SPE 93695

Applications of Underbalanced Drilling Reservoir Characterization for Water Shut Off in

a Fractured Carbonate Reservoir A Project Overview
D. Murphy, Petroleum Development Oman, I. Davidson, Shell UBD Global Implementation Team; Kennedy, Blade Energy
Partners, R. Busaidi and J. Wind, Petroleum Development Oman, C. Mykytiw, Shell UBD Global Implementation Team, L.
Arsenault, Precision Drilling UBD

Copyright 2005, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.

This paper was prepared for presentation at the 14th SPE Middle East Oil & Gas Show and
Conference held in Bahrain International Exhibition Centre, Bahrain, 1215 March 2005.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
information contained in a proposal submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to a proposal of not more than 300
words; illustrations may not be copied. The proposal must contain conspicuous
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O.
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.

Abstract
Following successful implementation of underbalanced
drilling in Petroleum Development Oman (PDO) an evaluation
of the value of underbalanced drilling (UBD) in a northern
carbonate field was commissioned. The study showed that
there was a production upside to developing the reservoir with
UBD. A four-well trial campaign was conducted between June
and October 2004 to assess the potential.
The trial campaign was implemented following a structured
program built from PDOs previous experience. During this
campaign a Reservoir Characterization (RC) system allowing
identification of multiple high permeability features was
developed. Water shut-off devices were installed in two wells
based upon the results of the Reservoir Characterisation
system. Production in the four wells was equivalent to or
greater than field average and the campaign scope has been
increased. The campaign was also a stepping stone towards
the goal of integrating UBD, Reservoir Characterization and
water shut off techniques.
Introduction
When UBD operations commenced in this northern
carbonate field, forty six wells had been drilled underbalanced
for PDO in the preceding two years1,2,3,4,5.
This northern field in Petroleum Development Oman
(PDO) is a heavily faulted and fractured carbonate reservoir.
The main reservoir is the Aptian Shuaiba Formation consisting
of rudist-bearing reefal shelf margin deposits with a complex
depositional architecture. Porosities range from 14% 26%.
Matrix permeability is highly variable ranging from 1 md

1D, with an average of circa. 20mD. The fracture system plays

a substantial role both in early high rate oil production and in
the increase in water production. In some cases, the high oil
rates are believed to be a flush production of oil which has
accumulated in the fractures. Previous reservoir studies also
concluded that the fractures were implicated in the movement
of water. Post-drilling, fracture systems were identified by the
interpretation of formation image logs the conductivity of
the fracture could not be determined.
A reservoir study to assess the value of UBD in this field
indicated a production upside associated with drilling
underbalanced. Four wells (ref. Fig. 1 - well schematic) were
drilled underbalanced during the campaign trial.
The primary objectives of the campaign were to realize an
increase in production and to evaluate the use of real time
Reservoir Characterization to identify features (including
fractures), that were believed to be responsible for water
production. Reservoir Characterization (RC), as applied here,
is the ability of UBD to statically (as well as dynamically)
characterize the reservoir while drilling by collecting and
monitoring surface and bottom hole (using a pressure while
drilling sub) flowing parameters.
The improvement in production performance was expected
because of the reduction in matrix damage (caused by UBD
conditions), especially in the tight facies, allowing even flow
along the wellbore. With even flow there is the potential that
water breakthrough will be delayed and hence, ultimate
recovery improved.
Once conductive features were identified, solid expandable
tubing (SET) or alternatives were planned to isolate these
water contributing intervals prior to the well coming on
stream. This, it was hoped, would delay the onset of dominant
water production. During another UBD campaign single
fractures had been identified6 & 7. The technique of identifying
multiple contributing fractures in a wellbore was not
developed at the start of this campaign.
Project Management
Experience had shown that when moving a UBD operation
from one field to another the process must be managed in a

www.petroman.ir

SPE 93695

structured manner. Assumptions regarding the similarity of

reservoirs and operations could not be made.
Preparations for moving the UBD operation to this were
managed using a detailed project plan. The plan that was
developed by Shells Global Implementation Team for UBD
identifies almost six hundred steps (issues) that are involved
when implementing a new UBD project. The UBD operation
in PDO was established, allowing the number of
implementation steps to be substantially reduced. The whole
team (subsurface engineering, service providers and drilling
engineering) met on a weekly basis to progress, raise and
resolve issues relating to the project.
Structure of the Project Plan
The plan identifies the six main steps to implementing a
UBD project as:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Concept Selection
Front End Engineering and Design
Detailed Engineering and Design
Construction and Commissioning
Start Up
Project Close out

