I Society of PetroleumEngineers I
SPE 24981
Innovative Slim-Hole Completions
B.R. Ross and A.M. Faure, Shell Research B.V.; E.E. Kitsios, Petroleum Development Oman;
Peter Oosterling, Shell Research B.V.; and R.S. Zettle, Baker Hughes Inc.
Copyright 1992, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc
This paper was prepared for presentation at the European Petroleum Conference held in Cannes. France. 16-18 November 1992.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following revlew of mformation contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper.
as presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect
any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committeesof the Society
of Petroleum Engineers. Permission to copy IS restrictedto an abstract of not more than 300 words. Illustrationsmay not be copied. The abstract should contain conspicuous acknowledgment
of where and by whom the paper is presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O. Box 833836, Richardson, TX 750833836, U.S.A. Telex, 183245 SPEUT.
ABSTRACT eventually rise to the point that new oil and gas
The successful development of slim-hole drilling and developments in a given area will cease. Clearly, if
evaluation technologies has created business viable oil and gas development is to continue in
opportunities that are contingent on the mature areas, controllable factors such as capital
development of complementary slim-hole well and operating cost that affect the unit cost of
completion technology. The monobore well production must'be reduced.
completion philosophy is presented. Potential
applications and limitations of slim-hole completions An assessment of Shell's existing reservoirs on a
are discussed. Areas requiring further development worldwide basis concluded that 40% of the original
are identified. oil in place would be produced using existing
technology, 20% of the oil would be by-passed, 20%
INTRODUCTION left in remaining oil columns and 20% was residual
oil saturation. If one half of the by-passed oil and
The fit-for-purpose slim-hole completion design is remaining columns could be economically produced,
driven by the need to capitalize fully on the cost Shell's reserves of producible oil would be increased
reduction potential of slim-hole drilling technology. by 50%.
Such completions moreover satisfy the increased
drive towards through tubing workovers that yield In 1987 it was concluded that drilling and completing
benefit in reducing time and costs. new wells accounted for between 30 to 70% of initial
capital cost for oil and gas field developments. This
BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT prompted a focused approach so as to reduce these
up-front expenditures without adversely affecting
In many mature oil and gas fields, the trend towards well productivity or operability.
incremental reserves that can be attributed to new
wells generally decreases as a function of the In particular, when it is considered that Shell
number of wells drilled. Figure 1 illustrates this currently spends in excess of $US 2 billion per
"creaming curve concept". Given this trend (all else annum on drilling, completing and working over
being equal), the unit cost of production will wells, even a small percentage reduction in these
expenditures will yield an immediate benefit.
References and illustrations at end of paper
INNOVATIVE SLIM-HOLE COMPLETIONS SPE 24981
APPLICATIONS FOR SLIM-HOLE DRILLING production basis, studies have shown that through-
tubing workovers may be 5 to 7 times more cost-
Further study concluded that a large portion of well effective than conventional rig-type workovers.
drilling cost is a direct function of hole size.
Consequently, a research programme was The traditional tubing/packerltailpipe completion was
commissioned to develop slim-hole drilling developed at a time when slick line or snubbing were
technology so as to reduce the viable well diameter the only viable methods for intervening in live wells.
range by at least one size. This development was During this period slick line developed as a cost-
originally aimed at comparatively inexpensive effective and safe method for controlling sub-surface
disposable shallow, low-temperature, low-pressure flow within the production tubing and conveying
exploration wells. The results of the drilling research downhole pressure recorders. Although snubbing
are presented in a companion paper [I]. operations have demonstrated their value in many
venues, cosVcomplexitylsafety concerns have
As the slim-hole project progressed, it became prevented general acceptance.
apparent that slim-hole drilling could be beneficial
not only to disposable exploration wells but also in The development of grease injection systems that
many other applications including: allow braided electric wirelines to be safely run in
- low-cost development wells, which may increase live wells, coupled with the emergence of modern
the ability to exploit small, otherwise uneconomic, coiled tubing and the associated equipment, has
reserves, including infill drilling for by-passed oil opened many opportunities for through-tubing, live-
and thin oil rims. well workovers.
