Staged Application of New Drilling Technology and Techniques to Achieve Optimal
Reservoir Performance and Well Productivity in a Difficult and Challenging
Environment
C.D Hamer, SPE, G.Gillespie SPE (Halliburton – Sperry Sun), J. Downie, SPE.(BHP Billiton)
Abstract
This paper will review the challenges and the technical and
financial successes experienced with drilling in the Lennox
field in the Irish Sea sector of the UK Continental shelf. The
paper describes the challenges faced and met in drilling
shallow high step out multi-lateral wells in the Lennox field
by operator BHP Billiton. From a drilling perspective the
Lennox reservoir has great variation, ranging from very
friable, fast drilling sandstones (+ 200 ft/hr) to very hard well
cemented sandstones (6 ft/hr), both the fast and slow drilling
sandstones are abrasive. Directional response is also erratic
with strong drop tendencies in the fast drilling sections and
build tendencies in the hard sections. Bit selection, through
the reservoir, has been generally limited to insert types, and
slick steerable motor assemblies have been required to
maintain directional control and achieve the high ratio
MD/TVD step-outs necessary in accessing the reservoir
acreage.
The challenges faced here were 1) to improve the directional
drilling performance in these demanding formations and 2) to
achieve tight TVD constraints in both target TVD and in
maintenance of vertical depth within the reservoir. The
objectives also included successfully logging complex, multi-
branched sections. Reservoir simulations indicated that the
payoff in successfully meeting these drilling challenges was
substantial.
In order to successfully complete the tasks, a staged
introduction of evermore complex “point-the-bit” techniques
and technologies were conceived and employed. Milestone
targets were set to monitor the deployments and ensure that
the targets objectives would be met.
The effort resulted in significant achievements as listed
below:-
• 6 Km of 8 ½” hole section placed within a +/- 2ft
corridor
• Two record breaking insert bit runs for the Lennox field
• Three horizontal open hole side-tracks with a rotary
steerable system
• Quad-combo logging with a rotary steerable system
The development of three horizontal open hole side-tracks
with a point-the-bit rotary steerable system was also an
industry “first”. Quad-combo logging with a rotary steerable
system was a “first” for the United Kingdom.
In addition to the technical success of the effort, BHP Billiton
and partners will realise a significant return on investment.
The full value of meeting the challenges is described in SPE
75249.
Introduction
The Lennox field is situated in Blocks 110/15 and 110/14 of
the East Irish Sea, about 5 km from the UK coast in 40ft of
water. Current participants are BHP Billiton Petroleum Ltd.
(46.1%), AGIP (UK) Ltd (45.0%), and Centrica plc (8.9%).
Fig. 1 shows the Lennox field in plan view
The Lennox field forms part of the Liverpool Bay integrated
development and is connected to the Douglas complex. The
Lennox platform has a 12-slot capacity.
Production on Lennox is currently aimed at draining the oil
rim prior to gas cap blow down. Oil recovery is maximised
by replacing the voidage with gas injected into this gas cap.
Two gas injectors and nine horizontal oil producers have
been drilled between 1995 and 2001. Wells L2, L3, L4, L5,
and L7 are single bore horizontal producers, while L6 is a bi-
lateral and L8 is a tri-lateral. All are targeted at a TVD 35ft
above the oil/water contact with a tolerance of +/- 10ft. The
gas injectors target the crestal area. In many cases the landing
point of the wells is critical for a number of reasons, and in
some of these cases there is close proximity between wells.
The benefits of multi-lateral wells to the Lennox field were
recognised early in the field development planning. The
competent nature of the reservoir rocks makes the use of
barefoot open-hole sidetrack (TAML Level 1) techniques
viable. In the case of L10 and L11 it was clear that slot
constraints demanded multi-laterals in order to economically
access reserves without resorting to platform modifications or
sub-sea wells.
L11 was planned as a dual lateral and L10 as a quad lateral,
dramatically increasing the productive interval beyond that
which might have been achieved with horizontal wells from
the limited Lennox platform slots.
Drilling Challenges
As the Lennox reservoir is relatively shallow, with most
wells targeted on a TVD of around 3365 ft, the ratio of MD to
TVD created by the required lateral reach is quite high. On
purely ratio terms this places the wells within what would
normally be considered ERD territory. Fig. 2 shows Lennox
wells L1 to L9 vertical section trajectories normalised to a
common vertical plane.
As a consequence hole quality, torque and drag, and
trajectory control have been a concern from the outset. In part
this relates to the ability to get casing set successfully, and in
part to the ability to achieve adequate weight transfer to the
bit while drilling in steering mode.
As the formations encountered are both hard, abrasive, and
in some cases highly laminated, bit choice has been a critical
issue.
The flatness of the 8 ½” hole section within the reservoir has
probably the most significant impact on overall economic
performance, hence the desire to reduce the drillers target
tolerance from +/- 10ft vertically, down to +/- 5ft and
ultimately to +/- 2ft. The elimination of sumps in the
horizontal sections reduces or eliminates the effects of
produced water.
