211, Completion: Open hole
Observations:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
W/c shot up after mid-2001 to IV 60-70%. Nearby injectors WI4 -3, 4 & WI5 -1, 3, 6 were closed in
Sep-Oct, 2001. Consequently" rise in w/c of N1-6H got arrested and thereafter, has been in the
range of 35-50%.
Seeing the recent pressure trends of wells completed in A1 only, it is inferred that pressure has
fallen, apparently due to lesser injection support. This pressure reduction is also indicated by
gradual fall in liquid production in this well (>2500 blpd in 11/01 to 1608 blpd in 3/03).
With the available data (wide variation in permeability-504md as per Buildup in 11/00 and 34md
as per influx study of 4/02), Jh/Js & Qh values could not be reasonably estimated.
Nearby conventional well Nl-5 completed in A1 is giving Q1 in the same range as this well.
The recent influx study (4/02) indicates damage as evident from skin (-0.8) and lower
contributing length (122. 7m, i.e. 29% of the lateral length). Also, considering performance of Nl5, it is obvious that this well should have much higher potential.
Recommendations:
1.
2.
OK for present, looking at the historical w/c trend and the declining pressure.
In future, when adequate pressure support is there, this well could be a possible candidate for
hole cleaning/ stimulation to enhance withdrawal (though with a higher w/c).
Well: W14-5H
Well came on production in 12/02 in A1 layer.

Test 3/03 : QI = 120 BLPD, W/c = 25%, Cum 0 = 0.03 MMbbl
Lateral length = 500m, Hole size= 8 1/211, Completion: Openhole
Observations:
1.
2.
As per Build up study of 11/02, contributing length is only 74m (i.e. 15% of the lateral length).
To be finally converted as water injector.
Well W14-6H

Test 1/03 : Ql = 504 BLPD, W/c = 59%, Cum O = 0.007MMbbl
Lateral length = 700m, Hole size= 6", Completion: Open hole
Observations:
1.
To be finally converted as water injector.
Well: N2-9H

Test 3/03 : Ql = 1272 BLPD, W/c = 30%, Cum. Oil = 0.67 MMbbl
Lateral length = 1024m, Hole size= 8 1/2", Completed with combination of 7" blank and slotted
liners (upto 2450m) and then open hole (upto 2917.5m).
Observations:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Initial QI was in the range of 3000 blpd, which gradually fell & has stabilized at ~ 1300-1400 blpd.
W/c has been in range of 15-20%
Based on study of the area around N2 platform (as brought out in earlier IOGPT report), N2-9H
is in a relatively more homogeneous area, which has resulted in lesser production. (than N2-10H)
and steady w/c. This may have resulted in lesser effect of nearby injectors (from WI-2 & 3
platforms) in term of pressure support, as compared to N2-10H (datum pressure of N2-9H is
1461 psi, as per influx study of 4/02, while that of N2-10H In 4/02 is 1684 psi).
Rate was in line with theoretical ~ calculation (refer Table 3.1).
The contributing length as per the Influx study of 4/02 is just 164m (16% of lateral length and
35% of openhole length).
The trajectory of this well is snake-like, with a number of crests and troughs. Water/ gas hold-up
in these troughs/ crests, resulting in reduced cross section available for flow, may be
instrumental in production decline in this well inspite of high transmissibility (Kh).
P-T of 6/02 shows GLV functioning is Ok.
Recommendations:
1.
2.
OK at present.
With eventual conversion of WI4-5H & 6H to injector, this well will get additional pressure
support.
Well: N2-10H
Well came on production in 2/02 in Ai layer.

Test 6/03 : QI = 2616 BLPD, w/c = 37%, Cum. Oil = 0.96 MMbbl
Lateral length= 1009m, Hole size= 8 1/2", Completed with combination of 7" blank and slotted
liners (upto 2652m) and thereafter openhole (upto 3132m).
Observations:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Well initially started producing with 4000 blpd, which has presently come down to ~ 2600 blpd.
There has been a gradual increase in w/c. This increase in inferred to be due to proximity of WI3 injectors and relatively heterogeneous area around this well (as compared to N2-9H area).
Pressure is on the higher side, as compared to N2-9H.
For the recorded drawdown (234 psi), the calculated Qh (6932 blpd) is coming much higher than
the actual rate. Qvog is also on the higher side (4407 blpd). The two possible reasons would be either reported drawdown is doubtful or well is damaged.
The trajectory of this well is snake-like, with a number of crests and troughs. Water/ gas hold-up
in these troughs/ crests, resulting in reduced cross section available for flow, may be
instrumental in production decline in this well inspite of high transmissibility (Kh).
P-T of 6/02 shows GLV functioning is Ok.
The contributing length as per the build up study in 4/02 is just 187m (18.5% of lateral length
and 39% of open hole length).
Recommendations:
1.
2.
OK at present.
Build up study suggested to ascertain wellbore damage, if any.
Well: N2-2zH

Lateral length = 636m, Hole size=8 1/2", Completed with combination of 3 1/2" blank and
perforated tubing (495m) till toe.
Observations:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Ql started at ~ 4000 blpd and gradually came down to the present level.
W/c started at ~ 13% and has steadily increased to ~ 25-30%.
Similar to N2-10H, this well seems to be in relatively heterogeneous area, explaining the higher
rate & increasing w/c.
Though no pressure data is available, pressure is inferred to be moderate, close to that of N210H.
Recommendations:
1.
OK.
Well: N3-7H

Lateral length = 484m, Hole size;; 8 1/2", Completed with combination of 7" slotted & blank
liners upto 2387m & then openhole upto 2509m.
Observations:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Initial Ql was ~ 3000+ blpd, which stabilized to the present value.

Well started with 60% w/c, which has remained in the same range.
Rate is in line with that calculated from Jh/Js value. The declining rate may be due to the poorer
reservoir properties in this area, as compared to the N3- 8H, which is further corroborated by
the completion philosophy (openhole length is only 122 m out of lateral length of 484m).
No P- T survey done in this well to check for GLV performance.
AII the wells of this platform completed in Ai have w/c in the range of 60%.
Nearby wells N3-5 & 4 (in A1) & N3-3 (in Al, A2-II) have seen very slow marginal rise in w/c in
the last 4-5 years.
The area is gradually getting watered out. There would not be much scope for remedial
measures for water control.
Recommendation:
1.
2.
P-T survey to rule out GLV leakage.

Maintain the existing injection pattern in A1 in wells of WI-2 & 3 platforms, so as to keep the rise
in w/c under control.
Well: N3-8H

Test 3/03 : QI = 3617 BLPD, W/c = 82%, Cum. Oil = 0.28 MMbbl
Lateral length = 754m, Hole size= 8 1/2", Completed with 7" slotted liner upto 2100m & then
open hole upto 2736m.
Observations:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Well started with 4000 blpd & presently, production is above 3000 blpd.
W/c has been around 70-75% through out.
Rate is in line with that calculated from Jh/Js value. However, calculated Qh is off, if
permeability of 6md (that of N3-1 & N3-5 wells, as per influx studies) is considered. Seeing the
performance of this well, permeability has to be higher, not withstanding the fact that the well
may have effective negative skin.
Nearby wells N3-S & 4 (in A1) & N3-3 (in A1, A2-II) have seen very slow/marginal rise in w/c in
the last 4-5 years.
The area is gradually getting watered out. There would not be much scope for remedial
measures for water control.
Recommendations:
1.
Maintain the existing injection pattern in Al in wells of WI-2 & 3 platforms, so as to keep the rise
in w/c under control.
Well: ND-6H

Test 1/03 : QI = 1056 BLPD, W/c = 67%/ Cum. Oil = 0.44 MMbbl
Lateral length = 403m, Hole size= 8 1/2", Completion: Open hole
Observations:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Performance of this well is in line with calculated Qh.

W/c has started at ~ 40% (apparently due to effect of water injection from western side, which
had already hit adjoining N3 platform wells, including N3-6), and has gradually increased to ~
65-0%, which, is combined effect of above & injection in ND-4 (which commenced from 5/00 in
A1, A2-I,II).
As the well is getting affected by injection in nearby well ND-4, increasing withdrawal would be
detrimental to W/c.
Influx stuy of 11/00 shows pressure of 1373 psi.
Recommendations:
1.
2.
Restrict withdrawal to present level & monitor w/c regularly.

When w/c shows further increasing trend, attempt PL T in nearby ND-4 injector to identify and
isolate high intake intervals in A1.
Well: NE-1zH

Test 2/03 : QI = 1197 BLPD, W/c = nil, Cum. Oil = 1.16 MMbbl
Lateral length = 543m, Hole size= 6". Completion: open hole
Observations:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
QI has been mostly in the range of 1400-1800 blpd.

Max. w/c reported has been 5% '
GOR reported is within 100 v/v. Apparently, the pressure in this area is adequate, considering
the QI & GOR (no pressure recording in this well)
Based on the past production & pressure data, it is inferred that the area around NE-1 & NE-3 got
depleted before these wells were side tracked. NE-3Y, even after side track, is producing with
very high GOR.
It is concluded that though presently pressure in NE-lzH is good, the pressure in A1 layer in NE
area in general is low & requires additional pressure support.
In absence of pressure data, well potential vis-a-vis conventional well could not be estimated.
Recommendations:
1.
2.
Well is ok at present.
May consider additional perforation in Ai in injector NH-5. Also, NE-3Y or alternatively NE-4z
could be considered for conversion as injector, in A1 to support NE area.
Well: N8-10H
Well came on production in 12/02 in A2-VII layer.

Lateral length = 332m, Hole size= 6", Completion: Openhole (3 non-perftubing in first 15m)
Observations:
1.
W/c has been >85% since beginning, though liquid rate was well maintained at 2000 blpd (till
recently). The steep decline in QI has been very recent.
2.
3.
4.
The high w/c in this well is most likely due to high-permeability streak from inj WI2-4 or ND-3
or nearby fault acting as conduit.
As per last PLT in WI2-4, maximum water intake was in A2-VII (water is going to A2-V perf and
then channeling down to A2-VII). ND-3LS (no PL T) is open in A2-V, VI & VII and is injecting ~
5000 BWPD. N8-5z, presently closed, was taking 36% water in A2-VII when on injection.
OWC in A2-VII is reported in well N8-4 (1372m TVD MSL). The possibility of OWC having
moved up to hit N8-10H is remote.
Recommendations:
1.
2.
Carry out P- T survey to check for GLV leak.

If gas lift is ok and if log properties are bad, plug lateral and complete in A2- V (can be attempted
rigless with CT, including CT based perforation system).
Well: NH-6H

Lateral length =701m, Hole size= 6", Completed with 3 1/2" perf & non-perf tubing upto
toe (2862m)
Observations:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
QI initially was 1600-1800 blpd and is now maintained at ~ 1100 blpd.

W/c is within 5%. GOR is <100 viv
In absence of pressure data, well potential vis-a-vis conventional wells could not be estimated.
Also, no other well in NH platform is completed only in A1.
Lateral length against perforated tubing is 400m out of total lateral length of 700m.
Suggestions regarding water injection covered under well NE-1zH would benefit this well area
also.
Recommendation:
1.
OK for the present.
Well: LC-10AH
Well came on production in 9/02 in B layer.

Test 6/03 : QI = 1453 BlPD, W/c= nil, Cum. Oil = 0.34 MMbbl, GOR=1139 v/v, Qgf=263055
m3/d. Well prod on S/F (FTHP=825 psi, 56/64" choke)
Lateral length = 620m, Hole size= 6", Well completed with combination of 3 1/2" perforated &
non-perforated tubing (upto 2035m) & then openhole upto 2375m.
Observations:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Well's production matches with the Jh/Js considerations (refer Table 3.1).
GOR/formation gas is on the higher side, though QI is restricted.
Datum pressure is 1669 psi (build up of 10/02).
As per build up study of 10/02, contributing length is only 37.2m (i.e. 6% of the lateral length and
11% of open hole length).
Recommendation:
1.
OK.
Well: LC-11H

Test 6/03 : QI = 878 BLPD, W/c =nil, Cum. Oil = 0.15 MMbbl, GOR=637 v/v.
Lateral length = 544m, Hole size=6", Well completed with combination of perforated & non-perf.
3 1/2 tubing (upto 2295m) & then openhole upto 2424m.
Observations:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Lateral length (openhole + perf tubing) is less by 90m as compared to LC-10H.

QI is restricted (choke=40/64"), as GOR is on higher side.
As per Jh/Js considerations, well could have produced more under given operating conditions
(if the pressure is assumed to be same as in LC-10AH). However, lookir1g at the QI & FTHP
trend in LC-10AH & 11H, it appears that reservoir pressure in LC-11H area has depleted more,
as compared to LC-10AH area.
There is also a possibility of formation damage.
Recommendations:
1.
2.
Well should not be disturbed at present.

Build up study suggested to infer the extent of formation damage. However, well should be
considered for stimulation only after pressure support in the area is enhanced.
WellL LD-11H

Test 6/03 : QI = 1999 BLPD, W/c =53%, Cum. Oil = 0.11 MMbbl, GOR=863 v/v, Qg=128919
m3/d
Lateral length = 503m, Hole size= 6", Completion: Openhole
Observations:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
QI is maintained around 2000 blpd.

