ANEXO PUBLICACIONES

Because the industry seeks to drill increasingly difficult well profiles economically, better means of directional control are needed. In recent years, significant advances have been made with regard to adjustable-diameter stabilizers. Initially, such tools were mechanically set and capable

of two size settings over a limited size range. These tools now provide more capability. One new tool, which is still mechanically set, allows three different gauge settings. Another advancement has been a hydraulically instructed adjustable-diameter stabilizer with many size settings over a wide size range. These new tools provide greater inclination control while maximizing rotary-mode drilling.

Further advances beyond adjustable gauge systems are needed to impact the drilling of ERD and designer wells. Currently, four major systems are in various stages of development and field testing. These rotary steerable systems are designed to steer in both inclination and azimuth planes while rotating the drillstring. One common component of all rotary-steerable drilling systems currently under development is a nonrotating section in an otherwise rotating tool. The nonrotating section provides a stationary mechanical and/or electronic reference plane that is used for controlling orientation, while the drillstring continues to rotate to reduce torque and drag. The various rotary steerable drilling systems use different mechanisms of operation. In all cases, the mechanisms of steering induce either force or BHA curvature to build, hold, drop or turn as required. Rotary-steerable systems will allow full 3D control of the wellpath while providing for rotary-mode drilling, thereby yielding optimal ROP and eliminating the drilling performance penalty currently inherent with oriented drilling. Just as the steerable mud motor changed directional-drilling technology in the 1980s, rotary-steerable drilling systems should prove to be a major advancement in directional-drilling capabilities in the near future.

References

API RP 7G, "Recommended Practice for Drill Stem Design and Operating Limits," 15th Edition, API (Jan. 1, 1995).

Banks, S.M., Hogg, T.W., and Thorogood, J.L., "Increasing Extended-Reach Capabilities Through Wellbore Profile Optimization," paper SPE 23850, 1992.

Birades, M., "ORPHEE 3D: Static and Dynamic Tridimensional BHA Computer Models," paper SPE 15466, 1986.

Bourgoyne Jr., A.T., Millheim, K.K., Chenevert, M.E., and Young Jr., F.S.:

Applied Drilling Engineering, SPE Monograph Series, Richardson, TX (1991).

Brakel, J.D.: "Prediction of Wellbore Trajectory Considering Bottomhole Assembly and Drillbit Dynamics," PhD Dissertation, U. of Tulsa, Tulsa, OK (1986).

Brett, J.F., Warren, T.M., and Behr, S.M.: "Bit Whirl: A New Theory of PDC Bit Failure," paper SPE 19571, 1989.

Cheatham, C.A., Comeaux, B.C., and Martin, C.J.: "General Guidelines for Predicting Fatigue Life of MWD Tools," paper SPE 23906, 1992.

Craig Jr., J.T. and Randall, B.V.: "Directional Survey Calculation," Pet. Engr.

(Mar. 1976) 36-54.

Dawson, R. and Paslay, P.R.: "Drillpipe Buckling in Inclined Holes," JPT (Oct. 1984) 1734-1738.

Dellinger, T., Gravley, W., and Tolle, G.C.: "Directional Technology Will Extend Drilling Reach," O&GJ (Sept. 15, 1980) 153-169.

Dufeyte, M.P. and Henneuse, H.: "Detection and Monitoring of the Stick-Slip Motion: Field Experiments," paper SPE 21945, 1991.

Eddison, A. and Symons, J.: "Downhole Adjustable Gauge Stabilizer Improves Drilling Efficiency in Directional Wells," paper SPE 20454, 1990.

Fear, M.J. and Abbassian, F., "Experience in the Detection and Suppression of Torsional Vibration From Mud Logging Data," paper SPE 28908, 1994.

Fear, M.J., Abbassian, F., and Parfitt, S.H.L.: "The Destruction of PDC Bits by Severe Slip-Stick Vibration," paper SPE 37639, 1997.

Guild, G.J., Jeffrey, J.T., and Carter, J.A.: "Drilling Extended-Reach/High-Angle Wells Through Overpressured Shale Formation," paper SPE 25749, 1994.

Hansford, J.E. and Lubinski, A.: "Cumulative Fatigue Damage of Drillpipe in Doglegs," SPE Reprint Series No. 6a (1973 Rev.) 285-281.