Within each of these main categories is a wide ranging list

of activities including, but not limited to: Health, Safety and
Environment (HSE); rig interfacing; training programs; fluid
selection; site layout; completion design; operational
procedures; company specific procedures; Shell guidelines;
etc.
Issues Identified during Project Implementation
UBD for Life
For the first time during the current UBD campaign the
operation was faced with wells that were known to flow to
surface. Using the existing well design the well would have to
be killed for each trip to surface and to run the completion,
potentially impairing the formation.
As it was suspected that the tight Shuaiba carbonate is
susceptible to damage when exposed to overbalanced
conditions a downhole isolation valve (DHIV) was used for
drilling and the initial stage of completing the well. This
avoided the need to kill the wells when tripping to surface. It
also provided an opportunity to resolve the issue of the extent
of formation damage in Shuaiba carbonate reservoirs by
isolating the formation from potential overbalance conditions
when tripping. A DHIV had previously been evaluated in a
previous UBD operation as part of a trial. It was decided to
use the same DHIV, and it would be installed as deep as
possible on the concentric casing8. The concentric casing was
used to inject the lift gas instead of using drillstring injection.
Use of the DHIV also meant that the well would be prevented
from flowing to surface.
The completion was installed in two stages. The first stage
involved running a packer and tailpipe complete with a preset
plug. With the DHIV closed, the packer and tailpipe were run

in the hole on drillpipe and the assembly set in the liner below
the concentric casing PBR (refer to fig. 2). The plug and
packer provided isolation from the reservoir allowing the
concentric casing and the DHIV to be retrieved. The second
stage involved running the production tubing into the well and
stabbing it into the preset tailpipe.
It is planned that subsequent well interventions will also be
carried out underbalanced to preserve the benefits of UBD.
Reservoir Characterization
Reservoir Characterisation (RC), is the ability of UBD to
characterize the reservoir while drilling by collecting and
monitoring surface and bottom hole flowing parameters.
A key objective of the campaign was to be able to identify
water-contributing fractures or other conductive features and
to shut them off once identified. To the best of our knowledge
UBD had never been used specifically for this purpose. It was
necessary to assimilate the data (drawdown, pressure while
drilling, flow rates, etc) to produce a method that would allow
fracture identification while drilling underbalanced. This was
achieved by developing the analysis techniques on a well-bywell basis. The technique used is continuously being revised
and improved and specific details of the techniques used will
be the subject of a further paper. By monitoring production
from the reservoir during UBD, the Productivity Index (PI)
can be calculated while drilling. Although this is an
instantaneous (and transient) PI that is not truly indicative of
productivity behavior, trends and variability in this PI, and
correlation to other data sources can be used to obtain valuable
information about the reservoir. By monitoring PI in real time,
it is possible to identify fractures/features and take steps to
isolate them during the completion phase. With successive
increases in reservoir deliverability, the PI increases. An
example of one phenomenon identified is flush production:
flush production is characterized by a sudden increase in
return fluid rate.
In line with the agreed plan for testing the reservoir,
regular well tests were initially required. The purpose of the
first well test was to learn about the reservoir by determining a
baseline productivity index (PI) and also a reservoir pressure.
The first well test was performed once 100 m of Shuaiba
formation had been drilled. Thereafter, production tests were
determined by offset resistivity, porosity and saturation
criteria. The second test was based upon encountering 50 m of
Shuaiba formation with pre-specified properties. However, if
these properties were not encountered then a production test
was required after drilling 200 m from the previous test.
Sudden events, such as an increase in gross flow rate also
required a well test. The final well test was performed at
section TD.
Key Performance Indicators
The purpose of the Key Performance Indicators (KPI) was
to provide HSE and technical assessments of the success of the
project. The criteria monitored were:

www.petroman.ir

SPE 93695

HSE criteria e.g. Lost Time Incidents (LTIs),

High Potential Incidents (HPIs) and oil spills.
Technical e.g. maintain UB conditions, nonproductive time (NPT) directly related to UB,
improving UB performance through time
reduction.

