PETROLEUM SOCIETY PAPER 2001-027

CANADIAN INSTITUTE OF MINING, METALLURGY & PETROLEUM

Production Enhancement by Redevelopment

Through Multilateral Well Drilling in Tight
Clastic Reservoirs with Low Primary Recovery
R. Singh, O.P. Jhamb, T.C. Patra, U.K. Ghosh, A. Roy
Institute of Reservoir Studies, Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited (ONGC)

This paper is to be presented at the Petroleum Society’s Canadian International Petroleum Conference 2001, Calgary, Alberta,
Canada, June 12 – 14, 2001. Discussion of this paper is invited and may be presented at the meeting if filed in writing with the
technical program chairman prior to the conclusion of the meeting. This paper and any discussion filed will be considered for
publication in Petroleum Society journals. Publication rights are reserved. This is a pre-print and subject to correction.

ABSTRACT
Kalol field was discovered in June 1961 and over 500
wells have been drilled so far. The field has multi-layered
reservoirs with 11 pay horizons. Layers X and VII have
better sand thickness and continuity. Gross lithology is
mainly siltstone associated with shale and coal. The
permeability ranges from moderate to poor and the
primary reservoir drive mechanism is depletion. The
reservoir pressure has fallen sharply from super-
hydrostatic to substantially sub-hydrostatic at present.
An attempt is underway for the first time in onshore
areas, India to apply multilateral well technology in X
and VII reservoirs with suitable configuration after
integrating geological, reservoir and production data to
improve oil recovery. Two Pilot areas, one each in
horizon X and VII have been selected on the basis of pay
thickness and support of water injection. Current oil
recovery factors are 6.4% in pilot area of X and 12% in
VII. Two such wells, one each in horizon X and VII are
proposed to be drilled, having two laterals of 250m each.
t/d during 1989-90 and gradually declined to about 800t/d
The relative angle between two laterals will be 60 o. The
reduction in well spacing from 600-700m to 250m is also
good for optimising oil production in tight reservoirs.
Improvement in recovery factors to the tune of 1.2% in
horizon-X and 3.5% in horizon-VII have been envisaged
in 15 years at a favourable IRR with conservative oil
price of US$16/bbl.
INTRODUCTION
Kalol field is located about 16 km north of
Ahmedabad in the Ahmedabad-Mehsana tectonic block
of North Cambay basin in western India (Fig.1). The
Cambay basin comprises of many small to medium
oilfields. Some of them having production history of
more than 30 years. Kalol is one such field. It was
discovered in June 1961 and put on production in mid
sixties. It is amongst the first few finds by the state
owned Oil and Natural Gas Corporation (ONGC). One of
the major studies of the field was carried out in early
eighties by an Indo-Russian team 1. On implementation of
the recommendations production increased 2 fold to 1620
in 1995-96. Another major study namely, Integrated Development