Sumps have been shown to dramatically increase frictional
losses leading to increased draw down and inhibited
recovery. These effects and their mitigation in the Lennox
field are fully described in SPE 75249.
Well planning has been crucial to meeting both the drilling
challenges and the reservoir objectives and is conducted in a
very interactive and collaborative manner between the
operator and the service provider.
Past Performance 12 ¼” Hole Section
Prior to drilling L10 and L11, the best drilling performance
in 12 ¼” hole measured in terms of the number of runs
required was 5, while the worst was 9 runs. Even with those
wells where 5 or 6 runs had been sufficient there had been
some directional control problems. Generally, the first run in
the 12 1/4" section would utilise a PDC bit on a stabilised
steerable motor assembly; ROP and toolface control would be
good through the Blackpool Mudstone and upper Ansdell
formations. As hole angle increased and the formation
became harder ROP would drop, toolface control would
deteriorate and this assembly would be tripped to pick up an
insert tri-cone bit, again on the stabilised steerable motor
assembly. When this assembly started to hang up the
assembly would again be tripped and all of the stabilizers laid
out. The slick motor assembly would then be utilised to TD
or until oriented drilling could no longer take place. In
several cases the slick motor assembly would be tripped to
adjust the bent housing angle to produce greater DLS or
reduce the DLS capability of the assembly. In the instances
where oriented drilling could not take place to section TD a
rotary building assembly would be used to TD the section.
Fig. 3 summarises in a bar chart the problems encountered
while drilling 12 ¼” sections on prior wells.
MWD reliability was also an issue partly due to the use of
silicate drilling fluid, employed from L5 onwards, which
attacked some elastomeric components such that the MWD
system had to be changed out. This drilling fluid also
generally has poor lubricity when compared to other fluids in
the same environment, leading to higher friction factors.
Another factor, which likely caused poor MWD reliability,
was vibration. At the time the wells were drilled vibration
was not measured or investigated but subsequent experience
and investigation indicates that on Lennox field vibration has
been the cause of many equipment failures; primarily MWD
tools and bits.
On L2 tool face control with PDC bits proved to be poor and
operations reverted to using TCI rock bits.
On L3 attempts were made to use a rotary assembly with an
adjustable gauge stabiliser (AGS), but build rates were
compromised.
L4 encountered similar problems with the rotary AGS
assembly the BHA was changed to a stabilised 9 5/8” motor
with TCI bit to recover the trajectory. The following
rotary/AGS BHA run to complete the final build required
heavy reaming to get to bottom, probably as a consequence of
hole spiralling and ledging created during the steerable motor
run.
L5 was drilled with a stabilised motor and PDC bit down to
the Ansdell formation. At this point the bit was changed to a
TCI but poor steering control was encountered and a further
2
change to a slick motor assembly with TCI bit was required
to control the trajectory.
L6 was drilled with a slick motor and PDC bit down to the
Ansdell formation. Attempts to drill further with a PDC bit
encountered steering control problems and operations again
reverted to TCI bits.
When drilling L7, in an attempt to extend the use of PDC
bits, the well was drilled with a slick motor and PDC down to
the Ansdell formation. Attempts were made to rotate this
assembly through the Ansdell without success. Again a
change to TCI bits was required, and despite this change the
landing point position was compromised leading to a
sidetrack in order to ensure that the horizontal section was
properly placed.
L8 was drilled in six runs; firstly with a stabilised motor and
PDC bit into the Ansdell formation. Poor ROP and steering
control then necessitated the use of insert tri-cone bits.
Another trip was made to lay out stabilisers and two trips to
adjust bent housing angle. Section TD was reached using a
rotary assembly.
All of the issues relating to drilling the 12 ¼” section were
reviewed prior to drilling L10 and L11. Fig. 4 shows a
composite “best case” conceptual well to TD of the 12 ¼”
based on the best bit run performances over the prior wells.
The challenge for L10 and L11 was to improve upon this
performance by eliminating bit runs and improving
directional control.
Technology Change – 12 ¼” Hole
In the intervening period between drilling the prior Lennox
wells and starting operations again with L10 and L11, some
advances in motor based steering technology had been
developed and utilised elsewhere. (Ref SPE 56936, SPE
63248).
In summary, this new approach dealt with some of the
drawbacks in conventional steerable motor assemblies by
eliminating the interference of the steerable motor with the
borehole wall. In conventional steerable motor assemblies
this interference perturbs the action of the bit, creating
conditions where bit whirl is induced leading to spiralling,
vibration, and other damaging effects.
The new system allows for the use of long gauge bits, rather
than rotating near bit stabilisers. The system steers by
pointing the axis of bit rotation leading to in gauge hole,
without spiralling, and has been shown to greatly extend bit
life. The system has also demonstrated that, by drilling very
smooth trajectories and eliminating small-scale tortuosity,
weight transfer to the bit is greatly enhanced. This assists
with better directional control.