Commercial performance indicators were used which were

Specific, Measurable, Accurate, Realistic, and Time-bound
(SMART) e.g. delay in water breakthrough, and non-SMART
e.g. ultimate recovery improvement and matrix PI
improvement. Some of these SMART and non-SMART
performance indicators are based on long term observations
and the results are still being assessed.
Each criterion was giving a weighting that would
contribute to the overall score and a level of success was
established. The establishment and acceptance of these criteria
meant that there be would a common consensus and definition
as to whether the project was a success or failure.
Operations
Execution Summary
The four wells in the campaign were all completed
barefoot (refer to Table 1). There were no HSE incidents
during operations. The first two wells were batch drilled, i.e.
the top hole was drilled with another rig prior to the arrival of
the drilling rig and UBD package. The remaining two wells
were drilled sequentially. Initially the wells were tested every
200m but the final well was only tested at TD, reducing the
time spent well testing from 2.8 days to 0.7 respectively. The
NPT was reduced from 6.2 days on the first well to 0.18 days
by the fourth well.
Well
Name
UBD 1
UBD 2
UBD 3
UBD 4

Open Hole
Length (m)
598
572
567
495
Table 1

Well TD
(m)
2207
2249
2242
2175

Operational Issues
Downhole Isolation Valve
NPT directly related to the DHIV was experienced on two
of the four wells.
UBD 1: The well had to be killed prior to tripping the
drill string due to the DHIV failure. An interesting result of the
failure, and subsequent exposure of the reservoir to
overbalanced conditions, was the clearly observable
reduction in production rate from the well. An investigation
into the failure of the DHIV showed that the sealing flapper
had been damaged and washed out preventing a seal from
being achieved.

UBD 2: The DHIV could not be closed after multiple

trips through it. The reason for failure is unknown.
Best practices for using the valve have been developed and
well UBD 4 was drilled without problems.
Export Pump
Despite the thoroughness of the implementation process, it
is sometimes possible to deviate from the plan. In one such
case, the existing low volume high pressure export pump that
had been with the UBD spread was replaced while drilling the
first well, because the volume of produced fluid while drilling
exceeded both pump capacity and expected well delivery.
Overgauge Hole
It had been planned to isolate water producing features
using SET technology. Cuttings returns and caliper logs from
previous operations indicated that the hole would be
overgauge. A log taken while drilling showed that the
reservoir section of the first well drilled was overgauge. Logs
on subsequent wells showed that the degree of borehole
enlargement was increased at each well test depth. The
enlarged borehole diameter was greater than the expansion
limits of the SET so that it could not be installed. Steps taken
to reduce the amount of borehole enlargement include: using a
6 bit; using a motor which has a reduced bit to bend length,
thus reducing the bend required9; reducing the amount of flow
testing (less time in open hole); and reducing the circulating
time prior to the well test; minimizing drawdown. The future
success of integrating UBD and RC with water shut off is
dependent upon drilling a gauge borehole, the root causes of
UBD borehole enlargement have not yet been fully identified.
Settlement behind the Concentric Casing
The lift gas was injected via a perforated joint run as part
of the concentric casing. For three out of four wells drilled
solids accumulated on the plug installed in the tail packer. The
drilled solids were behind the concentric casing and during
recovery of the concentric casing fell on the plug. Coiled
tubing was mobilized to remove the drilled solids from the
plug. To prevent this sequence of events re-occuring the OnOff connector of the packer assembly was extended to a point
just above the perforated joint in the concentric casing. The
result was that the plug was recovered on the first attempt in
well UBD 4.
Reservoir Characterization
Original Data Presentation
Initially Flowing While Drilling (FWD) data was
presented. The graphs used plotted measured cumulative
volume produced versus well depth. Bottomhole pressures
or log data were often added to the plots to aid in their
interpretation (ref Fig. 3). This data was looked at and
compared with the operations time breakdown and drilling
logs. This allowed some reservoir features to be inferred but it
is a subjective process and definite conclusions cannot be
made.