W/c has been ~ 50% since beginning.
GOR & formation gas are on the higher side.
Out of all nearby injectors, in N7-3 (in A2-VII, B, C), C layer was taking max. water (as per PLT).
In NQ-6 (in A2-VII, B, C) water was going mainly to A2-VII (non-perf). In NO-4 (in A2-VII, B, C)
most of the water was going to earlier squeezed intervals in A2-III & IV. Only in LE-3LS (open in
A2-VII, B, C, injection from 5/99), substantial quantity could be getting injected in B (indirectly
inferred from PLT of 1997, when well LE-3 was producer in B & C).
The reason for the present level of water cut from this well is probably injection water
breakthrough from LE-3 in B layer. Notwithstanding this, there is inadequate pressure support
in B in this area, which IS indicated by GOR trend in this well.
Recommendation:
1.
Regulate water injection temporarily in LE-3, to confirm or otherwise the injection water
breakthrough from LE-3 to LD-11H in B. In case breakthrough is confirmed, profile modification
in LE-3 & simultaneous improvement of intake in B in other nearby injectors mentioned above is
suggested.
MUMBAI HIGH SOUTH

Lateral length = 531m, Hole size= 6", Completion: openhole
Observations:
1.
2.
3.
QI had been in the range of 325 blpd till 12/02, when acid job (by bulldozing) was done.
Subsequently QI increased to ~ 420 blpd, but has again come down to the present level.
No pressure data available.
GOR is on the higher side (433 v/v). Injection in A1 is going on through WA-5 (since 4/00), WI61 & WI6-i2z, but rates are very low (755, 755 & 302 bwpd resp.). So, pressure support is less.
Recommendations:
1.
2.
Well requires CT based stimulation for uniform coverage of lateral.

Pressure support needs to be enhanced in this area.
Well: WA-SH:

Lateral length = 400m, Hole size= 6", Completion: open hole
Observations:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Initially, QI was in the range of 1000-1200 BLPD, thereafter it gradually declined to the present
level.
W/c has been in the range of 5-10% lately.
This well appears to be getting relatively better pressure support than WA-7zH & WA-3zH
(based on GOR consideration).
Acidisation with CT attempted many times in 1997-99. Earlier, CT had a greater reach in the
lateral (upto even 2334m, i.e. 340m in the lateral), however in subsequent attempts, obstruction
was felt, which limited CT reach to only max. 70m in the lateral (repeated acidisation may have
caused debris formation, due to release of carbonate/fines, which restricted CT reach).
Recommendation:
1.
Well requires stimulation with uniform coverage. Hole would need to be proved before
attempting stimulation.
Well: WA-7Zh
Well came up on production in 9/01 in A1 layer.

Lateral length = 528m, Hole size= 6", Completion: openhole
10
Observation:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Well came up with QI of 1200 blpd, but after 3 months of production, Ql fell to ~ 400 blpd & is
presently ~ 320 blpd.
Initially, w/c was 30% and has gradually increased to the present level.
Stimulation job (Arcasolve) was attempted in 2/03. CTU could only reach 87m out of 528m
lateral length. It is reported that 90 bbl of Arcasolve was pumped through CTU. Obviously, it did
not give uniform coverage because of CT reach problem. Job resulted in marginal improvement.
Although water injection in WA-5 has been restricted of late (755 bwpd as on 2/03), it is
suspected that it is affecting this well probably through a high permeability streak.
This area is not having very high potential, but should be better than the area of WA-3zH (based
on w/c and initial testing data).
Recommendations:
1.
2.
Stimulation to be retried with larger CT, ensuring uniform coverage of lateral. If it also has reach
problem, that may indicate formation debris which would require hole proving.
When the W/C situation worsens, this well may be a candidate for water source diagnosis. This
would require proved hole (this step would be worth, if there is appreciable increase in
production after stimulation as per the first measure).
Well: W16-P3zH
Well came on production in 2/01 in A1 layer. (after S/T)

Lateral length = 516m, Hole size = 6", Well completed with combination of 3 1/2" perf (252m) &
non-perforated (309m) tubings to 2193m (near the toe).
Observations:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Well initially produced rv920 blpd. It was on S/F for the first few months and when it was put on
GL (in 9/01), QI was 680 BLPD. Thereafter, it came down to 500 BLPD.
Blind tubing had to be put against more thai1 half of the lateral length, which indicates poor
reservoir facies.
Looking at the tight area (graben, where even the injectivity in injectors WI6-1 & 2zH is very low
at 300-400 BWPD) & only 252m of perforated tubing length, the present production appears
reasonable.
No pressure data.
Recommendation:
1.
2.
Ok.
P- T survey can be done to rule out GLV leak.
Well: W16-P4H

Lateral length = 1011m, Hole size= 8 1/2", Completion: Openhole
11
bservations:
1.
2.
3.
Well started with QI of 1500 blpd & the production had been mostly in the range of 1200-1700
blpd.
Pressure (as measured in Oct, 2001) is quite high (~1688 psi).
The fact that the well is placed out of the graben area towards south, where reservoir properties
are relatively better, explain its better performance, as compared to WI6-P3zH.
Recommendation:
1.
Ok.
Well: IU-7Zh

Test 6/03 :QI = 893 BLPD, W/c = 0.4%, Cum. Oil = 0.2 MMbbl
Lateral length =921m, hole size=6", Completion: combination of non-perforated tubing (upto
2428m) and then open hole (upto 3140m).
Observations:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Short drift side tracked in 7/02, because of low liquid influx.

Except for initial flush production of 1600 blpd, it is generally producing in the range of 800-1000
blpd.
Pressures are lower in IU area (IU-8 : 868 psi, IU-3 : 881 psi & IU-1 : 733 psi).
The area around IU-7zH appears to have less transmissibility (as per build up data of IU- 9H,
K=20md, KH=329 md.ft) which could be the reason for less injection support & low pressure
(even though the influx study of IU- 7zH showed pressure of 1652 psi).
As per Influx study of 7/02, contributing length is 196m (i.e. 21% of the lateral length and 27.5%
of the open hole length).
Comparing the performance of this well vis-a-vis IU-2zH, during self flow, it appears that there
could be a possibility of formation damage in IU-7zH (IU-2zH had higher FTHP for higher
rates).
Nearby injector IU-S (injection started in 7/97 with rates of 2000-3000 BWPD, but injection
stopped in end-1999 and resumed in 5/01) in A1 is influencing mostly IU-6 (also in A1) in
southern direction and is not affecting this well.
Recommendations:
1.
2.
3.
Ok at present.
B/up studies to ascertain reservoir properties & formation damage.
It would be desirable to enhance pressure support to this well before attempting any treatment
based on build up study results.
Well: IU-2zH

Test 6/03 : QI = 1296 BLPD, W/c = 2%, Cum. Oil = 0.19 MMbbl, Well on S/F (FTHP=263 psi). .
Lateral length =903m, Hole size =6", well completed with combination of 3 1/2" perforated and
non-perf tubings (upto toe).
12
Observations:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
The liquid rate has been in the range of 1000-1200 blpd.

Well was side tracked in 9/02, due to low QI.
Since the reservoir pressure recorded in nearby IU-8 & IU-1 area in the range of 700-50 psi and
w/c is negligible in all nearby wells (i.e. IU-1, 2zH & 8), the reservoir pressure in IU-2zH is also
expected to be low (in the above mentioned range). This is in spite of the nearby injector IU-5,
which is affecting only IU-6 (65% w/c) and IU-1zH (24% w/c). In another nearby inj WI7-1
(opened in A1 & other layers), injectivity was reported to be nil.
The low reservoir pressure and the high FTHP (well being on self flow) indicates that there is no
damage in the well.
Compared to the nearby conventional wells (which are on GL, FTHP ~250 psi), QI of IU-2zH is
almost double.
Recommendation:
1.
2.
Well is Ok for the present.

Area requires urgent additional pressure support.
Well: IU-1zH

Test 6/03 : QI = 1249 BLPD, W/c =24%, Cum. Oil = 0.09 MMbbl
Lateral length = 1001m, Hole size =6", well completed with combination of 3 1/2" perforated and
non-perf tubings (upto 2741m) and then openhole (upto 3592m).
Observations:
1.
2.
3.
The liquid rate has been in the range of 1000-1200 blpd.

Well sidetracked in /02, after getting high w/c (hit by IU-5 injector, as IU-6 was hit first) and
poor rate (200 bpd).
The w/c has been steadily increasing in this well (15% in 3/03 & 24% in 6/03). Water appears to
be injection water from IU-5.
Recommendation:
1.
Well is Ok for the present.
Well: IQ-9H

Lateral length = 159m, Hole size =6", Completion: Openhole
Observations:
1.
In the first month of production itself, production declined from 3400 blpd to 1700 blpd.
Thereafter, QI was in the range of 1500-1600 bpd, and it had rapidly declined to < 1000 BLPD
within 1 year and has further declined to the present level of ",700 BLPD. This could be due to
pressure depletion resulting in quick IPR degradation (covered in Chapter-3) along with the fact
that the lateral length is too short.
13
2.
3.
4.
As per Build up study of 2/00 & 3/00, the contributing length was 190m (i.e. 112% of lateral
length) and 110m (i.e. 69% of lateral length). The effective permeability had come down from
129md to 95md.
No openhole log is available.
Stimulation treatment (Arcasolve -insitu acid generation system) was carried out recently on
25/4/03 by bulldozing and there was a marginal increase in oil production.
Recommendation:
1.
Ok at present.
Well: IQ-8Zh
Well came on production in 7/02 in Al layer.

Lateral length =650m, Hole size= 6", well completed with combination of 3 1/2" perforated
(548m) & non perforated tubing.
Observations:
1.
2.
3.
4.
W/c has risen from ~ 40% in 8/02 to present level of ~ 55-60%.

It appears that this well is being hit by injection water from WI-7 injectors (especially WI7-3).
IS-IU-IQ area is in general a low pressure area, pressure varying between 900- 1100 psi. However,
in -IQ-1, which is closer to WI-7 injectors, has a higher pressure (1223 psi). As the row of
producers (IQ-1, 7, 8zH) have higher w/c (50- 60%), as compared to other IQ wells (w/c 25%), it
probably indicates better support to these wells from WI-7 injectors.
Nearby injector iQ-5 injecting in Ai may not be affecting iQ-8zH, rather may be moving towards
west (IQ-3, 4 area).
Recommendation:
1.
2.
Ok.
Monitor w/c in this well. If it rises too fast, water injection in nearby WI- 7 injectors (esp W173SS) would need to be regulated. If needed, water injection quantity in some other injectors (e.g.
IQ-5) can be increased to compensate for reduction in water injection volumes from WI-7
injector(s).
Well: ZA7H
Well came on production in 9/02 in Ai layer.

Lateral length = 989m, Hole size= 8 1/2", Completion: Openhoe (2214-3203m)
Observations:
1.
2.
QI had been initially in the range of 1300-1500 blpd, and has gradually declined to the present
level (gaslift started in 1/03).
Though the well has a high openhole length, the lower level of production (even initially), as
compared to ZA-8H & 9H indicates that either reservoir properties are poor (well on extreme
west) or there may be possibility of formation damage.
14
Recommendations:
1.
2.
Ok at present.
Build up study to ascertain reservoir permeability / formation damage.
Well: ZA-8H

Test 6/03 : QI = 2392 BLPD, W/C = 42%, Cum. Oil = 0.26 MMbbl
Lateral length = 705m, Hole size= 8 1/2'!, Completion: Open hole (1845-2550m).
Observations:
1.
2.
3.
As per Qh & Jh/Js calculations, production is in line with well potential.

QI has shown a gradual declining trend (from >2500 to 1900 BLPD), before start of GL recently.
The well is close to ZA-9H, which is producing with high w/c (80%) due to injection water from
WI-8 injectors.
Recommendation:
1.
Well is Ok.
Well: ZA-4H

Test 6/03 : QI = 1094 BLPD, W/c =0.4%, Cum. Oil = 0.05 MMbbl
Lateral length = 701 m, Hole size= 6", Completion: 3-1/2" perforated and clank tubing upto
2350m and open-hole upto 2611m
Recommendations:
1.
Ok
Well: ZA-5H

Test 6/03 : QI = 1411 BLPD, W/c =0.2%, Cum. Oil = 0.22 MMbbl
Lateral length =1101m, Hole size= 8 1/2", Completion: Open hole
Observations:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
QI has been consistently in the range of "'1500 BLPD.

As per Qh & Jh/Js (vis-a-vis conv. well WB-7), the potential of the well comes to 1700-1800 BLPD,
which is in line with the present production.
Though the lateral length is quite high, production level is much lower (as compared to ZA-8H,
9H). This indicates the well may be in an area of relatively poor reservoir properties
(permeability from build up is 47 md).
The contributing length is only 319m (i.e. 29% of the lateral length).
Less pressure drawdown (~150 psi) also indicates no formation damage.
The pressure (presently 1775 psi) is on the higher side, compared to IU-IQ platform. However,
ZA area would require pressure support in near future, to get sustained production.
15
Recommendation:
1.
Ok well.
Well: ZA-9H
Well came up on production in 7/02 in A1layer.