The smooth trajectories exhibit low measured friction
factors that also enhance the running and cementing of casing
even in challenging well trajectories.
The Directional Drilling provider working in conjunction
with the Bit supplier reviewed the Lennox well challenges
and proposed that: -
Improved bit life
Improving performance = + = Less time/cost
Improved directional control
To achieve this, based on the data available at the time, it was
postulated that a conservative (pessimistic) estimate of
improvement gained by running the new system would lead
to the initial bit run being extended by 270 ft into the Ansdell
formation. This would eliminate one TCI bit run and save an
estimated 25 hours of rig time. Fig. 5 illustrates this
conservative proposal.
However a more optimistic analysis suggested that this
initial run might carry on beyond the Ansdell to a TVD off
approximately 3300 ft. If this were achieved it was
considered that the 12 ¼” hole section might be drilled with
two steerable motor bit runs.
Uncertainty over bit performance and the lack of appropriate
offset data left the choice of bit for the second bit run open to
some debate between to proponents of a second PDC bit and
the more conservative proponents of a TCI bit. It was
estimated that if this could be achieved then approximately
75 hours of rig time would be saved. Fig. 6 illustrates this
more optimistic proposal.
An additional benefit of the proposal was that a consistent
BHA configuration would be used in L10 and L11,
eliminating variability and uncertainty.
The MWD run in conjunction with this system was a simple
Directional + Gamma + At Bit Inclination
L10 and L11 Actual Performance in 12 ¼”
L11 was the dual lateral, and was drilled before the quad-
lateral L10.
The initial PDC bit run on L11 with the new system started
in the Blackpool mudstone, continued in the Rossall halite,
penetrated through the Ansdell and into the Ormskirk. A
drilled interval of 1053 ft.
The 12 ¼” hole was drilled to TD with the second bit run
using the same motor and a TCI bit coupled to a full gauge
box/box sleeve to mimic the long gauge PDC bit dimensions.
This assembly drilled 1343 ft.
Directional control throughout was good, and hole quality
was observed to be good throughout. Fig. 7 shows the actual
performance on the 12 ¼” section of L11
Drilling the wells in this order was beneficial as it gave
confidence prior to drilling the more challenging L10 well.
The initial PDC bit run on L10 with the new system drilled
from 2107ft to 3052 ft , an interval of 945 ft and was pulled
to increase the build rate capability. The system was re run
with a sleeved TCI bit which drilled a further 1047 ft until the
run was terminated by an MWD failure 160 ft short of
planned TD, one of the cones on the insert tricone bit had
also failed. The third run drilled 161 ft landing out 1.7ft lower
then the planned TVD.
The success of the well depended upon finding a section of
the reservoir, which had the working name “Layer 15”. Layer
15 had still not been identified, so a further 100ft was drilled
and then pulled to run TLC logs. This bit and BHA were re
run drilling a further 157ft where the assembly was pulled.
TLC logs confirmed the position of layer15.
Although the section lengths on the two wells are similar at
2396ft for L11 and 2410 ft for L10, the trajectory for L10
(see Fig 8) was more challenging in terms of required build
rate and landing accuracy requirement. L11 was essentially a
3.4°/100 ft build on constant azimuth, while L10 required a
build rate of 4.75°/100 ft and some turn.
Discounting the additional trip relating to the identification
of layer 15, it is probable that L10 12 ¼” section could have
been drilled in three bit runs, as opposed to the minimum of
five that prior performance indicated. There is some
encouragement that it might also have been drillable in two
bit runs if there had been no equipment problems.
L11 was drilled in the “stretch target” of two bit runs.
More detailed evidence, which cannot be presented here in
the interests of brevity, suggests that the two bit run scenario
3
is probably optimal, but that there is scope to improve drilling
performance, and especially ROP’s, still further.
Friction Factors
As weight transfer, torque and drag etc, were issues for
Lennox drilling, and Liverpool Bay wells in general, a review
of historical data was undertaken.
This showed that in general the BHP Billiton wells in
Liverpool Bay had historically shown similar or slightly
higher friction factors that wide range of North Sea wells
used as the benchmark.
Prior work had shown that for the wide range of wells
studied the friction factors encountered averaged around 0.15
for oil base mud systems, 0.3 for salt saturated muds, and
close to 0.4 for silicate systems. In addition to this data, the
study had identified that for wells drilled with conventional
steerable systems a tortuosity index of approximately 1.35
was required. This tortuosity index is used as a multiplier to
the friction factor in order to account for the tortuosity not
described in a conventionally planned well trajectory.
The new motor and long gauge bit system was known to
produce both lower friction factor and lower tortuosity
indices.
As the operator had no experience of these systems the
directional drilling provider took a conservative approach and
used Liverpool Bay derived friction factors with no
reduction, but applied a lower tortuosity index of 1.10 when
planning the L10 and L11 wells.