www.petroman.ir

SPE 93695

During the 4-well campaign, the UBD implementation

team developed methods to improve the FWD data
interpretation.
Developing the Art
Early steps included clean-up of the data by taking out all
trips and other periods without production from the UBD
filtered data. Subsequently, flow rates were calculated by
dividing the incremental volume change by the corresponding
time change. Plotting the production rate versus well depth
yielded a curve with tremendous character, but also significant
noise. To correct for the effect of varying BHP during drilling,
an instantaneous PI was calculated by dividing the calculated
instantaneous rates (time derivative of measured cumulative
volume produced) by the inferred drawdown. This gave a
noisy representation, obscuring key trends and complicating
subsequent interpretation.
While the methods employed on the first two wells
identified some features, in at least one case, the method by
which the data was presented failed to identify the origin of
water production. Obviously, there was still too much noise in
the plots. Subsequent improvements to the data presentation
were made by applying other lagging methods for the volume
fractions and by plotting other Flow parameters. The
concept of rate integral time from rate transient analyses was
used to good effect to improve the quality and resolution of
the plots (refer to fig. 4). Filtering and noise reduction
methods were also used to improve the data presentation and
highlight key trends. Other data sources (such a log data,
drilling reports, etc.) were used to improve the correlation
between a trend and a reservoir characteristic, thus improving
the accuracy of interpretation
Impact of UBD Reservoir Characterization on Well
Delivery
Based upon the information gathered and interpreted from
the well plots it was decided to install plug and abandonment
kits in wells UBD -1 at 1967m AHMD and UBD - 3 at 2125m
AHMD. This isolated features that were identified as being
contributory to the eventual watering out of the well. The
preferred option of installing SETs could not be performed
because the hole diameter was greater than the limits
necessary for SETs.
The four UBD wells, when compared to offset wells,
showed an increase in initial productivity index. The results
are shown in Table 2 where the Productivity Index Factor
(PIF) is the result of the PI of the UBD well divided by the PI
of the offset well.
Well
PIF
UBD 1 2.5
UBD 2 3.8
UBD 3 6.2
UBD 4 8.5
Table 2

first 80 m of the reservoir section, this allowed the decision to

be made to steer the well downward whereupon producing
formations were encountered. The real time production data
from UBD - 4 has proven that the tight lower oil saturation
facies are not contributing to water production. This confirms
that no isolations are required across this zone and
significantly reduces well completion costs.
Once confidence had grown in the interpretation of the
data the time spent performing well tests was reduced to 25%
of the initial time.
Conclusions
UBD in PDO has been used in this northern carbonate field
to great benefit. The project was efficiently implemented. Key
issues such as use of the DHIV were identified and the correct
procedures put in place for their effective use. The success of
the four well trial has led to an extension of the campaign to
the entire 2005 drilling program.
Real time Reservoir Characterization has been effectively
used for the first time in PDO. By the end of the campaign, it
was an integral element of both reservoir evaluation and
operational decisions. Despite the art of RC being rapidly
progressed during the campaign, it remains in its infancy
and its full potential is far from being achieved. A substantial
amount of research and development is required to fully
realize and capture the value of Reservoir Characterization.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the Ministry of Oil & Gas and
management of PDO for their permission to publish this paper.
The work and results achieved during the execution of this
project would not have been possible without the efforts and
co-operations of the following: the Rig Team for PDO Rig 54
(both on site and office based) from PDO and Precision
Drilling; the underbalanced service provider Precision
Drilling; Blade Energy Partners; the PDO subsurface team for
this northern carbonate field; the Shell Global Implementation
Team in Dubai; Weatherford Oil Tools Middle East; and
Halliburton-Sperry Sun.
References
1. Francis, P. A., PDO, Davidson, I. A., Shell GIT,
Harthi, S., PDO, Geldof, W., PDO, Culen, M. S.
Northland and Jenkins, T., Weatherford Low
Risk/High Reward Strategy Drives Underbalanced
Drilling Implementation in PDO SPE/IADC 79853.
This paper was presented at the SPE/IADC Drilling
Conference held in Amsterdam, The Netherlands,
1921 February 2003.
2.

The trajectory of UBD - 4 was essentially drilled based

upon UBD data. There was no observed production from the

www.petroman.ir

Francis, P. A., PDO, Murphy, D. J., PDO, Khan, S.,

PDO and Culen, M. S., Precision Drilling UBD,
Innovative Contracting Strategy Complements
Technical Benefits of UBD in a Low Cost
Environment, SPE/IADC 85321. This paper was
presented at the SPE/IADC Drilling Conference held
in Abu Dhabi, UAE, 2022 October 2003.

SPE 93695

3.

Ramalho, J., Shell UBD Global Implementation

Team, Medeiros, R., PDO, Francis, P. A., PDO,
Davidson, I. UBD Global Implementation Team A.,
Shell, The Nimr Story: Reservoir Exploitation Using
UBD Techniques SPE/IADC 81623. This paper was
presented at the IADC/SPE Underbalanced
Technology Conference and Exhibition held in
Houston, Texas, U.S.A., 2526 March 2003.

4.

Walid Eissa, S. Al-Harthi, SPE, PDO, Under

Balanced Drilling Building the Future for PDO,
SPE/IADC 85317. This paper was presented at the
SPE/IADC Middle East Drilling Technology
Conference & Exhibition held in Abu Dhabi, UAE,
20-22 October 2003.