1
Plan2, was prepared in 1996 and the inputs in the form of
infill wells and water injection were given. Production
increased by about 20% to 1000t/d in 1998- 99.
Recently, in a major restructuring exercise ONGC has
adopted Asset based concept for exploration and
production of its fields located in this part of the country,
which is popularly called the Western Onshore Business
Unit (WOBU). As a result of this the attention has
shifted to revitalization of the old and aging fields.
FIELD DESCRIPTION
The field is developed on a doubly plunging NNW-
SSE trending anticline, covering an area of about
250sq.km. It is sub-divided by an axial and two
transverse faults into 4 major structural blocks namely
North, Main, South and West. The main axial fault dips
easterly with a throw of 20-30m and is sealing in nature.
The depositional environment is lower delta plain under
fluvial-dominated deltaic system, represented by
siltstone-shale-coal litho-association of lower to middle
Eocene age. The reservoirs are of structural/ stratigraphic
nature. There are 11 hydrocarbon-bearing layers, KS-II to
KS-XII in top to bottom sequence occurring between
1250-1550m depths3&4 (Fig.2).
The field has in place oil of 115.5MMt which is
mainly distributed in KS-IV (11.6%), KS-VI+VII
(16.9%), KS-IX+X (41.5%) and KS-XII (11.1%). The
reservoir pressures of deeper sands like KS-VI+VII,
IX+X and XII were initially 20-50% above hydrostatic
levels and contained undersaturated oil of medium to
light gravity (35-400 API), low viscosity (0.6 to 1.0 CP)
having solution GOR of the order of 70-100v/v.
Reservoir temperature varies from 84 to 880C.
The predominant natural drive mechanism in major
reservoirs like KS-VI+VII, KS-IX+X and KS-XII is
depletion drive. Pressure maintenance by water injection
started in early 70's in KS-XII on central line drive and its
current recovery factor is about 28% thanks to timely
initiation of water injection and relatively better
petrophysical properties. In contrast KS-IX+X and KS-
VI+VII were brought under water injection during early
90's on recommendations of reservoir performance
analysis carried out by the Indo-Soviet team when the
pressures were already below saturation pressure. Current
recovery factors of KS-IX+X and KS-VI+VII are as low
as 6.6% and 4.3% respectively. It is a matter of great
concern to increase recovery factor of these reservoirs.
The production rate of the field has drastically come
down from a peak of 1620 t/d in 1989-90 to about 900t/d
at present through 280 producers, averaging about 3.2t/d
coal marker (Fig.5) shows gently northeasterly dipping (3
2
per well. The field is under water injection, current
injection being 1700m3/d through 52 injectors.
Due to continued water injection the reservoir
pressure has increased by about 4-5 kg/cm 2 in KS-IX+X
whereas its effect is yet not appreciable in KS-VI+VII.
About 90% wells are on artificial lift. Well productivity
and injectivity are low. Poor oil recovery and lower
production rates are largely attributed to:
(a) fall in reservoir pressure below saturation pressure,
(b) limitations to stimulation jobs due to poor petro-
physicals arising out of lithological inhomogeneity,
(c) non-uniform withdrawal from the reservoir due to
variation in petro-physical character, resulting in by-
passed oil,
(d) relatively larger well spacing (600-700m).
MULTILATERAL WELL
Multilateral well is a variation of horizontal well where
one or more laterals are either drilled at a single elevation
(Fig.3a) or at different elevations (Fig.3b)5. These
laterals essentially offer larger reservoir face for fluids to
flow into the well bore as well as tapping one or more of
reservoir pockets simultaneously. The technical benefits
include increased reservoir exposure in depleted, tight
reservoirs for optimizing production/ injection strategies,
improved drainage geometry to reduce coning and
increased sweep efficiency6. In offshore environment the
limitation of drilling slots available on a platform can
also be greatly overcome by use of multilateral drilling
technology. Many leading oil companies, in their effort to
reduce the finding cost of oil, continues to foster the
evolution and use of multilateral well and associated
technologies to develop both new and maturing
reservoirs7.
SELECTION OF STUDY AREA
In order to study the applicability of Multilateral well
technology for enhancing production rates in such kind of
reservoirs, one study area in each of KS-IX+X and KS-
VI+VII has been selected on pilot basis. Selection of the
study area is based on primary recovery, adequate pay
thickness from the standpoint of drilling and placement of
the multilateral sections within the pay sand, performance