Data to verify the actual friction factors and tortuosity
encountered was recorded; but the torque readings taken are
suspect as the torque gauge was shown to be vastly out of
calibration towards the end of the project. However, as
previous steering problems seem to have been eliminated and
casing running encountered no difficulties, there is evidence
to support the assertion that good hole quality was delivered.
Factual data supporting this on other projects has been
described in other SPE papers, (See References).
12 ¼” Steering Problems and Vibration Damage
The other claim of the new system was that by allowing for
the bit to “run true” and by eliminating the interference of the
motor with the borehole wall, there would be both extended
bit life and reduced incidence of vibration induced damage.
In the tough drilling conditions encountered in Liverpool
Bay numerous drill-string and MWD failures had
compounded to problems of steering in difficult formations.
With only limited MWD sensors used in the 12 ¼” sections
the most objective evidence that these conditions were
mitigated is that there was only one failure. It is perhaps a
moot point as to whether the failed MWD on L10 was related
to the failing bit. During this run at higher inclinations there
had been pump problems that limited flow rates. This had had
the knock on effect of reducing hole-cleaning efficiency,
leading to some jarring and reaming. It is likely that these
remedial actions created the conditions that lead to the
equipment problems.
Steering was greatly facilitated by the smooth and efficient
weight transfer to the bit as long as the hole could be kept
clean. It is worth noting that on L11 the ROP reduced
dramatically down to 5 to 10 ft/ hour at the Ansdell/Ormskirk
interface and that the non-premium cutter, PDC bit was
eventually pulled and found to be ringed out. On L10 the
interface was drilled successfully with the sleeved TCI bit
without the loss of ROP, and the dog-leg capability improved
once into the Ormskirk. It was therefore unfortunate that the
specially built FM2943i PDC bit used to initiate the 12 ¼” on
L10 was pulled prior to drilling the interface due to the need
to increase dog leg capability. This bit design, with premium
ring claw cutters and an impregnated matrix body, may yet
prove capable of reducing the dependence on TCI bits in this
environment, thus allowing the section to be drilled in one
run.
12 ¼” Conclusions
Overall the challenges of drilling the 12 ¼” sections were
met. The application of the new matched bit and motor
systems provided the improved bit life and steering capability
needed to achieve these objectives. The anticipated savings in
rig time created by extending the life of the PDC bit run were
realised.
Objective evidence supports the assertion that good quality
hole was also provided, and that vibration induced damage
was greatly reduced.
8 ½” Drilling Challenges
While the challenges in the 12 1/4” hole had been primarily
to improve the efficiency and economics of drilling the
overburden, those of the 8 ½” reservoir sections were centred
firmly on productivity and recoverable reserves.
The design of Lennox wells called for a friction drop over
the producing interval to be less than 25% of the heel draw
down. A qualitative inspection of production logs showed
that where the undulation was within +/- 5ft of the nominal
horizontal depth, the friction drop requirements were met.
Given the close proximity of the Oil/water contact due to the
35ft standoff, it was decided that the toe end of the wells
would be drilled at a depth shallower, relative to the heel, by
a margin similar to the predicted survey uncertainty.
Again, by drilling L11 dual lateral first, some confidence
could be built that the objectives of the L10 quad lateral
would be met. It was also clear that while a +/- 5ft tolerance
would suffice, it would be desirable to achieve a tighter +/- 2
ft tolerance.
There was an additional challenge in L10 in that the heel
location was in close proximity to well L7Z heel. Fig. 9
shows the proximity of the heels.
The requirements for L10 were finally agreed as follows:-
• Although originally planned as dual lateral, additional
undrained volumes at the toe ends would be targeted by
the quad-lateral legs. This was easily justifiable in
economic terms.
• Undulations in all four laterals would be restricted to +/-
5 ft, and preferably to +/- 2 ft.
• The main wellbore and the first lateral to be isolated
from flow in proximity to L7Z heel.
• 8 ½” producing sections in the main wellbore to have
liner/ECP/sliding sleeves to TD.
• Both producing sections to be shut off remotely.
• Re-entry of the first three laterals not required.
While acknowledging these requirements, it was clearly
desirable to achieve them in the most cost-effective manner,
and not to compromise drilling performance if possible.
Technology Change in 8 ½” Hole
As previous wells had displayed a tendency to run out of the
ability to steer towards the toe of the well, and because of the
4
tight tolerances required, it was planned to drill the 6 laterals
(2 in L11, and 4 in L10) using rotary steerable technology.
The choice of system was determined as being the one with
the most likelihood of achieving all of the objectives of L10
and L11. Like the new motor system used in the 12 ¼”
sections, it was a “point-the-bit” technology. Like the motor
system it utilised long gauge bits and provided similar
advantages in terms of hole quality.
The system had been commercialised for only a relatively
short time prior to this campaign, and certain aspects of the
system control were still being tested. It was therefore a
considered risk on the part of the operator to utilise this
system.
However, some contingency was available in that the other
system could be used to achieve most of the objectives if
required.