Test 5/03 :QI = 1797 BLPD, W/c = 80%, Cum. Oil = 0.28 MMbbl
Lateral length = 805m, Hole size= 8 1/2", Well completed with combination of 7" slotted &
blinded liner upto 2400m & then open hole upto 2910m.
Observations:
1.
2.
3.
While drilling this well, because of diminishing fluoresecene & approaching water injector area,
the well was terminated at 2910m.
From the fast rise in w/c and the present level of w/c, it is inferred that injection water from WI8 p/f injectors (e.g. WI8-6 & 3) has gone towards west of WI-8 p/f (as per PLT of WI8-6 injector
in 1987, 67% water was going in A1). Also, there appears to be a more heterogeneous path from
the W18 injectors to ZA-9H, which may have resulted in rapid increase in w/c. The fact that this
well has gone towards high water saturation area explains the rapid increase in w/c (there is a
low resistivity patch in interval 249G-2530m, which falls in the open hole section).
Well taken up for sidetracking.
Recommendations:
No recommendation.
Well: ZA-3H

Test 6/03 : QI =1366 BLPD, W/c =5%, Cum. Oil =0.41 MMbbl, FTHP=441 psi, choke= 48/64" on
GL
Lateral length =699m, Hole size= 8 1/2", Completion: Openhole (2003-2782m).
Observations:
1.
2.
3.
4.
The well started with a flush production of ~ 2300 blpd, thereafter production gradually declined
to the present level.
There is no pressure recording in this well, but nearby well ZA-5H has a pressure of ~ 1775 psi
(at datum).
The decline in production could be indicative of reservoir pressure decline.
Calculated Qh comes to 1400 bbl/d, considering pressure drawdown of 150 psi (as in ZA-5H).
Recommendation:
1.
Ok for the present.
Well: WB-3zH
16
Lateral length =500m, Hole size=6", Completion: openhole.
Observations:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Initial production was ~ 2200 BLPD and then production has steadily declined to the present
level.
W/c had suddenly shot up (from <5% to >20%) in 10/02, apparently, injection water had hit
from WB-4zH injector (injection started in 6/02). W/c of nearby well WB-12H, which is closer to
the same injector increased in 7/02 (& is currently at 48%), WB-7, which is in between W8-12H &
WB-3zH, had seen a w/c rise since 9/02 (present w/c is 48%).
FBHP recorded in this well in 9/02 is ~ 650 psi. This low flowing pressure is also indicated by
higher gas injection in the well (~ 75000 m3/d in 1/03, as against 40000-60000 m3/d in other WB
wells.) This higher pressure drawdown may be indicative of either lower permeability or
formation damage.
MAJ done in 11/02 resulted in temporary increase in liquid rate (by ~ 200 blpd) but that in 2/03
did not help.
Nearby producers WB-12H & WB-4zH (producer till 5/02) has low pressure (1530 psi in 7/01 in
WB-12H & 1267 psi in 12/01 in WB-4zH). So, it is expected that pressure in the well WB-3zH is
in the same range.
Another injector WB-9 (where injection started in 3/02) is closed since 8/02.
Among WB producers, WB-3zH has the second highest oil production rate.
Recommendations:
1.
2.
3.
Ok for the present.

Later when production falls further, Build-up study to ascertain formation damage/ reservoir
permeability. Alternatively, attempt hole cleaning and flowing gradient measurement.
If formation damage exists, CT based stimulation treatment can be planned, ensuring complete
coverage of lateral
Well: WB-8Zh
Well came on production in 7/01 in A1/ayer.

Lateral length =550m, Hole size= 6", well completed with combination of 3 1/2" perforated and
non-perf tubings in lateral.
Observations:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Initially, QI was ~1200 blpd, which declined to ~ 800 blpd & in 6/02 again started to
increase(however, there was no increase in Qo). This was because of water breakthrough from
nearby injector.
Initially, well showed w/c of 20%, which is due to injection from WI-9 injectors (mainly WI9-255,
455). W/c has steadily increased, especially after 3/02 (which coincides with the start of water
injection in WB-9, followed by start of injection in WB-4zH in 6/02). As WB-9 is presently closed,
most of the present water is suspected to come from WB-4zH.
Pressure in this well (in 7/01) was ~ 1940 psi, which also indicates injection water presence. The
present pressure is ~ 1500 psi (static gradient in 5/03).
Although the performance of this well was initially good, the area around this well & WB-1 is
not promising.
17
Recommendations:
1.
2.
Low priority well for rig-based zonal isolation or side track.

Carry out diagnostic intervention in nearby injector WB-4zH to identify high water intake
intervals for isolation.
Well: WB-10H

Lateral length = 500m, Hole size= 6", Completion: Openhole
Observations:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
QI had been in the range of 1500-2000 blpd for a long time. The absence of production decline
could be attributed to high permeability (240md as per build up study of 7/01)
MAJ done in 2/03, and QI increased from -1700 to -2100 blpd, but after recent MAJ in 6/03, QI
went down from -1500 (in 5/03 testing) to -900 blpd. This could be due to sludge formation.
Water cut was negligible upto 6/02, then it suddenly shot up to ~ 60% in 2-3 months time, which
could be due to injection water from WB-9. As injection in WB-9 is closed since 8/02, water cut
has been falling in WB-10H.
The present pressure is 1083 psi (static gradient in 5/03).
The prod rate is in line with Jh/Js calculations, in comparison to table 3.1)
The contributing length is 290.5m (i.e. 58% of the lateral length).
Recommendation:
1.
Solvent treatment may be done to remove the sludge.
WellL WB-11H

Lateral length = 405m, Hole size=8 1/211, Completion: Openhole
Observation:
1.
2.
3.
4.
QI was initially ~ 1800 blpd, which gradually increased to the level of 3000 by mid 2002.
Well had ~ 40% w/c in the beginning. W/c gradually increased to ~ 90% by early 2002. The
source of water is injection water from WI-9 platform injectors (e.g. W19-2SS, which is open only
in AI). Nearby well WB-2 & 9 had 56% & 92% w/c respectively in 12/00 (presently 84% w/c in
WB-2, WB-9 converted to injector).
Though permeability inferred from influx study (32 md) is lower than that of WB-10H (240md, as
per Build up study), the production rate of WB-11H has been mostly higher than that of WB-I0H.
This indicates either permeability of WB-11H is higher than reported or it has more
heterogeneity in term of high permeability path.
Reservoir pressure (as per static gradient in 5/03) is ~ 1870 psi.
Recommendations:
1.
Reduce/ regulate water injection in WI9-2SS & 455 and monitor its effect on the w/c of WB-l1H
(and also WB-8H).
18
2.
If w/c doesn't decrease as a result of the above' measure, carry out diagnostic intervention in
WB-11H, to identify water producing interval(s) & isolate them.
Well: WB-12H
Well came on production in 1/01 in Al layer.

Test 5/03: QI = 1144 BLPD, W/c = 63%, Cum. Oil = 0.71 MMbbl
Lateral length = 501m, Hole size= 8 1/2", Well completed with combination of 7" blank and
slotted (1750-1925m, 2000-2250m) liner (upto toe).
Observations:
1.
2.
3.
4.
QI was initially ~1500 blpd, but gradually declined to ~ 700 blpd (in mid 2002), after which it shot
up to ~ 1400 blpd, and thereafter has been in the range of 1200-1400 blpd.
W/c was low (<20%) till 6/02, after which it suddenly jumped to ~ 50% (well has been hit by
injection water from nearby WB-4H, where injection started in 6/02) and has gradually increased
to the present level.
Acid job done on 2/6/03.
The reservoir pressure as recorded in 7/01 (build-up study) is ~ 1530 psi and is much lower as
compared to other nearby horizontal wells. There is no pressure recording after water injection
started in WB-4zH.
Recommendations:
1.
2.
Regulate injection quantity in WB-4zH and see the effect on nearby producers (WB-12H, 8H &
3zH).
If there is no substantial reduction in w/c of WB-12H, as a result of the above measure, carry out
diagnostic intervention in WB-4zH, to identify high water intake intervals for subsequent
isolation.
Well: EE-7H
Well came on production in 11/01 in C layer.

Test 6/03 : QI = 2219 BLPD, W/c = 83%, Cum. Oil =0.17 MMbbl
Lateral length = 599m, hole slze = 6", Well completed with combination of 3 1/2" perforated
(2100-65m, 2248-2304m,. 2443-2630m) & non-perforated, tubing upto toe.
Observations:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Well produced with 88% water from C layer during initial testing. Additional perf (1963-88m) in
B during immediate WOJ & recompletion.
While drilling the well, C layer top has come 12m below expected TVD, so OWC may be well
within C layer. Also, the vertical deviation of the lateral is comparatively very high (10m). From
the above, it is inferred that part of lateral has intercepted water leg in C. This is also supported
by the fact that produced water analysis (in 3/02) shows mostly formation water.
When the well was tested in C only, salinity of water was 19000 ppm, while after B was also
perforated, salinity was found to be ~ 29000 ppm. Although, injection water breakthrough has
occurred in B (based on salinity), B still has reasonable oil potential.
C layer was not plugged before perforating B.
Nearby producer EE-6 (in B, C) has 32% w/c.
19
Recommendations:
1.
2.
Diagnostic intervention in the lateral may be worthwhile, to identify source of water for deciding
upon isolation possibilities.
Till diagnostics is not carried out in this well, consider isolating lateral with cement plug (rigless
with CT), and produce from B.
Well: EE-8H

Test 6/03 : QI = 1737 BLPD, W/c = 79%, GOR=469 vivo Cum. Oil = 0.15 MMbbl
Lateral length = 447m, Hole size= 6", Completion: Open hole
Observations:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
QI has been mostly in the range of 1800-2000 blpd.

W/c has been 70% since beginning and very soon crossed 80%.
Well production is in tune with calculated Qh.
This well has been affected by nearby injector SH-l (which had a good intake in C layer, apart
from B). Nearby producer EE-4 (in B,C) started cutting water in 1989-90, and water had come
from both B & C layers. Presently, this well has 70% w/c and most of the water is from C (as per
PLT of 2/01).
Produced water analysis of this well (3/02) indicates more of formation - water, as the initial oil
saturation in this area is very low (25-300jo). Also the vertical deviation of lateral is 5m.
Formation GOR & injection gas quantity (91000 m3/d) are very high. High formation GOR could
be due to expansion of nearby gas cap.
Recommendations:
1.
2.
Low priority well (in present location).

Depending on the success of diagnostic & isolation attempts in EE-7H, similar jobs could be
planned for this well too.
Well: EE-9H

Well closed (temporarily abandoned) due to radioactive fish. Cum. Oil = 0.13 MMbbl
Lateral length = 740m, Hole size= 6", Well completed with combination of 3 V2" blind (1935-61m,
70-88m, 2418-2526m) & perforated tubing (1961-70m, 1988-2418m) and 150 m open hole.
Observation:
1.
2.
3.
Though initial QI was ~ 870 blpd, the rate has been mostly in the range of 500- 600 blpd, except
during the period 4/02- 7/02, when it was ~1000 blpd.
Initially, well was completed open hole, but well ceased to flow after 20 days. CT job (hole
proving) was carried out and well flowed with 60% oil. WOJ carried out in 12/01 and well
recompleted with 3 1/2" perforated & non perforated tubing.
W/c has been in the range of 50-60%, since beginning. Produced water analysis (in 3/02)
indicates produced water is more of injection water. In nearby injector EE-1 (in B, C), injection
started in 6/01, and presently 10000 BWPD is being injected.
20
4.
5.
The properties of B & C are poor eastwards of EE p/f (as evident from the performance of EE-2z
(though 19m perfs in C, QI was < 100 BPD, mainly water and B was gas bearing). Northwards,
i.e. towards EE-3, the L-III layer is not promising.
Recently (in 4/03), well was taken up for workover, for isolating C by cement plug and opening
B layer. But after putting cement plug at 1915m and drilling 6" hole in B (1861.5-1966m), while
doing LWD, the tool got stuck up (length 147m with top at 1800m). Later the drillpipe also got
stuck. As no activity can be pursued in the well and its vicinity (as per BARC), the well has been
temporarily abandoned.
Recommendations:
No recommendation.
Well: S1-6-6H:

Test 6/03 : QI =1478 BLPD, W/c =nil, well on 5/F (590 v/v GaR, FTHP=512 psi, 56/64" choke).
Cum. Oil = 0.66 MMbbl
Lateral length = 705m, Hole size= 6", Completion: 3 '/2" non-perf tubing (1778-1880m) and open
hole thereafter.
Observations:
1.
2.
3.
4.
QI was initially ~ 2100 blpd, which fell sharply to ~ 1000 blpd within 2 months (i.e. 2/02). Then
by 4/02, QI again improved to the range of 1500-1700 bbl/d.
High GOR seems to be due to pressure depletion in B layer, as evident from GOR of nearby 1M
wells (#2, 6 & 5), whose GOR is in range of 50G-800 v/v. In nearby injector IM-9 (55 in A2-VI, VII,
B) only 5% intake was there (as per PLT of 1999), whereas in IM-7, B intake was ~ 27% only. This
inadequate injection support may be the reason of this pressure depletion.
Nearby injector EE-1 is taking ~ 10000 bwpd in B & C (injection profile not known).
No pressure data record.
Recommendations:
1.
2.
Ok well.
Injection support to B layer should be improved to control pressure depletion, through EE-1 (PL
T may be taken) IM-9 & 7.
Well: S1-6-5H

Test 7/03 : QI = 887 BLPD, W/c = 43%, FTHP=455 psi, GOR=775 v/v. Cum. Oil = 0.54 MMbbl
Lateral length = 278m, Hole size= 6", Well completed with 3 1/2" non-perf & perf (2024- 2053m)
tubings and then open hole upto 2295m.
Observations:
1.
2.
QI initially was in the range of 1300-1600 blpd.