5.

Culen, M.S. - Precision Drilling Services UBD,

Harthi, S. - Petroleum Development Oman, and
Hashimi, H. Petroleum Development Oman, A
Direct Comparison between Conventional and
Underbalanced Drilling Techniques in the Saih Rawl
Field, Oman IADC/SPE 81629. This paper was
presented at the IADC/SPE Underbalanced
Technology Conference and Exhibition held in
Houston, Texas, U.S.A., 2526 March 2003.

6.

I. Davidson, SPE, Shell EP International Ltd, R.

Medeiros, SPE, Petroleum Development Oman; D.
Reitsma, SPE, Shell International EP, B.V.; B. Selby,
SPE, Shell International EP, Inc. Changing the
Value Equation for Underbalanced Drilling SPE
91559. This paper was presented at the IADC/SPE
Underbalanced
Technology
Conference
and
Exhibition held in Houston, Texas, U.S.A. October
2004.

7.

Richard S. Medeiros, Petroleum Development Oman;

Deepankar Biswas, DeGolyer and MacNaughton*;
and P.V. Suryanarayana, Blade Energy Partners.
*Formerly with Blade Energy Partners, Impact of
Thief Zone Identification and Shut-off on Water
Production in the Nimr Field, SPE 91665 This paper
was presented at the IADC/SPE Underbalanced
Technology Conference and Exhibition held in
Houston, Texas, U.S.A. October 2004.

8.

C.G. Mykytiw, I.A. Davidson, Shell UBD Global

Implementation Team, P.J. Frink, Blade Energy
Partners, Design and Operational Considerations to
Maintain Underbalanced Conditions with Concentric
Casing Injection., SPE 81631, This paper was
presented at the IADC/SPE Underbalanced
Technology Conference and Exhibition held in
Houston, Texas, U.S.A. March 2003

9.

Mohammed Al Jahwari , Petroleum Development

Oman, Salah Al Bahlany , Petroleum Development
Oman, Bill Blaschke, Halliburton Sperry-Sun, Rick
Russell, SPE , Halliburton Sperry-Sun, Controlling
Borehole Geometry Allows the Use of Expandable

www.petroman.ir

Clads to Control Water Influx in Fractured Carbonate

Reservoir, SPE 93655. This paper was presented at
the 14th SPE Middle East Oil & Gas Show and
Conference held in Bahrain International Exhibition
Centre, Bahrain, 1215 March 2005.

SPE 93695

7 CONCENTRIC CASING
PERFORATED JOINT
DOWNHOLE ISOLATION VALVE
SEAL ASSEMBLY

7 LINER TOP & TIE BACK

9 5/8 SHOE

6 1/8 OPEN HOLE

Figure 1

7 CONCENTRIC CASING
PERFORATED JOINT
DOWNHOLE ISOLATION VALVE
SEAL ASSEMBLY

7 LINER TOP & TIE BACK

9 5/8 SHOE

TAILPIPE PACKER
TAILPIPE PLUG

COMPLETION
TAILPIPE
7 LINER SHOE

6 1/8 OPEN HOLE

Figure 2

www.petroman.ir

SPE 93695

P r o d u c e d V o lu m e s d u r in g d r illin g v s . D e p t h
Al H u w a is a h AH -1 4 2

UBD - 1

1000

8000

P rod uc ed O il

900

7000

P rod uc ed W a ter
D raw do w n
P res s u re

6000

700

Oil volum e m

Wa ter v olum e m

Produce d Liquid Volum e )(m

800

5000

600
500

4000

400
3000
300
2000
200
1000

100
0

1690

1740

1790

1840

1890

1940

1990

2040

2090

2140

2190

D e p th (m M D )

Figure 3

UBD
-4
AH-145
15,000

0.08
Water PI

Draw Down

BHCP

0.06

9,000

0.05

6,000

0.04

3,000

0.03

(Water PI is plotted at 10x)

12,000

0.02

0.01

Measured Depth (m)

Figure 4

www.petroman.ir

2400

2380

2360

2340

2320

2300

2280

2260

2240

2220

2200

2180

2160

2140

2120

2100

2080

2060

2040

2020

2000

1980

1960

1940

1920

1900

1880

1860

1840

1820

1800

1780

1760

1740

Pressure (kPa)

Gross PI

0.07

1720

PI (m3/kPa/d)

Oil PI