At the time of drilling L11 control of the system was
essentially manual, requiring it to be deflecting in oriented
mode or drilling ahead in neutral mode. In this sense it
provided only some of the potential advantages over motor
based systems in terms of the fine directional control.
Refinement of an interactive communications loop (Geo-
Span™ downlink system) was in progress at the time and
would be available for the more challenging L10 well.
At the same time a comprehensive suite of FEWD and
Drilling Optimisation sensors were specified for the 8 ½”
sections. This comprised of the following: -
• At bit Inclination (in rotary steerable) L11 & L10
• Gamma ray L11 & L10
• Drill String Dynamics (Vibration) L11 & L10
• Resistivity L11 & L10
• Directional L11 & L10
• Pulser L11 & L10
• PWD L11 & L10
• Density L10 Only
• Neutron Porosity L10 Only
• Dipole Sonic(BAT™ tool) L10 Only
• Acoustic Calliper L10 Only
Fig. 10 shows the BHA diagram for the full suite.
The FEWD string and the rotary steerable tool are
intimately connected in such BHA’s in order to facilitate the
two-way communication link and provide infinitely variable
deviation control between the neutral and maximum
deflection conditions.
This fine steering control and the At Bit Inclination were
considered essential in order to meet the 8 ½” hole drilling
objectives.
The Directional Drilling supplier provided sleeves for the
TCI bits to mimic the long gauge PDC dimensions necessary
for the rotary steerable and tailored to the Lennox reservoir
conditions.
L10 and L11 Actual Performance
L11 dual lateral - The L11 8 ½” dual lateral consisted of
L11 lateral and L11Z open hole sidetrack, which would be
the completed main bore.
The L11 lateral was drilled from 4502 ft to 9900 ft, an
interval length of 5398 ft, in four bit runs. All four runs
utilised the rotary steerable tool with a sleeved TCI bit.
Rotary steerable control was “manual” (deflection on or off)
during the whole of this 8 ½” section.
 The initial run encountered some problems with hydraulic
effects while drilling the shoe track, but these cleared as soon
as new formation was drilled. The Ormskirk formation, in
this area, is a fine uncemented sandstone where directional
behaviour can be unpredictable. With the tool in neutral drop
rates as high as 5.5/100 were observed. Steering with a rotary
steerable in these conditions requires careful control of
drilling parameters to counter formation induced behaviour.
The BHA was pulled when it was no longer realistic to
counter the dropping tendencies and the +/- 5ft TVD target
was in danger of being compromised. When this BHA was
pulled the bit was found to have 95% of the gauge cutters
broken. It is speculated that this happened during drilling the
shoe track, and that directional performance might have been
better with an undamaged bit.
The same tools were re-run with a new bit. This tripped to
bottom freely and immediately began to counter the dropping
tendency seen on the previous run.
From 7830 ft a dropping tendency returned accompanied by
a drop in ROP from 30 ft/hr to 8 ft/hr. Iron Pyrite was
observed on the shakers and it was concluded that the bit had
“died”.
A second rotary steerable tool and FEWD string was picked
up for the third run. This again showed a return to good
directional control. The non-rotating housing on the rotary
steerable does exhibit some roll, and this is monitored and
reported to surface via the MWD as one of the onboard
diagnostics. On the previous runs housing roll in the more
friable sands had been controlled to manageable limits by
adjusting drilling parameters. Additionally, increased housing
roll was noted to coincide with recognised zones where losses
and fractures are evident; however, changes in drilling
parameters to control the roll were not required.
On this run bit performance was reduced due to a
combination of drilling through a faulted section, mud losses,
poor hole cleaning, all causing erratic torque. The LCM in the
mud also caused blinding of the shakers, which further
hindered operations. The BHA was eventually pulled for a bit
change.
A fourth and final bit run was made with the same rotary
steerable/FEWD BHA and a new bit. As with the previous
runs no difficulty was experienced in getting to bottom. This
BHA drilled a further 564 ft without incident until the well
exited the reservoir back into the Ansdell mudstone.
The next run was made to initiate the L11Z open hole
sidetrack. The same rotary steerable tool as had been used on
the previous two runs was re-run. Part of the FEWD string
was changed out, as was the bit.
This BHA was run in to hole to just above the sidetrack
point of 7100ft. Here it was oriented 105 right and flow rate
controlled to 330 gpm. Rotary speed was increased in stages
from 60 to 80 rpm and the string held on depth for 1 hour.
The sidetrack was then time drilled at 0.5 to 1 ft/hour for two
hours, 2 ft /hour for two hours and continued doubling
accordingly. There were no clear indication from drilling
parameters or the At bit Inclination of side tracking so the
process was re started using a tool face of 150 right. Tool
face held very steady, and from 7125 ft to 7135 ft there were
positive signs of having side-tracked. The tool was re-
oriented to 100 right and the remainder of the stand drilled
down. The MWD survey at 7135 ft confirmed the ABI
evidence of successful side tracking, with a maximum dog
leg capability of around 5/100.