W/c was nil/ negligible till 11/02, when it rapidly increased to ~ 40% (may be as a result of MAJ
in 10/02).
21
3.
4.
5.
The water could be from nearby injector EE-1 (in B, C), which is on injection since 5101, but there
are more chances of water being from OWC below C (the path could -have opened up,
consequent to MAJ in 10102). The lateral is vertically only 3m above C bottom.
The well log (thru LWD) showed good properties upto ~ 2150m only (i.e. initial 40% of lateral).
So, an attempt to isolate segment of lateral in this section may have a direct bearing on
productivity.
No BHS data recorded in this well.
Recommendation:
1.
Ok for the present.
Well: S1-6-P1H

Test 6/03 : QI = 1093 BLPD, W/c =nil, Well on S/F (GOR=1555 v/v, 56/64" choke). Cum. Oil =
1.28 MMbbl
Lateral length = 703m, Hole size=6", Completion: openhole
Observation:
1.
2.
3.
4.
QI initially was 1500-1600 BLPD, gradually declining to 1200-1400 BLPD & finally to the present
level. There was an appreciable decline in 8/02 (from ~1300 to 1100 BLPD) accompanied by
increase in GOR (400 to ~ 600 v/v).
QI is as per theoretical Qh calculations.
Well is producing with high GOR. In nearby well 51-6-3 (completed in B, C), GOC is in A2-VII
bottom. S1-6-P1H is structurally above (B layer has gas) S1-6-3.
The initial pressure (as per 5/00 buildup) in this well was 1737 psi. Since the pressure trend
thereafter is not available and due to the fact that injection water from nearby injector (e.g. EE-1)
has not hit this well. So gas production due to pressure depletion can't be ruled out.
Recommendations:
1.
2.
3.
Ok at present.
When Qo falls to <500 bpd, attempt PLT to diagnose gas producing intervals & isolate them (in
case of gas cusping/ high permeability streak).
In case pressure depletion is found to be the reason for gas, 51-6-3 may be planned for conversion
to injector (in original location or after 5T in the same quadrant), after its production falls below
economic limit.
Well: ED-8H
Well came on production in 9/02 in B-layer.

Test 6/03 : QI =1277 BLPD, W/c = 55%, Qgf =238356 m3/d (FTHP-569 psi, GOR=2609 v/v), well
on GL. Cum. Oil = 0.17 MMbbl
Lateral length = 425m, Hole size= 6", Well completed with combination of 3 1/2" perf (23172257m, 2376-2542m) & non-perforated tubing.
Observations:
1.
QI initially was ~ 2500 blpd and has steadily declined to the present level. This is due to choking
back the well (2248 blpd with free choke & GL in 10/01). Due to rising GOR, GL discontinued.
22
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
W/c was ~ 30-40% since beginning.

If its location ,is same as ED-FH (which is in between ED-1 & 2), it explains the w/c. Nearby well
ED-1 (in B) has 43% w/c, while ED-2 (in B, C) has w/c of 85% (B main water contributor, as per
PLT of 8/00).
Nearest injector is SH-2i (in B & C), which had the max. intake in B (as per PLT of 10/89).
AII ED wells have high GOR. The reason for this in most of the conventional wells is gas
channeling from GOC in A2-VII, as seen in ED- 7z, ED-5z & ED-4 (PLT of 7/02 in all these wells).
In ED-I (in B) also, channeling of gas is likely reason for high gas production, despite repeated
cement squeeze jobs at A2- VII bottom (GOC in A2-VII).
Since this well has gone towards EE-1, where L-III is not promising, the petrophysical properties
in this well may not be very good.
No pressure data in this well or nearby wells.
Recommendations:
1.
2.
Keep rate restricted in view of high GOR.

In future, with further decline in production (further increase in GOR), PLT & subsequent
intervention for isolation (after pulling out the 3 1/2" tubing from the lateral) may be attempted.
Well: ED-6H

Test 4/03 : QI = 786 BLPD, W/c = 1%, GOR= 1544 v/v, well on S/F (FTHP- 782 psi, 48/64"
choke). Cum. Oil= 0.27 MMbbl
Lateral length =699m, Hole size=6", well completed with combination of 3 1/2" blind and
perforated tubings.
Observations:
1.
2.
GOR is on the higher side.

Production is restricted, in view of high GOR.
Recommendation:
1.
Ok well.
Well: SS-9H
Well came on production in 1/03 in A2-VII layer.

Test 4/03 : QI = 1474 BLPD, W/c = 29%, FTHP=341 psi (well on GL). Cum. Oil = 0.09 MMbbl.
Lateral length =700m, hole size= 6", Completion: combination of 3 1/2" blind and perforated
tubings.
Recommendations:
1.
Ok.
3.0 HORIZONTAL WELL POTENTIAL
Horizontal wells have been drilled in Mumbai High L-III reservoir particularly for accessing the bypassed oil in heterogeneous thin limestone layers. In view of increased drainage area horizontal wells
should provide greater productivity than vertical wells. Generally, the horizontal wells in Mumbai high
23
L-III reservoir have outperformed the vertical wells in terms of oil production rate but in some cases the
optimum potential/productivity for the wells has not been achieved.
The potential for a horizontal well has been worked out and using available draw down data the
theoretical Qh of a well has been calculated. This theoretical Qh value is greatly dependant upon and
extremely sensitive to pressure data and is thus indicative only. For the calculation of Jh, the
permeability (k) and transmissibility (Kh) value which have a significant impact on the results have been
taken from build-up studies/influx studies in the wells. In case of wells having no build up/influx stduy
data, the k of neighboring vertical/horizontal well has been considered. The ratio of vertical to
horizontal permeability has been assumed to be 0.11 though it may be on conservative side in some of
the cases.
Also the ratio of PI of horizontal wells to that of conventional wells (Jh/Js ratio) has been calculated.
Based on this and normalized drawdown, Qvog values have been estimated vis-a-vis neighbouring
conventional wells.
As the above calculations are extremely sensitive to accurate permeability and drawdown data out of a
total 45 horizontal wells studied in Mumbai high L-III, theoretical Qh (based on Jh and Jh/Js) could be
ascertained and compared with actual QI in only 16 wells as detailed in the Table 3.1 below:
Table 3.1: Actual rate vs. Calculated rates
Well
N2-9H
N2-10H
N3-7H
N3-8H
ND-6H
LC-10AH
LC-11H
IU-7zH
IQ-9H
ZA-8H
ZA-5H
WB-10H
WB-11H
EE-7H
EE-8H
S16-91H
Actual Q1
(BPD)
Dt of
testing
2184
3384
2161
3165
1545
1264
1264
1495
3158
1446
1010
1733
825
2762
1089
1487
4/02
4/02
10/02
10/02
11/00
10/02
10/02
7/02
2/00
11/02
10/02
7/01
7/01
5/02
12/01
5/00
Pressure
drawdown
(psi)
116
234
399
443
635
147
640
175
397
150
150
176
339
374
212
97
Qh* (BPD)
Qvog ***
(BPD)
Jh/Js
2656
6932
n.c.
n.c
1131
n.c
913
n.c.
2582
1432
1884
3884
913
2206
1571
1072
530
4407
2640
3976
1721
1303
3849
1324
1897
1369
1776
1389
n.c
2729
1393
Not cal
4.87
5.09
3.93
5.43
3.7
4.28
3.36
4.95
2.39
4.95
6.45
4.34
3.93
4.64
3.97
4.95
* Qh is the theoretical rate as per Joshis method

** Qvog is the rate as per Vogel IPR with normalized drawdown & based on Jh/Js
The wells whose rate are not matching with the calculated potential have been discussed in the chapter
on Well-wise analysis.
While reviewing the performance of the horizontal wells in Mumbai High L-III reservoir, in many wells
(after excluding the initial flush production) a declining production trend upto the range of 20-30% of
initial production was observed within the first 6 months. As an example the performance, in terms of
24
average oil rate, of horizontal wells of N2 platform (N2-2zH, 9H & 10H) were compared with the
performance of the conventional wells of N2 platform, which have been completed in the A1 layer.
The plot reveals that the average oil rate in conventional wells has shown a gradual decline from around
1200-1100 bid to the level of 500 bid over a period of nearly 15 years. On the other hand, the average oil
rate in horizontal wells on the other hand has shown a sharp decline from over 3000 bid to nearly 1600
bid, i.e. a decline or nearly 50% in just one year.
In light of the above observation in Mumbai. High horizontal wells, an attempt has been made to find
the reasons for the same. Studies on inflow performance of horizontal wells show that IPR of horizontal
wells deteriorate rapidly with initial depletion when the recovery factor is between 0.1 % and 2%. In
other words, horizontal wells generally exhibit a rapid decrease of productivity index (PI) with depletion
and the rate or decline slows down later. The high initial flow rates are caused by the large contact area
between the well & reservoir and sharp initial pressure gradient. The rapid decrease in productivity is
witnessed because oil is depleted from near well region at a higher rate than it is replaced by oil from
outer region and is generally influenced by reservoir transmissibility
and extent of reservoir. IPR for horizontal wells operating under depletion drive based on study by
Bendakhalia & Aziz (refer SPE 19823) were drawn for well IQ-9H. In IQ-9H, test data were available for
3/00, 1 month after well came on production (i.e. 1% recovery factor) and 5/01 (i.e. 9% recovery factor).
Recovery factor is the ratio of cumulative oil production to oil in place, which is based on drainage area
of the horizontal well. As can be seen, in one year of production not only has the reservoir pressure
(SBHP) declined by more than 300 psi but with increasing recovery, the IPR of the well has also
degraded significantly (refer Fig. 3.2). By varying recovery factor (from 1% to 7%) IPRs have been drawn
for this well assuming the same SBHP as in 3/00. These curves (refer Fig. 3.3) show that at lower
depletion/ recovery factor between 1% to 5%, the productivity of the well declines rapidly. However at
later stages of depletion, the deterioration of IPRs slows down. Here it is worth mentioning that since
this well has a small drainage area (as lateral length is very small), the recovery factors are high, whereas
in other horizontal wells with longer laterals (and larger drainage area), the recovery factors would be
lesser and may be within the range where IPR would have a faster degradation.
In a case study of 82 horizontal wells operated by Elf-Aquitane, spanning more than 20 reservoirs in 13
different countries (SPE paper no.26618) horizontal wells on an average have produced 2-3 times more
than conventional ones, in initial stages, then declined more rapidly vis--vis conventional wells and
after some years of production, the production rates were of same order of as those of conventional
wells.
A case of Marmul field in Oman has also been discussed in SPE paper 39749 where the average
production rate from 20 horizontal wells have been compared with the average rate of 11 vertical wells.
Initially, though the horizontal wells produced nearly twice as much as the vertical wells, their rate of
decline was much faster and in 2 years the production from horizontal wells declined to nearly 30% of the
original rate .
Comparison of oil production rates from horizontal and vertical wells in the Marmul Field, Oman
The fall in productivity in horizontal wells can be attributed to various factors which include:1.
2.
3.
4.
Limited transmissibility
Finite reservoir size
Non uniform reservoir pressure distribution along the lateral length
Lateral heterogeneity in the reservoir, particularly along very long wells
25
5.
Local water humps and gas traps along the well bore -PLTs of horizontal wells worldwide have
indicated the formation of permanent water sumps due to crooked trajectory, regardless of
whether they produce water. In a case study, PLT run in an offshore horizontal well completed
with a slotted liner and ECPs in Australia (SPE 54326) clearly indicates the existence of water
sumps at low sections of the well which reduces the cross sectional area open to flow as shown
in Fig 3.5 below. Even though the TVD variation of trajectory is only 3-4m over a lateral length of
500m it has caused significant water sumps. This study so showed that there was no
hydrocarbon inflow into the liner at the toe portion of the well which contains a large sump of
completion fluid(mainly water). That is, the liner .had not got cleaned up in this section.
Apparently small downward shifts of approximately 1m in sections of the trajectory towards the
toe could be causing significant productivity impairment from these sections.
PL T results of a offshore horizontal well