- high-pressurelhigh-temperature applications
where slim-hole technology increases the The industry has devoted a considerable amount of
number of economicallyltechnically feasible effort to developing procedures, tools and equipment
casing strings. that use electric line or coiled tubing as a
- deepening or side-tracking out of existing wells conveyance. These include cement squeezing,
to access new reserves or by-passed oil or to cement plugs, inflatable through tubing bridge plugs,
realize the benefits of converting existing wells to mechanical through-tubing bridge plugs, under-
horizontal wells. reamers, production logging tools and hydraulic jet
- the possibility of developing root wells (or cleaners. This technology, although very useful in
multilateral wells) for enhanced well inflow, or the proper application, is often limited in
commingled drainage of hydraulically isolated performance because of the requirement that tools
reservoir blocks. must pass through the minimum inner diameter of a
Historically, new drilling technologies have had tubing string and function in a casing string that
limited impact on well completion planning. Prior to typically has an inner diameter three times larger
the development of slim-hole drilling technology, than the tubing.
there was little or no cost advantage in reducing the
production casing diameter to less than 7". In summary, through-tubing workovers are
Traditional casing sizes in turn supported the comparatively cost-effective, save time, minimize
conventional tubinglpackerltailpipe completion. downtime and minimize formation impairment. Many
Studies indicate that well cost savings of 15 to 40% other operations and technologies, such as sand
can be realised with available slim-hole drilling consolidation of long intervals, is limited by the
technology necessitating a fit-for-purpose completion limitations that the conventional
design allowing the final production liner diameter to tubinglpackerltailpipe imposes on the requirements
be reduced from 7" to 3.5. This prompted the for SPT's. Development of through-tubing workover
adoption of a new completion style, equipment and technology would be enhanced by a complementary
philosophy. completion style.
THROUGH-TUBING WORKOVERS MONOBORE WELL COMPLETION
When compared with conventional workovers, The concept of monobore well completion was
through-tubing workovers offer many advantages pioneered by Shell UK Exploration and Production in
that directly impact on project profitability. Generally conjunction with various select service companies in
they can be safely conducted without killing wells, the 1980's. The primary feature of monobore
which mitigates formation damage. The work can be completion is that the production tubing is the same
conducted more quickly than with a rig, which allows diameter as or larger than the production liner and
wells to be returned to service sooner, and requires there are no permanent diameter restrictions such
fewer personnel. On an incremental barrel of
SPE 24981 B.R. ROSS, A.M. FAURE, E. KITSIOS,[Link] AND R.S. ZElTLE
as restrictive nipples or locator seal assemblies to THE 3 112" SLIM MONOBORE COMPLETION
limit full-bore access to the productive horizon.
It is incumbent on every well designer to give due
The key advantage is that the opportunity for consideration to individual well function, productivity
effective rigless well intervention is maximized, and reserve recovery, flexibility, initial capital costs
which increases the ease with which wells and and operating costs with the objective of designing
therefore reservoirs can be managed. Another an optimized well. It is not the intention of the
major advantage is that well impairment and authors to imply that a 3 112" monobore is suitable
formation damage are mitigated, since safe for wholesale application.
operations can be conducted on live wells. Other
advantages include: The 3 112" slim monobore completion size was
- The completion style is simple, requiring a selected as a base case for tool development for
minimum of equipment to be installed in the well low-temperature, low-pressure wells because:
at the time of completion. - 3 112" production tubing is typically suited for
- The largest possible perforating guns can be run wells with oil production rates of below 3000-
into the production liner through tubing. 5000 bopd or gas production rates of less that 50
- Reliable, low-expansion tools can be used within MMSCFId (a large proportion of wells).
the liner. - 3 112" production tubing can be run inside 5" and
- Scale clean-out operations of the liner are easily 5 112" production casings. A 3 112" liner is
achieved on coiled tubing or with a snubbing unit complementary to the 4 118" and 4 314" slim-hole
using a full-bore mill. drilling system [I].
- Full-bore production logging tools are possible. - The current generation of successful monobore
- The potential to minimize the casing required for tools have been primarily 4 1/2", 5" and 5 112"
a required tubing size. sizes. Redesign of the current generation tools
The service industry has developed a range of to work in 3 112" tubings and casings was a
equipment for operating monobore wells. Of note logical step in monobore tool technology.
are the wireline set and retrievable straddle tools
and wireline set retrievable bridge plugs. The bridge The monobore completion style was selected
plugs can be run to hydraulically isolate specific sets because it:
of perforations when desired. The plugs can be set - allows reduction of the casing around the
to isolate lower zones in wells as well as to protect optimum tubing size,
and secure a well for workover operations. These - increases operating flexibility to optimize
tools facilitate cost-effective shut-off of undesirable production rates and reservoir recoveries,
zones such as those producing water, gas and thief - potentially minimizes operating costs,
zones without rig intervention. An important feature - potentially minimizes downtime.
of these devices is that they are retrievable, so that
they can be removed and replaced in the event that In addition, the monobore completion style will
well conditions change. facilitate continued growth in the development of
cost-effective reliable coiled-tubing applications.