5
After this the flow rate was increased to 550 gpm and
parameters optimised for ROP.
Later more ratty formations were encountered with highly
cemented sand stones and thin clay stone layers. Eventually
ROP slowed to 10 ft/hr and the assembly was pulled for a bit
change having drilled from 7100ft to 8321 ft.
This rotary steerable tool had now drilled 3259 ft in three bit
runs.
A third rotary steerable tool was picked up with the new bit
for the next bit run. It drilled from 8321ft to 9326ft, and
interval of 1005ft. TD was called when the well exited the
reservoir into the Ansdell clay stone.
Apart from short sections at the start of the first bit run, and
at the end of the last run all of the hole drilled was controlled
to within the +/- 2ft drillers target TVD. The section that
exceeded this tolerance stayed within the acceptable +/- 5ft
corridor. Fig. 11 shows a plan view of L10 and L11 as
drilled.
L10 Quad-lateral
Learning from the experiences of L11 it was decided to drill
the 9 5/8” shoe track and initiate the 8 ½” hole using the new
steerable motor system rather than rotary steerable. The
objectives of this first bit run were to exit the 9 5/8”, drop
inclination from 92 to 90 degrees, build again for a short
period to provide a profile for later side-tracking, and turn the
well from Azimuth 280 to 243 wile remaining within the +/-
2 ft TVD tolerance.
All of these objectives were met and the assembly was
pulled at 5755 ft having drilled 1238ft with an average ROP
of 70 ft/hr.
The next assembly used the rotary steerable and drilled from
5755ft to 6609ft, an interval of 854 ft. This was the first use
of the two-way communications link to provide finer
interactive steering control. This system uses the PWD in the
FEWD string to receive pulsed instructions from the surface
computers. These instructions are then acknowledged by a
return transmission to surface via the FEWD.
While the system worked partially, detection was not 100%
and would be improved upon later. Despite these problems
the +/- 2ft tolerance was maintained.
The run was terminated after an internal communications
failure within the rotary steerable on board instrumentation.
A new rotary steerable tool was picked up for the next run.
The intent was to drill ahead on azimuth 217 to TD while
maintaining the +/- 2ft tolerance. Drilling proceeded from
6609ft to 8515ft with good control and much better two-way
communications. After this depth on board diagnostics
flagged to surface indications of problems developing within
the rotary steerable deflection control system. With the tool
set to neutral there was a dropping tendency of about
0.75/100. Confirmation was provided that it was acceptable
to drill ahead exceeding the +/- 2ft tolerance but remaining
within the +/- 5 ft tolerance.
It was hoped that the bit run would exit the reservoir into the
Ansdell before exceeding the +/- 5ft TVD corridor limit.
However, the Ansdell did not come in as prognosed, and with
the drop rate increasing the run was terminated at 8739 ft
having drilled 379 ft.
The next bit run picked up a new rotary steerable and ran in
hole to attempt to build inclination again. Despite good Geo-
Span two-way communications and good control, build
capability was limited. A number of attempts to optimise
drilling parameters were used with some success.
 On the previous L11 well the exit into the Ansdell was
across a fault. In this case on L10 it appeared that the
assembly was drilling along the dipping interface between the
Ormskirk and Ansdell. TD was called at 8785 ft.
L10Z (first sidetrack)
The rotary steerable used on the last run in the first of the
four laterals was run in hole again, but this time in
conjunction with a FM2841 PDC bit, rather than the sleeved
TCI bits used on prior runs.
The objective was to time drill an open hole side-track at the
point prepared during the first 8 ½” bit run. A depth of 7075
ft. The trajectory thereafter required a dogleg of 3.5/100ft to
achieve a final azimuth of 281 degrees, staying within the +/-
2ft tolerance and at an inclination 0f 90.1 degrees.
The rotary steerable was set up with 100% deflection to low
side and time drilling commenced in the section of hole
prepared for the sidetrack by creating a short build and turn.
It is the nature of the long gauge bit / point the bit systems
that under these circumstances they will drill straight ahead
through the low side of the original rising profile, until the
side-track is initiated. Once the bit is buried in the new hole
the 100% low side orientation will begin to drop, but not
before.
After time drilling the bit became mechanically stuck at a
depth of 7099ft and had to be jarred free. This was a strong
indication that more than half the bit diameter was in new
hole. At this point WOB was increased gradually. Increased
drilling torque was a positive sign of side tracking and the
two-way communication link was used to gradually change
tool face from low side to 90 right and onwards to 45 right.
With the sidetrack initiated the required turn was made and
drilling ahead on the desired azimuth and inclination was
facilitated by balancing any build/drop/turn tendencies with
tweaks to the deflection via the two-way communications
link while drilling ahead.
When the harder formations were encountered ROP’s
dropped, and the run was finally terminated at 8507 ft after an
MWD failure. This rotary steerable/long gauge PDC bit
combination drilled a total of 1432 ft.