When a large percentage of the wellbore cross section is filled with water reduced oil entry occurs which
causes loss in productivity and significant additional wellbore pressure drop. Through an integrated
approach using production logging measurement and productivity modeling in the horizontal wells of
the Middle East and North Sea field it was seen that water sumps in the horizontal well trajectory may
result in 30-50% productivity reduction in wells.
In the N2 platform, wells N2-9H and 10H have higher transmissibility (kh>3000 md-ft). However, the
trajectory of these well are snake-like, with a number of crests and troughs. Water/ gas hold-up in these
troughs/ crests, resulting in reduced cross section available for Row, may be instrumental in sharp
production decline of. horizontal wells of N2 platform as compared to conventional wells in .spite of
high transmissibility (kh).
Therefore, it is concluded that in general, high productivity to the tune of 2-3 times that of conventional
wells can not be expected in a horizontal well throughout its life. The PI of a horizontal well would
decline more rapidly than that of a conventional well, depending on pressure depletion, reservoir facies
characteristics and well trajectory.
4.0
FORMATION DAMAGE
Formation damage is a problem in horizontal wells, akin to the conventional wells. Drilling is a major
cause of formation damage in horizontal wells, primarily because the formation remains exposed to the
mud for a longer period. To restrict fluid loss in the formation, creation of filter cake is essential,
however, the same is a hindrance to the well productivity, if not cleaned up properly. Thus, effective
clean-up of mud cake is a pre-requisite for achieving a good well productivity.
In Mumbai High field, though in the recent years, formation damage during drilling has been reduced
by use of solids-free non-damaging fluid as drill in fluid (while drilling the lateral section), hole clean-up
remains an important issue. It has been observed in the lab that sea water with 2% KCI does not always
facilitate effective clean up of the mud cake. Recently, IOGPT has worked on some clean up formulations
(refer IOGPT report titled "Mudcake removal from horizontal well and drainholes" issued in 2001-02)
and procurement is in progress.
Fig. 4.1 & 4.2 illustrate the effects of classical drilling induced formation damage -by mud filtrate
invasion & mud cake. The damage due to mud filtrate invasion is not very significant in case of a
horizontal well, as the well could tolerate moderate levels of damage without sacrificing productivity,
due to the large inflow area exposed. However, productivity is more dependant on the extent of mud
cake present. With the mud cake intact, productivity is nil. As mud cake removal opens more and more
26
holes in the filter cake along the length of the lateral, productivity begins improving slowly (as seen in
Fig. 4.2). From 0.01% mud cake removal to 0.01% mud cake removal, the wells production improves by
~ 800%. With higher order of mud cake removal, there is negligible improvement. This indicates that a
well even 1% mud cake removal can have productivity close to the max, potential. It has been found
(refer SPE paper no. 49097) that 1% mud cake removal (over the entire lateral length) is equivalent to 12
spt (0.75 diameter) perforations in 9 5/8 casing and 10% mud cake removal (over the entire lateral
length) is equivalent to 105 spf (0.75 diameter) perforations in 9 5/8 casing. Though it is practically
impossible to quantity the extent to mud cake removal, from the above it is evident that only partial clean
up of mud cake along the entire length of the lateral is sufficient to attain wells optimum productivity.
Though the paper describes sandstone reservoir, the same principle is applicable for limestone reservoir
too, notwithstanding the effect of secondary permeability (due to solution channel, vugs, cavities, etc.) on
prodution.
Fig 4.2 : Effect of mud cake on horizontal well performance
Well stimulation helps in removing damage due to mud filtrate invasion, as well as, mud cake
deposition. In Mumbai High field, matrix acid jobs, based on HCI, have been attempted in some of the
horizontal wells, which had been drilled some years ago. The results of such jobs, in term of sustained oil
production, were not found to be satisfactory. On the contrary, it could have been damaging to the well
productivity, as could be the case with well WA-8H, where concurrent with declining production,
repeated acid jobs have been attempted, leading to a strong possibility of debris formation in the
openhole section due to release of carbonates/ fines. The well had faced CT reach problems during the
later acid job attempts, which could have been caused by the build up of debris.
As an improvising measure, application of in-situ acid generation system (Arcasolve) has been
attempted in some of the horizontal wells, many of them completed in Al layer. In Feb. 2003, Arcasolve
job was done in 2 wells of WA platform -WA-7H & WA-9H (ML). In the former, CT could no go beyond
80m in the lateral & treatment had to be done practically by bulldozing, thus limiting the uniform
coverage of lateral. There was only a marginal increase in oil production. In WA-9H(ML), CT went upto
420m and treatment was carried out, but it's not confirmed which lateral the CT went in. As there was a
marginal increase in oil production, it is suspected that the CT went in the 'first' lateral, which is not in
good "reservoir facies" area. Later, Arcasolve- job was attempted in 4 more wells IQ-9H, ED-8H, 5N-8H
& 1B- 7H. However, these jobs were done without use of CT, by bulldozing-and only marginal
improvements were reported.
It is felt that the stimulation job using CT would be more effective (instead of bulldozing), as it would
enable placement of treatment chemicals uniformly in the lateral, for complete coverage. It would be
prudent to simulate CT operation before job execution (Maurer Engg's "CTDrag" and CTES's "Cerberus"
are some of the software available). The issues of CT reach, advantages & constraints of using 1 1/2" CT
vis--vis 1 1/4" CT are covered in Chapter 6. Since sludge formation is a problem with higher viscosity
crude, acid based stimulation jobs in wells completed in Al layer should include use of anti-sludge agent.
Also, use of multi-arm caliper logs can be planned to identify points of washouts, which can be avoided
during subsequent acid jobs, allowing a higher coverage of lateral.
Presently, all the new horizontal wells are activated by using surge plugs, which by virtue of the limited
chamber size, may not be creating sufficient drawdown for the lateral section away from the heel. In case
of laterals in known/ suspected "poor reservoir facies" areas, a desirable practice may be treatment of the
wells with in-situ acid generation system, just after drilling & before completing the well (i.e. drilling
mud in the lateral section be displaced with brine and brine, in turn, is displaced with in-situ acid
generation system). It would however require a guarantee from the manufacturer that the acid will be
27
generated not before 12 hours of placing the treatment solution in the lateral, by which time, the
completion string would be run in and well completed.
5.0 WELL COMPLETION & FUTURE OPTIONS
Well completion is a key aspect in formulating the overall strategy for production from horizontal wells.
Presently, three types of horizontal well completions are used world-wide:
open hole
slotted liner (with or without ECP)
cased, cemented and perforated
The merits and demerits of these options and well completions adopted in Mumbai High L-III reservoir
are discussed below:
A)
Open-hole completions
Open-hole completion has several advantages:
it is by far the least expensive alternative

as no equipment is associated with open-hole completion, there is little potential for mechanical
problem after the well is drilled.
it allows any other completion method to be used later.
it is least restrictive to production. All the reservoir exposed through drilling is free to contribute
to the borehole. The only pressure drop is that of the fluid flow through\the borehole.
The disadvantages of an open-hole completion are:
High cost and associated risk of remedial operations to isolate sections of the well-bore for
testing, stimulation or water/gas shut-off
Borehole failure caused by hole instability, which again is a function of well-bore stresses and
rock properties.
Gas-flow is typically a problem when the well is shut-in.
Mumbai High a carbonate reservoir, has a relatively low Poison's ratio and high Young's modulus so the
borehole should be stable, except for cases of laterals entering the shale section which are susceptible t-o
collapse.
In Mumbai High, of the 45 horizontal wells studied (15 in Mumbai High North & 30 in Mumbai High
South), 21 wells (48%) are completed open hole (6" or 8-1/2" hole) as shown in Table 5.1 below:
Table 5.1: Openhole completion in Mumbai High
Mumbai High North
Well No
OH section
Hole size
NE-1zH
543m
6"
Avg Initial Liq Prodn

(BLPD)*
1721
LD-11H
503m
6"
906
28
W14-6H
N8-10H
N1-6H
ND-6H
W14-5H
700m
232m (3-1/2 blind
tubing in first 15m)
418m
403m
500m
6
6
504
272
8
8
8
2256
1059
120
Mumbai High South

Well No
OH section
Hole size
WA-3zH
531m
6"
WA-8H
WA-7zH
WB-10H
WB-3zH
EE-8H
IQ-9H
400m
528m
500m
500m
447m
159m
6"
6"
6"
6"
6"
6"
S1-6-P1H
ZA-3H
ZA-5H
ZA-7H
ZA-8H
WB-11H
703m
699m
1101m
989m
705m
405m
6"
8
8
8
8
8
W16-P4H
1011m
Avg Initial Liq Prodn

(BLPD)*
295
664
314
1483
1462
1643
1392 (rapidly declining
rate)
1116
1674
1540
1335
2168
1692 (even incrsd to ~ 3000
bpd)
1659
Even though theoretically the horizontal well production is expected to increase with well length,
however the above table shows that there can be no direct correlation of well length with well
productivity. The well performance is also dependent on reservoir properties in the area, reservoir
pressure, flow mode (S/F or GL), well trajectory etc. For example in WA area the wells produced at low
rates due to poor reservoir properties in the area. ZA-SH which has a lateral length of 1100m producing
at nearly the same rate as ZA-3H whose lateral length is just 699m (i.e. 400 m less length). This could be
due to poor properties in the area of ZA-SH as explained in the chapter on well-wise analysis. In fact,
well WB-11H with a lateral length of only 40Sm has even produced liquid upto 3100 bpd. It may be
generally inferred from the above table that in Mumbai High (Ai layer), for a fully openhole completion,
a lateral length of 400-500m may be sufficient to sustain a liquid production of around 1000 blpd,
provided the reservoir properties are not poor and the well trajectory is devoid of sumps.
In 18 wells of Mumbai High (4 in Mumbai High North and 14 in Mumbai High South), the horizontal
lateral portion has come across a shale section, which have been isolated by putting a combination of 3
V2" perforated and non-perforated tubings (along with openhole sections in some cases). Details of the
completions in these wells are given in Table 5.2 (for Mumbai High North) & Table 5.3 (for Mumbai
High South).
Such completions restrict the possibility of carrying out rigless interventions in the wells (except wells
where the last section is openhole). Rig-based interventions can be done only after pulling out the 3 "
tubings from the lateral. However, pulling out the tubings may be difficult, depending on the hole
conditions.
29
Hence, horizontal well completions with 3 1/2" perforated & non-perforated tubings should be avoided
as far as possible.
B) Liner Completions
Liner completions are used in horizontal wells for two primary purposes:
To isolate depleted sections near the vertical well-bore for future re-entry or to isolate shale sections.
To provide a convenient path to facilitate conveyance of various tools like CT, in case of hole variations
in the lateral section, e.g. dog legs and washouts.
The disadvantages of slotted liner completions are;
ineffective zonal isolation (for selective production/ injection)

difficulty in effective stimulation due to open annular space between liner and well
unreliability of PLT, as it cannot measure the fluid flow occurring outside the liner (in the lineropenhole annulus)
At present, a combination of 7" slotted and blank liners and open hole, is being used in 6 wells (4 is
Mumbai High North and 2 in Mumbai High South) of Mumbai High L-III reservoir (for details see Table
5.2 & 5.3).
Any intervention in these wells which would require pulling out of liner may not be feasible, as liner
pulling out is very difficult (as witnessed in ZA-9H) due to hole collapse/debris. Also, after the liner is
pulled out the possibility of hole collapse remains.
Due to the disadvantages of slotted liner completions as given above, in wells where zone isolation is
required, many operators worldwide, like in Table 5.2 Horizontal wells of Mumbai High L-III: Lateral
Completion scenario
MH-North
Wells with OH
(6)
Wells with OH
(8 )
Wells with 7 slotted &

blank liner & OH
1) NE-1zH (543m)
1) N1-6H (418m)
1) N2-9H (1024m)
BL-300m (1800-2201.5,
2438-50)
SL=237m (2201.5-2438.2)
OH=467.m (2450-2917.5)
2) LD-11H (503m)
2) ND-6H (403m)
2) N2-10H (1009m)
BL=245m (2123-2288, 23592439)
SL=284m (2288-2359, 24392652)
OH=480m (2652-3132)
Wells with 3
pert & non-perf
tubing
1) N2-2zH
(636m)
Perf = 495m
(1883-1911),
1929-2396)
Nonperf=141m
(1791-1883, 191129, 2396-2479)
2) NH-6H (701m)
Perf=468m (23212479, 2552-2862)
Nonperf=233m
(2101-2321, 24792552)
Wells with 3
perf & non-perf
tubing & OH
1) LC-10AH
(620m)
Perf=120m (175595, 1920-2000),
Nonperf=160m
(1795-1920, 200035), OH= 340m
(2035-2375)
2) LC-11H
(544m)
Perf=260m
(1987.5-2248)
Nonperf=155m
(1880-1987.5,
2248-95)
OH=129m (229530
2424)
3) W14-6H (700m)
(2250-2950)
3) W14-5H
(500m) (22342734m)
4) N8-10H (232m)
(2010-2342) (3
blind tbg in first
15m)
3) N3-7H (484m) BL=66m

(1969-2079, 2375-87),
SL=297m (2078-2375)
OH=121.5m (2387.5-2509)
4) N3-8H (754m)
SL-118m (1947-2100)
OH=636m (2100-2746m)
Table 5.3 Horizontal wells of Mumbai High L-III: Lateral Completion scenario
MH South
Wells with
OH (6)
1) WA-3zH
(531m)
Wells with
OH (8 )
1) ZA-7H
(989m)
Wells with 7 slotted