It is important to clarify the distinction between a
"monobore" completion and a "nippleless" Two "standard" casing schemes have been
completion. Slip-type flow control devices that can established for the 3 112" monobore well. For new
be set in the production liner of monobore wells, a 5 112" production casing with a 3 112"
completions do not require landing nipples; as a production liner is the preferred case. The 5 112"
result of this, occasionally people draw the casing provides sufficient inner diameter to run gas
conclusion that monobore completions do not lift mandrels and other standard completion
include landing nipples. In many cases, a monobore equipment and still allow passage of monobore tools
completion utilizes landing profiles for flow control and equipment. A second casing scheme is 5"
devices such as surface-controlled sub-surface production casing with a 3 112" production liner set
safety valves, sliding side doors and mandrels and below it. This scheme is considered applicable to
plugs. The key to monobore completion is that the cases in which wells are deepened below existing 5"
landing profiles do not inhibit (near) full-bore access production casings or liners. In many areas, a
to the production liner. casing scheme of a 3 112" liner, below a 5" liner,
below a 7" casing is expected. Figure 2 illustrates
the basic 3 112" monobore well completion.
Virtually all of the tools and equipment required to
complete and operate 3 112" monobore completions
4 INNOVATIVE SLIM-HOLE COMPLETIONS SPE 24981
are available from a limited number of service that wellbore diameter has little direct impact on the
companies. Slim-hole specific tools such as 5" x 3 inflow performance of a well. For instance, the PI
112"liner hangers incorporating tubing tiebacks are impact of reducing wellbore diameter from 8 112"to
available. Monobore flow control devices such as 4 314"wellbore is comparable with reducing wellbore
slip-type monobore plugs and wireline set and diameter from 12 114"to 8 1/2":Traditionally, it has
retrieved straddles are now available. Artificial lift been by exception that a 12 114"wellbore is justified
options include, amongst others, ESP's, gas lift and relative to an 8 112"wellbore on the basis of inflow
rod pumping. Further development of tools and performance.
equipment will be market-driven in response to
specific customer needs and requirements. The mechanical skin factor 'S' is a dimensionless
number that is used to compensate for near-
Todate, Shell's experience with 3 112"monobore wellbore effects. If, for instance, the formation
well completion is limited to two wells. These wells permeability in the near-wellbore area has been
have been recently completed and consequently reduced, a positive skin would result in reduced PI.
limited operating experience has been acquired. Conversely, effective stimulation may result in
This company, as well as other Shell operating increased permeability in the near-wellbore area and
companies, are evaluating further applications of this a negative skin would result in increased PI. Skin is
technology. a function of permeability changes in the near-
wellbore area, the extent of the damaged zone and
INFLOW PERFORMANCE the wellbore radius. As an alternative to using skin
factor it is possible to compensate for near-wellbore
The impact of slim-hole wells on inflow performance effects by deriving the steady-state radial flow
is a consideration in the evaluation of slim-hole equation for flow through a two-permeability system
drilling development well applications. The as illustrated in Fig. 4.
variations in reservoirs and completion requirements
make it outside the scope of this paper to study well Dake [2] derives the following equation:
inflow performance comprehensively as a function of
wellbore diameter. A brief argument is presented to
illustrate that the effect of wellbore diameter on well
inflow is often minimal and to discuss the magnitude
of performance impact that should be anticipated where a two-permeability system is assumed.
when considering slim-hole wells. Steady-state flow is assumed in the near-wellbore
area (r < ra) and semi-steady state flow is assumed
One must recognize that slim-hole monobore wells in the unaffected reservoir (r > ra). This equation
offer many features that are expected to offset the can be rearranged and expressed in terms of PI:
minimal inflow performance impact associated with
reducing wellbore diameter. As examples:
- The slim-hole drilling technology package
incorporates the essential elements to drill
horizontal wells in the pay zone for a small
incremental cost [I].
- The drilling fluid circulating system is smaller,
which means that a more expensive, less This equation may be used to compare the PI of two
damaging fluid could be used. Ultimately, it is different wellbores. If the depth of invasion or
envisioned that underbalancedcoiled-tubing stimulation is kept constant regardless of wellbore
drilling of the pay zone may become common diameter, the PI ratio for various wellbore diameters
where beneficial. can be compared:
- Cost savings during the drilling phase can justify
proportionately larger expenditures on effective
completion and stimulation procedures that will
maximize productivity.
- Post-completion damage is mitigated by
perforating underbalanced and thereafter
conducting virtually all operations in a live well.
Figure 3 is a plot of relative Productivity Indexes (PI)
for various wellbore diameters assuming a drainage
This equation can be used to generate plots such as
radius of 1475 ft, a neutral skin, and steady-state
Fig. 5. From this plot it appears that the effect of a
radial flow. This simplified analysis demonstrates
SPE 24981 B.R. ROSS, A.M. FAURE, E. KITSIOS,[Link] AND R.S. ZETTLE 5
reduced wellbore diameter is small if a high zonal isolation tools for use in a 3 112" production
completion efficiency is achieved. The monobore liner. At least two service companies are working on
well enhances the probability of attaining this variations of equipment that will allow installation of
objective. a "sliding side door" in the production liner.