The bit was graded 1:1 but there was severe erosion of the
support cylinders of the PDC cutters. There were some torque
issues during the run and it is likely that a lighter set bit and
some optimisation of drilling parameters might further
improve performance.
The same rotary steerable tool was re-run having picked up
a sleeved TCI bit. The objective of this run was to TD the
sidetrack while maintaining azimuth and inclination to stay
inside the +/- 2ft TVD corridor.
This bit run drilled from 8507 ft to 9237 ft when it was
terminated by an MWD failure. Tool performance and
communications were good throughout with minor
adjustments being made while drilling ahead.
After changing out the MWD the same rotary steerable
assembly was used to drill from 9237ft to 9905 ft, where it
appeared that we were again drilling along the interface
between the Ormskirk and Ansdell formations and TD was
called 5 ft earlier than prognosed.
The bit was found to be 1/8” under gauge, and the outer row
of teeth was entirely worn. The inner rows were graded 7.
The near bit rotating sleeve was 3 /16” under gauge. These
conditions contributed to some degradation of the directional
performance towards the end of the run.
6
This rotary steerable tool had drilled a total of 2876ft in the
primary and first lateral holes, including the 1432 ft PDC bit
run to initiate the lateral.
L10Y (second / primary sidetrack)
The objective of this lateral was to sidetrack at a depth of
4570ft and continue with a proposed well plan that called for
a turn of 4.5 /100 to azimuth 315 before turning back to
azimuth 281 degrees, while maintaining the +/- 2ft TVD
tolerance.
The success of the well depended on the "primary"
sidetrack, L10Z to L10Y taking place in layer 15. During the
planning the decision was made that the sidetrack would take
place with a slick, bent housing motor with ABI. The reason
for this was that this would be capable of a greater dog-leg
than any rotary steerable system and the turn required after
the sidetrack had to take place as planned or there would be
proximity issues with L7, an already existing and producing
well. A low tortuosity drilling system was required due to the
lengths of hole sections to be drilled after the sidetrack so the
steerable motor system was again employed.
The 6 ¾” 6/7 lobe 5 stage motor with a sleeved TCI bit was
run in hole to 4569ft. The system was oriented and left for 20
minutes to cut a ledge. The ABI indicated a change of bit
inclination from 90.2 to 88.5, and time drilling commenced
for two hours until the bit began to take weight.
As the tool face was gradually turned towards high side the
BHA jumped back into the old hole (indicated by ABI and no
weight). The BHA was pulled back and reoriented. The
sidetrack was found again with weight indications and time
drilling continued until more separation had been established.
Once confirmed drilling resumed but by 4616ft dog leg
capability had degraded to the point where near continuous
oriented drilling was required. ROP dropped, even in rotary
mode and by 4703 ft it was clear that the bit needed
replacing.
On pulling out of hole it was found that all three cones were
loose, there were no teeth left and the bit was down to 7”
gauge. The sleeve was also 7” gauge except for the top 1”
which was only 1/16” under gauge giving some confidence
that the majority of the hole was near gauge.
The same motor was re run with a new bit and rotating near
bit sleeve. After reaming the final three feet of the previous
run this BHA drilled from 4703 ft to 5210 ft.
At the bit manufacturers request WOB was restricted to 30-
35 Klbs. This resulted in sliding ROP’s of 25 ft/hr and
rotating ROP’s of 60 ft/hr. Increasing the WOB caused a
severe increase in vibration from 20 G to in excess of 50 G
while rotating. Later an increase in WOB to 45 Klbs was
required to maintain ROP but the run was terminated by an
MWD failure at 5210 ft.
Given that the motor/sleeved bit combination is relatively
quiet from a vibration stand point, the effects seen on this run
indicate the severity of drilling conditions in the Lennox
reservoir and wider Liverpool Bay area.
Following this motor run the rotary steerable was picked up
again with a new sleeved TCI bit. The assembly went to
bottom with only light reaming and commenced drilling the
flat turn required. At 5250ft a clay stone stringer was
breached and ROP increased from 25ft/hr to over 80 ft/hr
with a strong change in directional tendencies. This was
compensated for by the rotary steerable settings. Later very
unconsolidated sands were encountered where instantaneous
ROP’s of 230 ft/hr were observed as the hole washed out
ahead of the bit. This also led to strong dropping tendencies.
 From a depth of 5830 ft these erratic changes in behaviour
were compounded by degradation in the rotary steerable
deflection control and the run was terminated at 6128 ft
before adherence to the +/- 2ft tolerance was compromised.
The run had drilled an interval of 918 ft.
A new rotary steerable tool was picked up together with a
new sleeved TCI bit. The objectives of this run were to
continue the turn to azimuth 315 degrees, set up a sidetrack
profile at 7200 ft ready for the next sidetrack, and then to turn
on to azimuth 281 degrees and TD this lateral.
All the objectives of this run were met without any
significant performance issues. In some shale sections there
were indications of housing roll and increased vibration,
probably indicative of hole enlargement.
The run drilled from 6128 ft to 8630 ft, an interval of 2502
ft.