of existing vertical wells, well spacing and water
injection for pressure maintenance.
SAND IX+X
The study area falls in the southern part of the Main
Block (Fig.4). A prominent coal marker occurs at the top
of KS-IX+X. The structure contour map on top of this
to 4o) beds with net pay thickness of sub-layer KS-X
 of about 10m (Fig.6). Well log correlation has been made
around the selected area, taking 1350m MSL as reference
level and the 3-D perspective of local sand development
in the form of a panel diagram has been shown in Fig.7.
The pay horizon is siltstone to shaly siltstone and having
sufficient continuity in terms of lithology and thickness.
Average depth of the reservoir is around 1400m MSL,
effective porosity () 20% and initial oil saturation (Soi)
60%. OIIP of K-IX+X comes around 3.45MMt in the
study area(Table-1). The cumulative production accounts
for 6.4% of OIIP of the block. Plot of water-oil-ratio
(WOR) versus cumulative production is shown in Fig.8a.
The current reservoir pressure is about 85ksc as against
initial value of 200ksc. Current oil production rate is
27.5m3/d through 7wells and water injection rate of
68.0m3/d through 2 wells.
SAND VI+VII
This study area lies in the central part of the Main
Block (Fig.4). The layer also shows gentle dip of 2 to 3 0
(Fig.9). The sub-layer KS-VII is relatively thinner with
about 4-6m pay thickness (Fig.10). Panel diagram has
also been prepared around this area, taking 1350m MSL
as reference level (Fig.11). The pay horizon is principally
siltstone and fairly continuous in lithology, thickness and
also structural level. Average depth of the reservoir is
1385m MSL and  18-20%, So 50-55%. OIIP of sub-
layer KS-VII in the study area is estimated 1.54MMt. The
cumulative production is 12% of OIIP of the block
(Table-1). WOR versus cumulative production plot is
given in Fig.8b. The initial and current reservoir
pressures are 156ksc and 90ksc respectively. Current oil
production rate is 64m3/d at water-cut of less than 10%
through 10 wells and water injection rate of 45.5 m3/d
through 2 wells.
ESTIMATION OF PRODUCTION RATE
Assuming steady state conditions, production rate of
multilateral well is given by:
0.007078 kh h p/oBo
Qh = -----------------------------------
ln(F reh/L)+(h/nL) ln(h/2rw)
This is formula is basically given by Borisov 8 and
translated from Russian to English by Joshi 5. In order to
account for permeability anisotropy of the formation,
Joshi9 has suggested substituting h by h' and k h by keff,
where:
h' = h*(k /k )0.5 and
h v
0.5
keff = (kh*kv)
upto the kick-off-point (i.e. till 700m depth) and the landing point in the pay will have a horizontal shift of about 500 from
3
Also, if rev is the drainage radius of a vertical well,
then drainage radius of horizontal well (lateral section of
multi-lateral), reh, is given by10
reh =((L/2 + rev)*rev))0.5
The resulting equation after substitution of terms as
mentioned above has been used for calculating the
productivity index (PI) of the multilateral wells at current
conditions of exploitation. The PI of multilateral wells
works out to be 5 to 8 times that of vertical wells in the
present case. One set of parameters and calculation is
given in Table-2.
METHODOLOGY FOR OIL PROFILE
Conventional method has been adopted for working
out oil profiles of the study areas. Following assumptions
have been made:
1. Rise in water cut will follow the trend of semi-log
plot of cumulative oil production versus water-cut
history of the study area (Fig. 8a & 8b) for base case
as well as multilateral-case. It assumes that by
changing the sweep pattern as can be expected by
drilling of multilaterals in the study area, the same
old trend of water cut and cumulative oil production
will hold good. In practice, the trend would slightly
change for the better and water cut would be less
than predicted.
2. Liquid production in both cases remains constant as
a result of water injection.
3. Field operating efficiency of 75% has been assumed
for gross liquid production from multilateral wells.
Thus Qlh =(Qoh/(1-Wcut))*75%.
4. Oil profile have been generated for 15year period.
The oil recoveries in base variant and with
multilateral for the study area in KS-IX+X and KS-
VI+VII have been plotted in Fig.12a and Fig.12b
respectively. Incremental production of about 43000 ton
and 54000 ton over a period of 15 years can be realised
through drilling of Multilateral wells in the study area
KS-IX+X and KS-VI+VII respectively. This works out to
be an increase of about 1.2% and 3.5% of OIIP over base.
GEOMETRY OF MULTILATERALS
The lateral length of 250m has been found to be
optimum considering the existing well spacing in the