Hogg, W.T. and Thorogood, J.L.: "Performance Optimization of Steerable Systems," ASME PD (1990) 27, 49-58.

Jogi, P.N., Burgess, T.M., and Bowling, J.P.: "Predicting the Build/Drop Tendency of Rotary Drilling Assemblies," Directional Drilling, SPE Reprint Series No. 30 (1990).

Johancsik, C.A., Friesen, D.B., and Dawson, R.: "Torque and Drag in Directional Wells—Prediction and Measurement," paper SPE 11380, 1983.

Justad, T., Jacobsen, B., Blikra, H., Gaskin, G., Clarke, C., and Ritchie, A.:

"Extending Barriers to Develop a Marginal Satellite Field From an Existing Platform," paper SPE 28294, 1994.

Larson, P.A. and Azar, J.J.: "Three-Dimensional, Quasi-Static, Drill Ahead BHA Model for Wellbore Trajectory Prediction and Control," PED, Drilling Technology, ASME (1992) 40.

Le Peuvedic, J.P., Astier, B., Baron, G., Boe, J.C., Dumas-Planeix, M., Koenig, L., Mabile, C., Prin, R., and Toutain, P.: "Directional Surveying (Ch. 3)," and "Directional Drilling Practice (Ch. 4)," Directional Drilling and Deviation Control Tech. (1990) 47-137.

Lockett, T.J., Richardson, S.M., and Worraker, W.J.: "The Importance of Rotation Effects for Efficient Cuttings Removal During Drilling," paper SPE 25768, 1993.

Lubinski, A.: "Factors Affecting the Angle of Inclination and Doglegging in Rotary Boreholes," API Drill. and Prod. Prac. (1953) 222.

Lubinski, A.: "Maximum Permissible Doglegs in Rotary Boreholes," SPE Reprint Series No. 6a (1973 Rev.) 255-275.

Macpherson, J.D., and Mason, J.S.: "Surface Measurement and Analysis of Drillstring Vibrations While Drilling," paper SPE 25777, 1993.

Moineau, J.D.: "Gear Mechanism," US patent 1,892,217(1932).

Mueller, M.D., Quintana, J.M., and Bunyak, M.J.: "Extended Reach Drilling From Platform Irene," SPEDE (June 1991) 138.

Murphey, C.E. and Cheatham Jr., J.B.: "Hole Deviation and Drillstring Behavior," paper SPE 1259, 1965.

Nicholson, J.W.: "An Integrated Approach to Drilling Dynamics Planning Identification and Control," paper SPE 27537, 1994.

Odell, A. and Payne, M.: "Application of a Highly Variable Gauge Stabilizer at Wytch Farm to Extend the ERD Envelope," paper SPE 30462, 1995.

Payne, M.L. and Spanos, P.D., "Advances in Dynamic Bottomhole Assembly Modeling and Dynamic Response Determination," paper SPE 23905, 1992.

Payne, M.L., Abbassian, F.A., and Hatch, A.J., "Drillstring Dynamic Problems and Solutions for Extended-Reach Drilling Operations,"

paper presented at the 1995 ASME Energy-Sources Technology Conference, Houston, Jan. 29–Feb. 1.

Rasmussen, B., Sorheim, E., Seiffert, O., Angeltvadt, O., and Gjedrem, T.:

"World Record in Extended Reach Drilling, Well 33/9-C10, Statfjord Field, Norway," paper SPE 21984, 1991.

Rollins, H.M.: "Are 3° and 5° 'Straight Holes' Worth Their Cost?" O&GJ (1959).

Sananikone, P., Kamoshima, O., and White, D.B.: "A Field Method for Controlling Drillstring Torsional Vibrations," paper SPE 23891, 1992.

Sheppard, M.C., Wick, C., and Burgess, T.: "Designing Well Paths To Reduce Drag and Torque," SPEDE (Dec. 1987) 344-350.

Slavomir, S.O. and Azar, J.J.: "The Effects of Mud Rheology on Annular Hole Cleaning in Directional Wells," SPEDE (Aug. 1986) 297.