& blank liner & OH
1) ZA-9H (805m)
SL=150M (2150-2300)
BL=145m (2095-2150,
2300-2400)
OH=510m (2400-2910)
2) WA-8H
(400m)
2) ZA-8H
(705m)
2) WB-12H (501m)
SL=425m (1750-1925,
2000-2250)
BL-75m (1700m (170050, 1925-2000) upto toe
3) WA-7zH
(529m)
3) ZA-5H
(1101m)
4) WB-10H
(500m)
4) ZA-3H
(699m)
5) WB-3zH
5) WB-11H
(405m)
6) EE-8H
(447m)
6) W16P4H
(1011m)
Wells with 3 pert &

non-perf tubing
1) EE-7H (599m)
Perf=121m (2100-65,
2248-2304),
Perf/nonperf=157m
(2165-2248, 2369-2443)
Nonperf=321m (20042100, 2304-69, 24432630)
2) W16-P3H (516m)
Non perf=258m (16311734, 1986-2193)
Perf=252m (1734-1986)
OH=6m only
3) IQ-8zH (650m)
Perf=548m (2095-2565,
2615-93)
Nonperf=102m (206095, 2565-2615, 26932720)
4) ED-8H (425m)
Nonperf=139m (210937, 2258-2377)
Perf=286m (2137-2258,
2377-2542)
5) ED-6zH (699m)
Perf=410m (2200-2500,
2580-2690)
Nonperf=289m (20902200, 2500-8-, 26902789)
6) IU-2zH (903m)
Perf=555m (1980-2073,
2182-2645)
Nonperf=348m (194480, 2073-2182, 2645-
Wells with 3 perf &

non-perf tubing & OH
1) EE-9H (740m)
Perf=439m (1961-70,
1988-2418), Nonperf=152m (1935-61, 7088, 2418-2526)
OH=150M (2526-2675)
2) S1-6-5H (278m)
Perf=29m (2024-2053)
Nonperf=8m (2005-25)
OH=242m (2053-2295)
3) S1-6-6H (705m)
Nonperf=85m (17781880),
OH=620m (1880-2500)
4) IU-1zH (1001m)
Perf=18m (2723-41)
Nonperf=132m (25812723)
OH=851m (2741-3592)
5) IU-7zH (921m)
Nonperf=209m (22002428)
OH=712m (2428-3140)
31
2860)
7) WB-4zH (488m)
Perf=304m (2270-2574)
Nonperf=184m (2145.52270, 2574-2667)
8) WB-8zH (550m)
7) IQ-9H
(159m)
8) S16-P1H
(703m)
9) SS-9H (700m)
North Sea (refer SPE 54302) have chosen cased and cemented horizontal wells as the preferred mode of
completion.
Liner completions with External Casing Packers (ECP)
Liner completion with ECPs is a low cost option of providing zonal isolation in horizontal wells. The ECP
consists of a reinforced rubber (elastomer) bladder attached to the outside of a liner and a valve system
that allows the bladder inflation with any type of fluid. Both ends of the rubber tube are sealed and
secured to the steel collars, which have nominal OD of the packer to protect the rubber element in the
middle to a certain extent. The packers can be inflated by cement slurry or mud. A case study of the open
hole horizontal wells completed with ECP in Prudhoe Bay, Alaska (SPE 35592) states that the overall
success for cement inflated ECPs was 64% and that of mud inflated was 28%. However, the number of
mud inflated ECPs was small and less reliable. The pros and cons of cement inflation vis-a-vis mud
inflation is given in the table below:
Cement
inflation
Mud
inflation
Pros
Once set the packer will not burst
permanent
Can be perforated
Casing movement unlikely to damage
packer completely
Long life expectancy even though not
expected to provide seal for its lifetime
Less risky
Provides initial seal irrespective of hole
angles
Conforms to changed wellbore shape
though not necessarily maintains pressure
load / seal
Usually cheaper for simpler operations
Cons
Can be risky- cementing up string
and potential formation damage
In horizontal / near horizontal
positions seal can be lost because of
slurry shrinkage
Cannot cope with changes in
wellbore shape
Usually more expensive
Fluid volume change due to
temperature would lead to losing
seal or packer burst
Casing movement could burst
packer
Packer damage is catastrophic
Valve leak could cause loss of
inflation fluid and packer
The above case study conducted on 103 ECPs indicated that overall success rate of ECPs has been
variable and low. Similarly, in the Yibal field in Oman, a carbonate reservoir, the ECP has not been much
successful in shutting-off the unwanted water as in some instances water tended to by-pass the packers
within days after the well was put on production (SPE 36233).
However, in a recent case study in Australia, PL T was recorded in a horizontal well (SPE 54326) The
well had a liner of OD 4.5'1 set in an 6.75" hole. The ECPs were situated at 1935 to 1945m and 20912101m. PLT runs on CT carried out in this well showed that the ECPs were functioning effectively and
32
there was no flow between the ECPs and the formation. M/s. TAM has provided various case histories
of successful ECP applications the details of which are provided in Annexure-2.
The advantage of the ECP based completion is that they provide a technical solution for achieving zonal
isolation at a lower cost. However, the reliability of these packers in providing an effective sea with the
formation is still to be established. Concerns for the reliability of ECPs in the Andrews field prompted BP
to switch over to cased, cemented and perforated liner completions for .their horizontal wells (refer SPE
paper 38183).
The failure of the ECPs, which have been documented above, are due to various reasons which include
inadequate inflation leading to improper sealing against the borehole, packer damage while RIH due to
debris in hole, flawed ECP design (lack of standard or guarantee in elastomer) faulty ECP completion
design, setting tool related problems etc.
With advancement in the ECP technology with time, the success of ECP applications have risen.
However, in view of the inherent complications involved in tool setting, more successful cases need to be
recorded before this completion method can be applied in a complex reservoir like Mumbai High.
C) Cased, cemented and perforated completion
This is similar to. completion of a conventional well and is suitable for medium and long radius wells.
The main merits of this completion are:
It allows selective production/ injection
Zonal isolation is easier
It allows selective stimulation
However, there are some disadvantages too:
It is quite costly and may not be economically feasible on most occasions
Cementing in the horizontal lateral poses a problem -if the cement has free water content, due to gravity,
free water would segregate near the top portion of the well and heavier cement settles at the bottom,
resulting in a poor cement job. To avoid this, a free water test should be conducted for cement at least at
450 deviation, in addition to the conventional API free water test in vertical position.
Good cementation will not be achieved in case mud loss is experienced in the zone itself while drilling.
BP Amoco has gone for this sort of completion in some of its horizontal wells in Wytch Farm, UK (one
well had 8-1/2-inch section to a total depth of 11,278m -making this the world's longest horizontal
section to date and a 7 inch liner set at vertical depth of 1610m and a total depth of 10,210m) achieving
excellent wellbore isolation (refer SPE 62893). The cement slurry properties included zero free water and
low fluid loss, along with considerable thickening times, to allow for correct placement.
In a case study of the the Yibal Carbonate reservoir in Oman (refer SPE 36233), which produces low
viscosity crude (40 deg API, 0.6 cp) with an average w/c of 56% from 260 vertical and 60 horizontal
wells, and permeability ranging from 1-100 md, cemented and perforated liners completions were very
successful in isolating the water-bearing features and reducing the average w/c to 23%. This is the most
preferred completion option in the field, though horizontal injectors are completed barefoot.
Cased and cemented liners despite higher costs have also been a preferred completion option in low
permeability carbonate reservoirs in the US as effective stimulation of the lateral could be achieved with
this type of completion (refer SPE 76725).
33
Tubing Constraints
As far as the production string is concerned, higher size tubing (4 or more) is preferred worldwide,
keeping in view the higher flow rates and to allow for bigger size CT and other tools.
In Mumbai high field, due to lower liquid rates 3 '/2" tubing has been lowered in most of the wells.
However, all the tubing strings in horizontal wells have a 2 7/8" landing nipple with a no-go of 2.205"
(even though the major tubing is 3 1/2"). This restriction poses a challenge in running rigless
intervention tools like inflatable packers and well tractors. It is recommended that all future horizontal
wells should be completed by using 3 landing nipple.
For the Mumbai High field, open hole completions may still be the most suited option in locations with
good reservoir properties, however the length may be restricted to around 500m. Use of liners should be
avoided as far as possible. Also, in 6" hole, it is preferable to use a 5" liner instead of 3 1/2" tubing for
isolation of the shale sections. Cased and cemented liners have been very successful worldwide. But, in
view of the incremental costs involved, this may be tried in areas having poor reservoir properties and
effective stimulation is necessary e.g. in the WA area. However, it needs to be ensured that in such areas
mud losses have not posed a problem while drilling the lateral in nearby wells.
In the final analysis, though the completion philosophy is decided by cost, the future workover/
stimulation options will also playa major role in selecting a suitable completion, which may work out
economical in long , run.
6.0 WELL INTERVENTION
A horizontal well, especially an infill well, may sooner or later require well intervention. Intervention
could be for the following purposes:
Diagnosis of problem/culprit horizontal section

Zonal isolation
Hole cleaning/ stimulation
The usual problems associated with horizontal wells are excessive water/ gas production and
low liquid production (due to formation damage, debris in hole, GLV leakage, etc.). Most often,
problem diagnosis is a pre-requisite for zonal isolation and hole cleaning/ selective stimulation.
Reasons for hi as production in a horizontal oil well

Significant pressure drop in the lateral could induce higher pressure drawdown near heel, causing
water/ gas coning in that section.
If the lateral is inadvertently placed near OWC/GOC, water or gas production is likely in future,
especially in thin reservoirs. Sometimes due to a snake like trajectory, well may intersect water/ gas
zone.
Water/ gas may move in through high permeability streaks intercepted by the lateral (this could be
anywhere in the lateral).
Channeling of water/ gas through the cement behind 9 5/8" casing is a possibility, especially in 8
openholes.
Mud cake/ debris build up in slotted liner could cause uneven reservoir fluid entry, resulting in water/
gas coning.
The pressure drop along the slotted liner may create poor flow distribution from the reservoir and result
in premature water/ gas breakthrough.
34
A) Problem Diagnostics
Problem diagnostics is very important, before any remedial measure is planned for a horizontal well,
mainly due to the complication arising from issues like long openhole section, snake-like lateral etc. A
diagnostic tool not only elaborates on the type of problem, but also indicates the section of the lateral that
is responsible for it, which would require isolation or other treatments.
The common diagnostic methods in use for horizontal wells are:
1. Production logging (PLT)
Akin to conventional/ vertical wells, PLT can be done in horizontal well too with the objective to :
identify high water/ gas producing intervals and the reason