study areas in sands KS-VI+VII and KS-IX+X. The angle
between the laterals is fixed at 60 0 in order to avoid
drilling complications. The positioning of lateral sections
have been adjusted so that the nearest injector is at right
angles and away from them (Fig.7 and Fig.11). XC-
polymer based drilling fluid is proposed to be used for
drilling of lateral sections to avoid formation damage due
to invasion of drilling fluid. The wells will be vertical
the KOP. The hole will be cased and cemented till
landing point whereas the laterals will be bare foot
completion, thus forming Level-1 multilateral under the
now famous TAML (Technology Advancement-Multi
Laterals) classification11.
ECONOMICS
The cost of drilling and completion has been worked
out to be around Rs. 2.56 crore after accounting for the
rental charges of special down-hole drilling and survey
equipment, casing, cementing, and XC-polymer based
drilling fluids. Techno-economic analysis based on
discounted cash flow has also been carried out at crude
oil price of US$16/bbl, exchange rate of INR 43.00/US$,
and discount rate of 16%. Internal rate of return is
profusely positive at 108% for KS-IX+X and 307% for
KS-VI+VII.
CONCLUSIONS
1. Redevelopment through drilling of multilateral wells
will reduce the well spacing from the existing 600-
700m to 250m in the patterns of study areas where
these wells are proposed to be drilled. This is
expected to be suitable for tight, depleted and
segmented reservoirs like KS-IX+X and KS-VI+VII.
2. PI of multilateral wells is 6 to 8 times of vertical
wells in the present case.
3. Conventional calculations shows that multilateral
wells in the pilot area can give additional oil
production of 43000 ton in KS-IX+X (1.2% of OIIP)
and 54000 ton in KS-VI+VII (3.5% of OIIP) in 15
years period .
4. The investment is paid back in 2 years and internal
rate of return are 108% and 307% for KS-IX+X and
KS-VI+VII respectively.
5. The sensitivity analysis shows that the scheme
generates IRR of 16% even if the actual production
profiles come out to be as low as 34.5% and 26.5%
of the projected figures.
6. The experience from drilling and operation of two
multilaterals will open wide possibilities for working
out strategy for redevelopment of the field. Both
infill producers and injectors may be drilled as multi-
laterals having high productivity and injectivity
indices which will lead to maximizing reserves and
increasing oil recovery factor of the field.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We are grateful to Shri S.K.Sood, GGM & Head, IRS,
Ahmedabad for inspiration, encouragement and guidance
during the course of work leading to investigating reasons
4
of low oil recovery in Kalol Field and suggesting a pilot
stage leading edge technology for improving the
productivity.
NOMENCLATURE
Qh rate, barrels/day
kh horizontal permeability (md)
kv vertical permeability (md)
keff effective permeability (md)
h formation thickness (ft)
p pressure difference (psi)
o oil viscosity (cp)
Bo oil formation volume factor (v/v)
rev drainage radius for vertical well (ft)
reh drainage radius for multilateral (ft)
rw well bore radius (ft)
L length of lateral section (ft)
n no. of laterals
F depends on n ( F =4, 2, 1.86, 1.78
for n= 1, 2, 3, 4)
REFERENCES
1. Indo-Soviet Team, “Final Development Plan of
Kalol Field”, Report No. IRS/FD-1/139/82, IRS
Library, ONGC, Ahmedabad, India, January 1982.
2. Lohiya,J.P., et al., “Integrated Development Plan of
Kalol Field”, Report No. IRS/D-I-71/1761/96, IRS
Library, ONGC, Ahmedabad, India, April 1996.
3. Ahmed, A.E., et al., 1993, “Geological Analysis of
Pay Zones of Kalol Field”, in-house R&D Report of
IRS, ONGC.
4. Mehrotra,R.B., “Kalol Deeper Sand- Discovery of a
new Prospect”, Bulletin of ONGC, Vol.20, No. 2,
December 1983.
5. Joshi,S.D.,1991, Horizontal Well Technology,
PennWell Publishing Company, Tulsa, Oklahoma.
(p. 122).
6. Oberkircher, James P., “The Economic Viability of
Multilateral Wells”, SPE 59202, 2000 IADC/SPE
Drilling Conference, New Orleans, 23-25 February.
7. Vullinghs,P., et al., “Multilateral Well Utilisation on
Increase”, SPE 56954, 1999 Offshore Europe
Conference, Aberdeen, 7-9 September.
8. Borisov, Ju P., "Oil Production Using Horizontal and
Multiple Deviation Wells", Nedra, Moscow, 1954,
Translated into English by J.Strauss, edited by
S.D.Joshi, Phillips Petroleum Co., the R&D Library
Translation, Bartlesville, Oklahoma, 1984.
9. Joshi,S.D.,1991, Horizontal Well Technology,
PennWell Publishing Company, Tulsa, Oklahoma.
(p. 83).
10. Joshi,S.D.,1991, Horizontal Well Technology,
PennWell Publishing Company, Tulsa, Oklahoma.
(p. 63).
 11. Flatern,Rick von,”The World is out on multilaterals”,
Asian Oil & Gas , July/August 1988.