Thomas, R.P., Azar, J.J., and Becker, T.E.: "Drillpipe Eccentricity Effect on Drilled Cuttings Behavior in Vertical Wellbores," JPT (Sept. 1982) 1929.

Thorogood, J.L.: "Instrument Performance Models and Their Practical Application to Directional Surveying Operations," SPEDE (Dec. 1990) 294-298.

Thorogood, J.L. and Sawaryn, S.J.: "The Traveling Cylinder–A Practical Tool for Collision Avoidance," SPEDE (Mar. 1991).

Underwood, L. and Odell, A.: "A Systems Approach to Downhole Adjustable Stabilizer Design and Application," paper SPE 27484, 1994.

Williamson, J.S. and Lubinski, A.: "Predicting Bottomhole Assembly Performance," paper SPE 14764, 1986.

Wolff, C.J.M. and de Wardt, J.P.: "Borehole Position Uncertainty—Analysis of Measuring Methods and Derivation of Systematic Error Model," JPT (Dec. 1981) 2339-50.

Chapter 3 - Horizontal, Multilateral and Multibranch Wells in Petroleum Production Engineering

The Petroleum Well Construction Book was published by John Wiley and Sons. Content provided has been authored or co-authored by Halliburton employees to be used for educational

purposes.

Michael J. Economides, Texas A&M University Dan R. Collins, Halliburton Energy Services W.E. (Bill) Hottman, Halliburton Energy Services James R. Longbottom, Halliburton Energy Services

Introduction

Rather than attempting to move hydrocarbons into vertical wellbores that may not be well positioned, the industry is now resorting to the use of horizontal, multilateral, and multibranch wells that move the wellbore closer to the hydrocarbons in place.

Multilateral well systems allow multiple producing wellbores to be drilled radially from a single section of a "parent" wellbore. A major difference between this method and conventional sidetracking is that both the parent wellbore and the lateral extensions produce hydrocarbons.

Because only a single vertical wellbore is required, multilateral well designs require less drilling time, often have fewer equipment and material requirements, and increase hydrocarbon production. Typical multilateral applications include:

• Improving productivity from thin reservoirs

• Draining multiple, closely spaced target zones with horizontal exposure of each zone

• Improving recovery in tight, low-permeability zones (increasing the drainage radius of a given well)

• Preventing water and/or gas coning

• Controlling sand production through lower drawdown at the sand face

• Improving the usability of slot-constrained platform structures

• Improving waterflood and enhanced oil recovery efficiency

• Intersecting vertical fractures

Background

Multilateral drilling and completion methods have been practiced since the mid-1940s. The first applications were developed for mining, where multiple bores were drilled from the parent shaft. These short, directional

displacement bores were achieved with bent subs and the conventional rotary drilling technology of the time. Several patents were issued covering multilateral or multibore tools and methods for use in mining (Gilbert, Rehm), but the technology was not initially used in the oil field.

For years, hydraulic fracturing (although not really a competitor of modern multilateral drilling) provided large areal exposure between the well and the reservoir. However, with the significant advancements in horizontal drilling technology in the mid-1980s and its evolution into multilateral drilling in the mid-1990s, the performance of a vertical well with a hydraulic fracture can now be readily surpassed by a properly oriented horizontal or multilateral well in an areally anisotropic reservoir. Furthermore, horizontal wells provide better results in reservoirs with large gas caps or water aquifers.

The first extensive modern application of multilateral drilling was in the Austin Chalk formations in Texas during the late 1980s. High initial production rates and high decline rates required increased reservoir face exposure for the achievement of maximum production in the shortest possible time.

Austin Chalk and Buda Chalk reservoirs are conducive to multilateral applications because of the deposition geometry and integrity of the reservoirs. Chalk formation depositions are wide-ranging and highly fractured. Horizontal drilling tools and techniques intercepted and connected many of these natural fractures. The inherent stability of the formations allowed extended horizontal sections to be drilled without the threat of formation collapse and subsequent loss of the producing wellbore.

Accurately drilling through and connecting or isolating fractured sections of the reservoirs required several technologies, including horizontal drilling, directional drilling, and measurement-while-drilling (MWD) tools and processes. (Fig. 3-1)

Figure 3-1 Multiple drainholes as applied to the Austin Chalk