Developments such as accurate downhole
This work was intended to demonstrate the range multiphase flowmeters would be of great value in
and magnitude of the inflow performance impact allowing commingling 6f stacked reservoirs.
from slimmed-down wells. Rate-dependent skin
effects normally associated with high-velocity flow of Sand control in such wells needs further
gas through porous media has not been presented development, since gravel packing technology would
in this simplistic study. Similarly, pseudo skin effects be difficult, especially in stacked reservoirs. Options
associated with partial completions have not been for sand consolidation in such scenarios are being
presented. Clearly, the potential inflow performance developed.
impact of slimming down wells must be analysed on
a case by case basis. CONCLUSIONS
APPLICATIONS FOR SLIM-HOLE WELLS The monobore completion design offers the
opportunity to complete wells with 3 112" production
Slim-hole wells are demonstrably applicable for: tubings and still reap the cost benefits of slim-hole
- enhancing the economics of small or marginal drilling.
developments.
- high-pressure, high-temperaturewells. Tools and equipment for completing slim-hole wells
- deepening or side-tracking of existing wells. as 3 112" monobore wells cost effectively are
- root well systems. currently available. Further development of
Slim-hole wells are also clearly attractive when the equipment will be driven by industry demand.
cost benefits of slim-hole drilling are not consumed
by impacts on well productivity and a 3.5" production The impact on inflow performance associated with
tubing is suitable for the expected inflow slimming wellbore diameters can be mitigated
performance. As an example, one Shell operating through effective completion procedures.
company has successfully completed gas wells in
carbonate reservoirs at a depth of approximately Early applications of slim-hole wells will provide
4000 m with 3 112" liners and reports no information for delineating the limits of slim-hole well
performance impact associated with slim-hole wells applications.
compared with 7" liners.
Continued development is required to optimize the
A large majority of wells fall into an area requiring application of slim-hole wells.
careful consideration and one must consider the life
cycle economics of a slim-hole well against the NOMENCLATURE
economics of the best conventional alternative on a
case by case basis. da = depth of invasion or stimulation
h = formation thickness
Small-diameter slim-hole wells should not be applied ka = permeability of affected zone
where highly productive wells are expected and well k, = permeability of unaffected reservoir
numbers adversely impact on infrastructure costs. A pe = pressure at the external boundary
deep-water off-shore development would typically be pwf = bottomhole flowing pressure
an example of where small-diameter slim-hole wells PI = Productivity Index
may not be applicable. None the less, even in areas q = production rate
where large production tubing is required, the basic ra = radius of affected zone
monobore design principles should still be re = external boundary radius
considered. rw = wellbore radius
S = mechanical skin factor
FURTHERDEVELOPMENT p = viscosity
Many developments are comprised of stacked ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
reservoirs, which have been traditionally produced
through selective single and dual completions. For Many people have made significant contributions to
the slim monobore to compete in these venues, it this paper and we wish to thank them all. Also, we
will be necessary to develop reliable cost-effective
6 INNOVATIVE SLIM-HOLE COMPLETIONS SPE 24981
-
wish to thank Shell Research B.V., Shell - 7
lntemationale Petroleum Maatschappij B.V., -
Petroleum Development Oman L.L.C. and Baker
Hughes, Inc. for permission to release this paper. t:
REFERENCES
-
V)
0)
5-
V)
1. R.N., Worrall et al.: "An Evolutionary Approach to
Slim-hole Drilling Evaluations and Completion", -
SPE 24965, Europec 1992, Cannes, France.
2. L.P., Dake: "Fundamentals of Reservoir
Engineering". Elsevier Scientific Publishing
Company, Amsterdam, Oxford, New York (1978).
I I I I I
Wells
I
-
I
Fig. 1 Creaming curve for oil and NGL
I I I I
Standard 3'12"
flow control equipment
with 2.813" seal bore ID
+-- Side pocket mandrels
with 2.813" ID
-
5'/2", 17.0 IWfl Liner hanger complete
production casing with tubing tieback
Retrievable straddle
H
a
+ Retrievable bridge plug
+ Permanent bridge plug
3lI2: 9.2lbbt 0 5 10 15 20
production liner Bit diameter (")
Fig. 2 Typical 3l12" monobore well completion Fig. 3 Well productivity relative to a 8.5"bore as a function
of bit diameter
Ida=0.1 m I
Bit diameter
Permeability ratio (Ka, Ke)
Fig. 5 Well productivity relative to an affected 8.5"wellbore
Fig. 4 lllustration of terminology used
in calculation of two k radial flow