SI METRIC CONVERSION FACTORS

bbl x 1.589874 E-01 = m3
ft x 3.048* E-01 = m
psi x 7.0308 E-02 = kg/cm2
cp x 1.0* E-03 = Pas

* Conversion factor is exact.

TABLE-1 :Year-wise Production/Injection TABLE-2 :SAMPLE CALCULATION

Sand KS-IX+X Sand KS-VI+VII Parameters KS-VI+VII KS-IX+X
No. Np, Wi, No. Np, Wi, Kh, md 20.0 7.5
Year op Mm3 Mm3 op Mm3 Mm3 kh / kv 10 10
70-71 2 0.8 h, ft 13.1 32.8
71-72 3 7.9 p, psi 142 142
72-73 2 10.4 o, cp 0.76 0.61
73-74 3 11.7 Bo, res bbl/STB 1.19 1.28
74-75 5 19.1 Nlat 2 2
75-76 5 34.5 F 2.00 2.00
76-77 5 41.9 L, ft 820 820
77-78 6 52.9 rev, ft 820 1148
78-79 6 60.3 Rw, ft 0.25 0.25
79-80 6 65.1 Qh, bopd 299.6 219.1
80-81 6 70.2 Qh, m3/d 47.6 34.8
81-82 6 73.0 PIh, b/d/psi 2.1 1.5
82-83 4 76.4
83-84 5 79.3
84-85 5 82.2 FIGURES
85-86 5 85.5
86-87 6 92.4
87-88 6 98.3
88-89 7 105.7
89-90 11 129.5
90-91 12 156.3
91-92 12 169.7 8.5
92-93 9 182.8 45.3 4 12.4
93-94 11 197.7 86.1 4 30.8
94-95 11 215.6 131.4 4 44.4
95-96 10 221.5 172.1 7 65.9
96-97 10 228.6 223.4 9 114.8
97-98 9 235.0 265.1 10 163.6
98-99 8 260.0 289.0 12 200.7
99-00 8 268.4 309.4 11 224.8 10.
0
Fig.1 : Location map of fields/structures of Ahmedabad
Asset
 N

AREA CONSIDERED

AREA CONSIDERED FOR SAND KS-VII

Fig.2 : Typical well log of Kalol Field

Fig.4 : Study area of sand KS-X and KS-VII in Kalol field

a b

Plan View Plan View

FOR SAND KS-X

Layer-II

Layer-I
Layer-I

Cross-sectional View Cross-sectional View

Fig.3a : A Schematic of Multilateral wells at a Single Elevation

Fig.3b : A Schematic of Multilateral wells at different Elevations

Fig.5 : Structure contour map on top of KS-IX+X

 WOR V S Cum ulative oil production (KS-IX+X)
100

10

2.E+05 4.E+05 6.E+05 8.E+05 1.E+06

C u mu l a t iv e o i l ( m 3 )

0.1

0.01

0 .0 0 1
0.E+00

Fig.8a : WOR vs Cumulative oil production ( KS-IX+X)

WOR VS Cum ulative oil production (KS-VI+VII)

100

10

0.1

2.E+05 4.E+05 6.E+05 8.E+05 1.E+06

0.01 C u m u la t iv e o i l ( m 3 )

0 .0 0 1
0.E+00

Fig.6 : Effective sand thickness map of KS-X

Fig.7 : Panel diagram showing wells in study area KS-IX+X

Fig.8b : WOR vs Cumulative oil production ( KS-VI+VII)

Fig.9 : Structure contour map on top of KS-VII

N
 Comparison of oil profile (KS-
450 IX+X) Multilateral RF: 10.0%(w/c 84%)
400
350
300

Cumulative oil (Mm3)

n
250 Base RF: 8.8%(w/c 71%)

200

2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018
Year

Fig.12a : Predicted performance of KS-X

Comparison of oil profile (KS-VI+VII)

600 Multilateral RF : 30.0%(w/c 80%)

550

Cumulative oil (Mm3)

500
450
400 Base RF : 26.5%(w/c68%)

350
300
250
200

2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018
Year
Fig.10 : Oil isopay map of KS-VII

Fig.12b : Predicted performance of KS-VII

AL

E
SH

E
SH
L

SHALE
SHALY SHALE
SAND SAND

Fig.11 : Panel diagram showing wells in study area KS-VI+VII