identify upproductive / low producing sections
characterize the drainage pattern
identify any cross flow between section of the lateral along the wellbore with variation in
reservoir characteristics
check performance of ECP {if completed with ECP)
study the influence of well trajectory on possible flow choking/prevention at crests/sumps.
PLT would need to be run on either wireline or CT/ work string. In Mumbi High field, PLT has not been
attempted yet in a horizontal well, as the use of wireline poses a risk in the high deviation section/
horizontal lateral. Further, CT conveyed logging system was not available and its considerations also
posed constraints in view of the limited crane capacity of the wellhead platforms.
Wireline PLT vs CT -based PLT
CT could affect the flow characterization inside the wellbore, thus complicating log interpretation.
Wireline deployment is more cost effective.
CT based P~ T preferable, if possibility of debris in hole
However, PL T in horizontal well lateral faces the following difficulties:
Multi-phase segregated flow, where the flow velocity of different fluids will be different, complicates
spinner readings.
Water sumps and gas traps in the lateral can perturb the response of conventional PLT tools by restricting
the cross-sectional area open to flow. This can be possible even in the wells producing dry oil at surface.
The spinner would behave insensitively at low flow rates, especially towards the toe of the well.
In laterals completed with 7" slotted and blank liners or 3 perforated and non- perforated tubings,
accurate estimation of flow rate would be difficult, because of the annulus between liner/tubing and
openhole. Also, changing openhole diameter and the liner/ tubing eccentricity will have, an unfavorable
bearing on the flow measurement.
Appreciable changes in hold up and fluid velocities can occur due to even small deviations in well
trajectory (w.r.t. horizontal) Certain tools (e.g. gradiomanometer) would not work in a horizontal well
and some other tools (e.g. nuclear fluid densimeter) may be undesirable, because of environmental
hazard.
35
Lastly, but importantly, CT conveyed PL T often faces the risk of CT reach problem (like in other CT
operations). Even wireline PLT is not feasible without a tractor.
However, with the use of integrated production logging toolstrings (including GHOST I Flow View Plus,
RST, etc.) offering multiphase sensors to measure a flow parameter, the use of tractors (to guide
wireline/ CT in lateral) quantitative measurements can be obtained for determining fluid phase.
velocities, holdups, formation saturations, etc.
Due to completion limitations, use of tractor is not feasible in existing wells. Hence, the option CT -PL T
is being looked into by MH Asset.
PLTs (CT conveyed) have been run successfully in West Tuna field (offshore) of Bass Straits, Australia
(refer SPE 54326), where the well was completed with slotted liner & ECP. PL T has been attempted in 8
horizontal wells of Mahogany field (refer SPE 81118) of Trinidad (7 with CT and the latest with wireline
tractor). It has also been run in Champion East field of Offshore Brunei Darussalam (refer SPE 72150),
where the horizontal well was completed openhole (with wire wrapped screen) and intersected multiple
sands.
Use of memory PLT (CT conveyed) provides an alternative. However, due to limited power-pack life, it
may be difficult (and costly too) to go for multiple passes, thus, limiting its use in case of bad quality date
as real time data monitoring is not possible.
2. Inflatable straddle packer testing
This is a possible alternative to PL T in horizontal wells. Openhole laterals can be tested in segments to
identify the section responsible for unwanted water/ gas entry or low/ no production. Large (200-600 ft
long) section of lateral can be isolated independently using a bottom inflatable bridge plug and an upper
inflatable production packer. Swab testing or short term full draw down production testing provides a
basis indication of fluid entry rates & water cut.
CT conveyed packers cannot be used in the present horizontal wells of Mumbai High, due to restriction
posed by 2 7/8" landing nipple (2.2 no- go). They can be planned for future wells, where larger (3 1/2")
landing nipples should be used. So, for the present wells, the inflatable packers have to be run on 3
tubing/ drill pipe, along with a combination of sliding sleeve' and seating nipple to test independently
the sections above or below the packer. These packers can be set and reset to test the lateral section in
parts all in a single trip. Selective portion of the open hole section can be tested by straddle packer
arrangement.
The inflatable packers for the above purpose are manufactured by TAM (straight J single packer,
straight-J straddle assembly) and Baker Oil Tools, etc. TAM also provides re-settable inflatable straddle
packers combined with a hydraulic jet pump are available for full draw down testing on short intervals.
This allows for testing multiple zones under full a/lift drawdown with a single trip in hole.
B) Zonal isolation
Once, diagnosis indicates. the section of lateral, which is responsible for high water/ gas production,
zonal isolation is the next step. There could be the following scenarios, which would require different
procedures of zonal isolation:
Water/gas coning at or near the heel --This can be isolated by re-completing the well with liner (e.g. 7"
liner in 8 1/2" hole) and cementing it. A cement inflated ECP could provide added isolation.
36
Water gas channeling behind 9 5/8" casing --Placement of 7 liner and cementing it would also be
helpful here.
Water/gas entry in section between heel and toe Isolation could be attempted by any of the following
means
Placing an inflatable scab liner, which will isolate only the water producing section. These scab liners are
available with TAM & Baker Oil Tools. However, generally, this sort of completion will only provide a
seal over a very short section (typically 3m), so fluids will very soon start bypassing the ECP.
An alternate means of water shut off in such a situation could be use of polymer gels. The effect of gels in
horizontal wells is akin to that in a conventional well. However, looking at the long producing lateral, a
WSO job with gel should not only treat the unwanted water producing section, but also protect the
potential oil producing zone. In effect, this would require a good placement technique. Recently, a WSO
job was done successfully in Wafra Ratawi field of Kuwait, by using a non-damaging temporary gel
system to isolate the oil producing heel side and use of another organically cross-linked polymer to shut
off water from the toe side.
Placing openhole clad against the water producing section: recently (in 3/02), it was tried in an oil well
in AI Huwaisah field (see Annexure-II for details) of Northwest Oman (refer SPE 81489), where the oil
rate increased sustainably from 50 to > 100 m3/d, The liquid rate increased, indicating a better lift
performance from the gaslift completion, leading to a increased drawdown. A similar application had
been tried in Yibal field of Oman to isolate high intake section in horizontal injector, where water
injection rate came down from ~ 1800 m3/d to ~ 1400 m3/d (sustained). In both cases, elastomeric
sealing of SET (solid expandable tubular) was achieved directly against the information. One of the
major benefits of this application is getting minimum flow restriction (as ID is more compared to any
other mechanical isolation methods) as well as no restriction on number and size of clads that can be put
in a lateral. A caliper log run is advisable before attempting installation of open hole clad, to identify
tight spots (will require reaming).
Use of inflatable bridge plug and polyacrylamide gel: This technique has been used to shut-off water in a
well in an offshore Nigerian field (refer SPE 74806), where the well had slotted liner completion. A
through tubing inflatable BP was set above the water entry section and a cement retainer below it and
subsequently, the water section sealed off with a gel. A Polyacrylamide gel was specifically tailored to
seal off behind the slotted liner and prevent flowback of poymer in annular section. The treatment was
performed in 3 days and well was left closed for 2 days for allowing polymer curing. The job resulted in
70% reduction in water cut, which was sustained for a year.
Annular Chemical Packer (ACPl : This allows zonal isolation in laterals with liners that are not cemented.
Here, selective placement behind a slotted liner can be achieved with CT based inflatable packers/
bridge plugs (see Annexure-II for details). ACP aims to achieve full circumferential coverage over a
relatively small length, while leaving the liner free for flow or tool passage.
This technique has been applied in 3 wells in Prudhoe Bay, Alaska (by Arco-BP Exploration) for Gas
shutoff with low (10% reduction in GOR) to good (60% reduction in GOR) levels of success, which has
proved the operational feasibility of this technique. These wells had 600-1000 ft laterals with 4 1/2" or 2
7/8" slotted liner completion (refer SPE 38832).
However, since the s~tting length of ACP is normally small (upto 50 ft), this technique may be better
suited for isolating toe/ near toe section.
4.
Water / gas entry at the toe end of lateral --Isolation of toe portion can be done by putting an
inflatable bridge plug (cement inflation would be preferable). The BP could be conveyed by 3 tubing/
37
drill pipe (CT based job not possible due to the 2.2" completion restrictions). The bridge plugs are
available with TAM & Weather ford.
Another option could be the use of SET openhole clad with a shoe left in place to act as plug.
Though various techniques as mentioned above are available to achieve zonal isolation, case histories of
their applications are rare. There have been some applications of both mechanical isolation methods, like
Openhole clad and chemical isolation (use of gels). However, the gel based jobs may have been more
reservoir-specific, thus proving less popular on a worldwide scale. These techniques require more
successful applications worldwide, before adoption in use for a complex field like Mumbai High.
Nevertheless, looking at the growing popularity of the openhole clads, this technology can be planned
in a couple of high w/c wells like WB-11H, after running PLT.
C) Hole cleaning and Stimulation
It is essential to prove the hole prior to any workover or PLT attempt. In a limestone reservoir with
presence of shale, there is a possibility of debris formation (as a result of acidisation etc.) and this debris
could get deposited in the hole bottom or in sumps.
The most important means of getting a clean hole at the first place is proper transport of drill cuttings
during well drilling. Though mud parameters (e.g. viscosity, weight, yield point), hole diameter and rate
of penetration are important considerations here, an average annulus velocity of 80-120 ft/min, has been
observed to be ideal for good wellbore cleaning.
Post-drilling hole clean up, which is the next important step, is normally done in Mumbai High with
brine (with 2% KCI), but application of other clean up fluids is planned in near future.
Subsequently, over the life of the horizontal well (especially those with open hole lateral/ section), there
could be more occasions, when hole clean up would be needed. Following techniques may be
considered:
Use of 8 '/2"' or 6"1 bit (as per hole size) with MWD for direction control
CT conveyed specially designed bullnose mills, along with downhole motor & circulation sub. This can
work without the requirement of MWD tool, as the mills would avoid side tracking of existing hole.
Concentric CT application, which may not be possible at this time in Mumbai High (due to limitations of
platform load bearing capacity, crane capacity, etc.), provides a good means of hole cleanup, as done in 3
wells in Saladin field of Western Australia (refer SPE 74820). A well cleaning tool with an 1 CT inside a
2" CT working on a "fines removal mode" could clean the well to the toe. An added advantage was
evaluation of fluid contribution across the lateral (that'd otherwise have required a PL T), while, pulling
out on "fluid removal mode".
High pressure water jet technology has been used in 10 horizontal wells of field by QGPC, Qatar (refer
SPE 58780) to remove drilling damage. The jetting action can be created by use of orifice or rotating type
jetting nozzle and standard pumping equipment. Though this is best suited for initial well cleanup, it can
be as effective as a conventional acid job (can even be a replacement) without causing any further
damage, typically associated with acids.
Apart from acid bulldozing (which is not suitable for horizontal laterals, as it does not cover the entire
exposed length and may even be detrimental in the long run) and stimulation with in-situ acid
generation system (covered in Chapter-4), there are some more methods of horizontal well stimulation.
One of the most promising methods is ISAP.
38
ISAP (Inflatable Straddle Acidizing Packer System) --Baker Oil Tool's ISAP System allows selective
stimulation operations. It consists of 3 major sub-assemblies: an injection control valve, a mechanical
control (or spotting valve) and a packer section. The system is deployable on CT or work string and is
controlled downhole by manipulating the injection and mechanical control valves. Inflation and
deflation are controlled through hydraulic manipulation of the injection valve. The tension operated
mechanical control valve opens or closes an unloading flow path between the treatment interval and the
annulus, above the packer section. ACT-deployed ISAP system is shown in Fig. 6.1. The system offers the
following features:
CT deployable (rigless)
Allows multiple settings in one trip
Offers spotting capability at each setting
Inflation pressure is not locked into the elements
This mechanical acid diversion system has been used successfully in horizontal wells in Alberta, Canada.
It was run on CT, job was done in 12 settings in 1 day and all sections were treated with HCI. The depth
was 12192 ft, min. restriction was 2.75" and element OD was 2.5".
The usefulness of this system in providing a good level of acid diversion makes it a good case for
application in heterogeneous reservoirs of Mumbai High. However, the existing Mumbai High horizontal
wells have 2.2" landing nipple restriction, which would not permit CT deployed ISAP system. If the wells
coming in future are completed with 3 1/2" landing nipple (2.75" restriction), ISAP can be tried out.
CT reach problem
Well intervention through coiled tubing (CT) is a standard practice for horizontal wells, as in
conventional/ vertical wells. CT provides a cost effective means to carry out jobs like hole proving/
stimulation, PLT, inflatable packer based interval testing, zonal isolation etc. The normal CT sizes in use
worlwide are 1 1/2" and above (mostly 2").
However, CT application in horizontal well faces a risk of reach limitation in the lateral. CTs, especially
the smaller ones, could
go repeatedly into wormholes, created by past acid jobs

stop at the sumps
buckle
lock up, while running in the hole, due to excessive friction
The problems become more serious in wells, where trajectory has a lot of TVD deviation from horizontal
(ire. snake-like trajectory).
In Mumbai High horizontal wells, CT applications have faced this problem. Till now, max. 1 1/4" CT
have been used (1 1/2" CT has just arrived) and there has been CT reach problem in almost all wells. In
WA-8H, in 3 attempts in 1998-99 for CT based stimulation, CT did not go beyond -70m (i.e. 18% of lateral
length). In WA-7zH, during CT based Arcasolve job in 2/03, CT didn't go beyond 87m (out of 528m
lateral length).
39
Though the advent of 1 1/2" CT is expected to improve the situation (buckling poses less problem for 1
1/2" than 1 1/4" CT), its use may be restricted to those well platforms, where crane capacity/ load
bearing capacity and space is adequate (however use of barge can be looked into). Also, as the following
simulation run carried out for WA-7zH shows (Table 6.1, Fig 6.2-6.4)} even the 1 1/2'1 CT may not be able
to
reach
the
toe,
though
its
reach
is
higher
than
the
1
1/4'1
CT.
Well
OH upto
CT size
CT reach
WA-7zH 2730 m
1 1/4"
WA-7zH 2730 m
1 1/4"
WA-7zH 2730 m
1 1/4"
Note : F.F. is friction Factor.
2289 m
2314 m
2450 m0.4
F.F. in
OH
0.4
0.4
0.4
Addl.
Date of
F.F.in OH
run
0.15
2/03
0.15
Simulated
0.05
Simulated
The well tractor offers a conveyance and deployment solution covering production logging, open hole
logging,perforation etc.. It can also be used with CT to extend its reach in horizontal laterals. Well tractor
could be in the form of :
a) Wireline well tractor -for all services run on wireline (Iogging, perforating, shifting sliding sleeves etc.)
b) Coiled tubing well tractor -for all CT based services
Currently ( wireline well tractors are provided by Welltec (Denmark), Sondex (UK), Read (UK)), etc.,
whereas Welltec is the main CT tractor manufacturer. The details or these tractors are given in AnnexureI. Both the wireline and CT well tractors are available in 2 1/8" and 3 1/8" (common) sizes.
The CT well tractor allows smaller diameter CT to be utilized by reducing the weight, also easing on the
need for spooling coil from a boat and crane capacity limitations. It also eliminates the need for CT
stiffening, thereby increasing CT life.
The completion strategy in vogue in the horizontal wells of Mumbai High includes use of landing nipple
with 2.2" restriction( which could pose passage problem for 2 1/8" tractor, However; the same can be
used in the future wells, if higher size landing nipple (31/2") is used. However, 2 1/8" CT tractor will not
permit flow-through capability and the CT fluid has to be routed through top vent (which does not allow
jetting belay, tool).
Some of the successful well tractor runs include:
CBL in Mississippi, USA in 2002( where the DLS was 130/100 ft and time taken was 1.3 hrs over a
distance of 2785 ft (max dev. = 870
CBL in 12/90 in Shell, Brunei (running distance of 836m in 7 hrs)
PL T through screens (2 runs) in Caspian Sea, Azerbaijan in 4/02 (total op time 59 hrs over
3978m)
Logging / PL T in a water injector in Lekhwair field, Oman in 12/99 (1550 openhole covered)
CT tractors can not be used in the current completion scenario of the existing wells of MH. However,
future wells completed with a 3-1/2" landing nipple this option may be explored.
Other solutions for improving CT reach include use of centralisers/ kickoof tools and use of larger size
CT.
7.0 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
40
The cost estimates, have been worked out for zonal isolation using open-hole clad. The following general
costs have been considered for the purpose of economic analysis:
Rig cost US$ 50,000/day and cost of hole proving US $ 2,500 /day.
10 days rig time has been assumed taking into consideration time required for pulling out existing
completion, hole cleaning, dummy runs for the open-hole clad and final setting of OHC.
The payback period has been calculated for three different scenarios of expected oil gain of 200 bbl/day,
400 bbl/day and 500 bbl/day. However, expected oil gain well-wise needs to be worked out based on PL
T to ensure that the job is economical.
A) Cost
US$ 373,517 isolation) (Incl 11% Ins. &
Freight+40% Cust)
US$ 20,250
US$ 500,000
US$ 5,000
US$ 898,767
Rs. 4.13 crores (1US$=Rs.46)
Total Open-hole clad cost (for 100m isolation)

Service charge (2 persons X 7 days)
Rig cost (10 days)
Hole proving cost (2 days)
Total cost
B) Revenue
Oil price (Rs/MT)

Royalty
Cess
Net oil price (Rs/MT)
Daily Revenue (in Rs., for oil gain of 200 bbl/day)
Oil price ($18/bbl) Oil price ($21/bbl) Oil price ($26/bbl)

6313
7365
9118
850
850
850
1800
1800
1800
3663
4715
6468
96082
123682
169683
192165
247365
339365
240207
309207
424207
C) Payback period
Payback period (in days, for oil gain of 200 bbl/day)

Oil price
($18/bbl)
463
218
174
Oil price
($21/bbl)
339
169
136
Oil price
($26/bbl)
247
123
99
The above estimates are based upon the cost for isolating a 100m section by OHC. However, for isolating
a 25m lateral length section, the cost will reduce by nearly 20% and the payback period (assuming oil
price of $18/bbl and oil gain of 200 bbl/day) works out to less than a year (346 days).
8.0 CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS
8.1 Well-wise analysis
Detailed well-wise analysis has been carried out for 15 horizontal wells in Mumbai High North and 30
wells in Mumbai High South.
41
8.1.1 Mumbai Hiqh North

a) Nl-6H, though ok for the present, is a possible candidate for hole cleaning/ stimulation, when
adequate
pressure
is
there.
b) WI4-SH & 6H are to be finally converted to water injectors hence no recommendations have been
given.
c) N2-9H,10H and 2zH are ok, but build-up study may be carried out in N2-10H to ascertain well-bore
damage.
d) Maintain injection pattern in Al in WI-2 & 3 so as to keep w/c in N3- 1H & 8H under control; P-T
survey
in
N3-7H
to
rule
out
GLV
leak.
e) Monitor w/c in ND-6H; when w/c shows further increasing trend, attempt PLT in nearby ND-4
injector
to
identify
and
isolate
high
water
intake
intervals
in
A1.
f) NE-1zH is ok at present; however injectors are required to support A1 in the area
g) In N8-10H, P- T survey to check GLV leak, else plug lateral and complete in A2-V, based on log.
h) NH-6H, LC-l0AH & LC-11H are ok, build-UP study required in LC-11H to ascertain formation damage
i) LD-1l1H is ok, injection monitoring in LE-3 to confirm water breakthrough and profile modification in
injector, if required.
8.1.2 Mumbai High South
a) CT based stimulation for uniform coverage of lateral required in wells in WA -3zH/ WA-8H and WA7zH.
b)
WI6-P3H
&
P4H
are
ok
c) IU- 7zH & 2zH are ok at present; area requires urgent pressure support, B/up to tie carried in IU- 7zH
to
ascertain
reservoir
properties
and
formation
damage
d)
IQ-9H
&
8zH
are
ok
at
present;
W/c
monitoring
required
in
IQ-8zH
e) All wells o! ZA are ok; Build up study in ZA- 7H to ascertain reservoir permeability/ formation
damage
f) WB-3zH -ok for the present but CT based stimulation may be planned based on business results
g)
WB-8zH
is
low
priority
well
for
zonal
isolation
or
side-track
h) Regulate injection in WB-4zH and monitor effect in WB-12H, WB-8zH and WB-3H; Diagnostic
intervention in injector WB-4zH and subsequent isolation of high water intake intervals may be beneficial
to
nearby
producers
i)
WB-10H
-Solvent
treatment
to
remove
sludge.
42
j) Diagnostic intervention in WB-11H and EE-7H to. identify water producing intervals and isolation
thereof.
k)
EE-8H
is
low
priority
well
I) S1-6-6H & 5H are Ok at present; S1-6-P1H ok for present, but later when Qo falls to <500 bpd, attempt
PLT to diagnose gas producing intervals & isolate them (in case of gas cusping/ high permeability
streak).
m) Keep rate restricted in ED-8H in view of high GOR; In future, with further decline in production
(further increase in GOR), PLT & subsequent intervention for isolation (after pulling out the 3 1/2" tubing
from
the
lateral)
may
be
attempted.
n)
ED-6zH,
SS-9H
are
ok.
8.2 Horizontal well potential

In many horizontal wells of Mumbai High, after excluding the initial flush production, a declining
production trend upto the range of at least 20-30% of initial production was observed within the first 6
months. Based on studies of inflow performance of a well of Mumbai High and world-wide case studies,
it is inferred that horizontal wells:
intially produced 2-3 times that of conventional wells

declined more rapidly vis--vis conventional wells
were producing at the same level as the conventional wells, after some years of production.
The fall in productivity in horizontal wells can be attributed to various factors which include :1.
Limited
2.
Finite
3.
Non
4.
Lateral
uniform
reservoir
heterogeneity
in
transmissibility
reservoir
pressure
reservoir,
distribution
along
particularly
aiong
size
the
very
lateral
iong
length
weiis
5. Local water humps and gas traps along the well bore due to crooked well trajectory, which in some
cases has resulted in even 30-50% productivity reduction in wells. Hence, for the future, the well
trajectory should be designed so that sumps are minimised and clean-up maximised.
8.3 Formation Damage
Effective clean-up of mud cake is a pre-requisite for achieving a good well productivity.
Stimulation job using CT would be more effective (instead of bulldozing), as it would enable
placement of treatment chemicals uniformly in the lateral, for complete coverage.
It would be prudent to simulate CT operation before job execution.
Acid based stimulation jobs in wells completed in Al layer should include use of anti-sludge
agent.
Use of multi-arm caliper logs can be planned to identify points of washouts, which can .be
avoided during subsequent acid jobs, allowing a higher coverage of lateral.
43
In case of laterals in known/ suspected "poor reservoir facies" areas, a desirable practice may be
treatment of the wells with in-situ acid generation system, just after drilling & before completing
the well.
8.4 Horizontal well completion and future options
Open hole completion is a preferred option in Mumbai High keeping in view the borehole
stability in the reservoir. However, a length of about 500m seems to be sufficient to sustain a
liquid production of more than 1000 blpd, provided the reservoir properties are not poor and the
well trajectory is devoid of sumps.
Uncemented liner completions should be avoided as far as possible as such completions restrict
the possibility of any future rigless interventions. Rig-based intervention in these wells would
require pulling out of tubing/liner which may difficult, (as witnessed during pulling out of 7"
liner in ZA-9H) due to hole collapse/debris. Also, after the liner is pulled out the possibility of
hole collapse remains. Also, in 6" hole, it is preferable to use a 5" liner instead of 3-1/2" tubing for
isolation of the shale sections
Liners with ECPs (external casing packers) provide a low cost technical solution for achieving
zonal isolation but the reliability of these packers in providing an effective seal with the
formation is still to be established. In view of the inherent complications involved in tool setting,
more successful cases need to be recorded before this completion method can be applied in a
complex reservoir like Mumbai High.
Cased, cemented and perforated completion, though costly, is a popular completion philosophy,
particularly in fields where achieving effective stimulation and shutting off water-bearing
features have been the key issues. This option may be tried in areas having poor reservoir
properties and effective stimulation is necessary e.g. in the WA area. However, it needs to be
ensured that in such areas mud losses have not posed a problem, while drilling in nearby wells.
8.5 Well Intervention
Problem diagnosis is a pre-requisite for well repair jobs like zonal isolation and hole
cleaning/selective stimulation.
The completion strategy in vogue in the horizontal wells of Mumbai High includes use of 2 7/8"
landing nipple with 2.2" restriction, which poses passage problem for the smallest size well
tractor (2 1/8") . However, the same can be used in the future wells, if higher size landing nipple
(3 1/2") is used
Similarly, straddle packer testing can be planned for future wells, completed with larger (3 V2")
landing nipples.
In absence of well tractors/ straddle packer testing, CT -PL T is the only diagnostic option, which
is also being planned by Mumbai High Asset & Well Logging Services for use in horizontal wells
of Mumbai High.Multi-arm caliper logs may also be run to identify wash-outs.
If the wells coming in future are completed with 3 1/2" landing nipple (2.75" restriction), ISAP
may be tried for selective stimulation.
Though the advent of 1 1/2" CT is expected to improve the situation (buckling poses less
problem for 11/2" than 1 1/4" CT), its use may be restricted to those well platforms, where crane
capacity/ load bearing capacity and space is adequate. Alternatively, use of barges (for stationing
CT reel, etc.) may be looked into. For future wells completed with 3 1/2" landing nipple, an
alternate conveyance for tools in horizontal laterals could be the use of well tractors.
Software simulation should be carried out before CT jobs to ascertain extent of CT reach. Also, for
the present CT reach can be improved by the use of centralisers/ kick off tools.
Though various zonal isolation techniques are available, case histories of their applications are
rare. These techniques require more successful applications worldwide, before adoption in use
44
for a complex field like Mumbai High. Nevertheless, looking at the growing popularity of the
openhole clads, this technology can be planned in a couple of high w/c wells like WB-11H, after
running PLT.
Payback period for isolating 50m lateral section using open hole clad
works
out
to
346
days,
assuming
an
oil
gain
of
200
BOPD.
SET open Hole Clad

By expanding jointed casing with elastomer coating, directly against the formation, PDO and Enventure
Global Tech. have pioneered the use of SET in openhole WSO. The advantages of this technology over
other shut-off techniques include: minimal ID loss, openhole seal across entire length of pipe, access to
toe of well for logging and remediation tools & no risk of formation contamination by cement.
By bonding an elastomer seal directly to the outer surface of the pipe the actual sealing interface between
the clad and the formation can be extended as far as desired, maximising the length of matrix flow
required to circumvent the seal.
The use of elastomer compounds, developed by Shell, that swell in contact with the formation fluid has
increased the operating envelope of the system. Once the pipe has achieved its maximum expansion
diameter, elastomers set across over-gauge sections, not yet touching the well bore, continue to swell and
seek out the formation to complete the seal.
To date PDO have used Enventure Global Technology SET clads in the Al Huwaisah, Qata, Yibal, Nimr,
and Fahud fields. The success of SET in openhole water shut-off is leading to a rapid uptake across the
company, with SET OHC fast becoming the default water control solution.
Annular Chemical Packer
The technology involves placement of a novel cement based fluid into the slotted liner - openhole annular
space, in the zone to be isolated between the straddle packers. It is designed to set in this position and
form a permanent, impermeable high-strength plug. For placement, the fluid has a sufficiently low
viscosity to be pumped from CT and out through the small slots in the liner.
One placed, the fluid immediately develops high gel strength to prevent slumping and incomplete
annular fill, which would otherwise lead to improper isolation. Any fluid in the liner immediately after
placement is washed out prior to the cement set time. Finally, the slurry solidifies into a strong
impermeable plug with good hydraulic bond strengths to steel and formation. The ACP may contain a
tracer to allow determination of plug position with a GR tool. A beneficial feature of the ACP is its
reparability downhole, using the Optimised Microcement Slurries (OMS), which can penetrate small
cracks and fissures.
Customised lab slurry design is required to ensure that the slurry has and appropriate thickening time
(>5 hours at reservoir conditions), exhibits the appropriate thixotropy and develops the necessary
compressive strength requirements (>500 psi), once it is placed and set.
45

Perf Analy MHAsset Nov 03

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Perf Analy MHAsset Nov 03

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Performance Analysis of horizontal wells of Mumbai High Asset

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF HORIZONTAL WELLS OF MUMBAI HIGH ASSET

http://www.infraline.com - Your Information Gateway to Indian Energy Sector

Performance Analysis of horizontal wells of Mumbai High Asset

http://www.infraline.com - Your Information Gateway to Indian Energy Sector

Performance Analysis of horizontal wells of Mumbai High Asset

Well came on production in -12[00 in Ai layer. ,

Well came on production in 12/02 in A1 layer.

http://www.infraline.com - Your Information Gateway to Indian Energy Sector

Performance Analysis of horizontal wells of Mumbai High Asset

Lateral length = 500m, Hole size= 8 1/211, Completion: Openhole

Well came on production in 1/03 in A1 layer.

To be finally converted as water injector.

Well came on production in 1/02 in A1 layer.

Well came on production in 2/02 in Ai layer.

http://www.infraline.com - Your Information Gateway to Indian Energy Sector

Performance Analysis of horizontal wells of Mumbai High Asset

Well came on production in 4/02 in A1 layer.

Well came on production in 1/02 in A1 layer.

http://www.infraline.com - Your Information Gateway to Indian Energy Sector

Performance Analysis of horizontal wells of Mumbai High Asset

Initial Ql was ~ 3000+ blpd, which stabilized to the present value.

P-T survey to rule out GLV leakage.

Well came on production in 5/02 in A1 layer.

Well came on production in 11/00 in A1 layer.

http://www.infraline.com - Your Information Gateway to Indian Energy Sector

Performance Analysis of horizontal wells of Mumbai High Asset

Performance of this well is in line with calculated Qh.

Restrict withdrawal to present level & monitor w/c regularly.

Well came on production in 1/01 in A1 layer.

QI has been mostly in the range of 1400-1800 blpd.

Well came on production in 12/02 in A2-VII layer.

http://www.infraline.com - Your Information Gateway to Indian Energy Sector

Performance Analysis of horizontal wells of Mumbai High Asset

Carry out P- T survey to check for GLV leak.

Well came on production in 4/02 in A1 layer.

QI initially was 1600-1800 blpd and is now maintained at ~ 1100 blpd.

OK for the present.

Well came on production in 9/02 in B layer.

http://www.infraline.com - Your Information Gateway to Indian Energy Sector

Performance Analysis of horizontal wells of Mumbai High Asset

Well came on production in 10/02 in B layer.

Lateral length (openhole + perf tubing) is less by 90m as compared to LC-10H.

Well should not be disturbed at present.

Well came on production in 11/02 in B layer.

QI is maintained around 2000 blpd.

http://www.infraline.com - Your Information Gateway to Indian Energy Sector

Performance Analysis of horizontal wells of Mumbai High Asset

Well came on production in 4/02 in A1 layer.

Well requires CT based stimulation for uniform coverage of lateral.

Well came on production in 5/97 in A1 layer.

Well came up on production in 9/01 in A1 layer.

http://www.infraline.com - Your Information Gateway to Indian Energy Sector

Performance Analysis of horizontal wells of Mumbai High Asset

Well came on production in 2/01 in A1 layer. (after S/T)

Well came on production in 9/01 in A1 layer.

http://www.infraline.com - Your Information Gateway to Indian Energy Sector

Performance Analysis of horizontal wells of Mumbai High Asset

Well came on production in 7/02 in A1 layer.

Short drift side tracked in 7/02, because of low liquid influx.

Well came on production in 9/02 in A1 layer.

http://www.infraline.com - Your Information Gateway to Indian Energy Sector

Performance Analysis of horizontal wells of Mumbai High Asset