At this point the BHA was pulled. The bit was replaced and
the full FEWD suite that had been left out of previous runs as
a risk avoidance measure was picked up.
The new assembly was run to bottom and a wiper trip made
back to 7200 ft to log that interval where no FEWD had been
run. Drilling then commenced from 8630 ft to 9361 ft where
the run was terminated due to the rotary steerable battery
reaching the end of its life, a drilled interval of 731 ft.
A similar BHA was picked up and used to TD this lateral
drilling from 9361 ft to 9679 ft, an interval of 318 ft. This
BHA was also used to initiate the third sidetrack.
L10X (third sidetrack)
The BHA used to TD the second sidetrack was pulled back
to the desired sidetrack depth of 7257 ft, where the trajectory
had been set up previously to facilitate initiation of this fourth
lateral.
The same time drilling techniques were used again here and
the sidetrack established in 5 hours. After side-tracking it was
a requirement to turn at 3.5 /100 to azimuth 345 degrees
maintaining the +/- 2ft tolerance.
The system behaved extremely well during this run. The
formations were such that any build or drop trend initiated by
steering required an opposite orientation to break the trend
rather than a return to neutral. The Geo-Span two-way
communication link proved invaluable in these
circumstances. Of the 105 instructions sent during this run all
were received first time, with rotary steerable responding
quickly.
The run was terminated for a combination of Krevs on the
bit and slowing ROP having drilled 1995ft from 7275 ft to
9270 ft.
The same assembly was re-run with a new bit but after
drilling only from 9270 ft to 9290 ft a 700 psi pressure drop
indicated a wash out.
The same tools and bit were re-run after dealing with the
washout. This final run drilled from 9290 ft to TD at 9962 ft,
an interval of 672 ft.
This rotary steerable tool had drilled a total of 3005 ft.
Fig. 11 shows the plan view of the two wells, while Fig. 12
shows the 8 ½” sections for both wells projected on to a
common vertical section plane to illustrate the “flatness”
achieved.
FEWD / Drilling Optimisation Data Acquisition – (A brief
over view)
There is insufficient space and time in this paper to
thoroughly review what is a very interesting data set.
7
Highlights are that all the data acquisition requirements were
met. Apart from providing the petrophysical data required,
the data sets show some interesting geophysical/rock
mechanics features with a correlation between increasing
rock strength and comparatively early hole enlargement.
As expected, these “point the bit” BHA’s have proven to be
comparatively “quiet” from a vibration stand point, thus
limiting or eliminating collateral damage to BHA
components in a quite harsh drilling environment.
The hole quality provided by the “point the bit”
technologies also contributes to improved FEWD log quality
by helping to limit the rugosity of the bore hole.
8 1/2” Hole Conclusions
The objectives of the 8 ½” sections in both wells were met.
In excess of 90% of the 8 ½” hole was drilled within the tilted
+/- 2ft corridor set as the stretch target, and 100% of it within
the +/- 5ft corridor.
Overall reliability of the drilling systems was good, and the
new two way communications link (Geo-Span) worked well
after debugging the issues seen during the first run.
Campaign Conclusions
L10 is the most successful well in Liverpool Bay. Producing
22,000 bbls/day with 25psi draw down.
L10 and L11 respectively added 7,000ft and 15,000ft to the
producing interval. Over 90 % was within the +/- 2ft stretch
target tolerance, and therefore provides confidence that the
long-term productivity improvements outlined in SPE 75249
will be realised.
There were three 8 ½" section field record bit runs on L10;
the longest PDC bit run of 1,408ft and the two longest insert
tri-cone bit runs of 2,502ft and 2,313ft, the latter also
including an open hole side-track. The tri-cone bit
development for drilling the 8 ½” sections on Lennox has had
significant input over the life of the project and has resulted
in the hybrid 15GFDGPD bit that was manufactured specially
for this project. The main feature of the hybrid bit is that as
much diamond wear protection is put on all areas of the bit as
possible to slow down the effects of the abrasive sandstone.
This achievement has extended the oil-producing plateau of
the Lennox field by approximately 2 years, and reduced
produced gas to solution levels. It is also estimated that
recoverable reserves have been increased by at least 6.7
mmstb.
The considered application of appropriate drilling
technologies and techniques has contributed significantly to
this success. Confidence in doing this was facilitated by
taking a staged approach to their introduction, and by
planning contingency measures to match the perceived risks.
Given the immaturity of the technologies at the time of well
construction, performance and reliability was very good.
Only four individual rotary steerable tools were used to drill
both wells.
References
1. A.Yaliz, T.Chapman and J.Downie – “Case Study of a
Quad-Lateral horizontal Well in the Lennox field:
Triassic Oil-Rim Reservoir.” SPE 75249 - SPE/DOE 13th
Symposium on Improved Oil Recovery- Tulsa, April 2002
2. T.M.Gaynor,G .T Irvine, R. Boulton, D.A.Gilchrist, Ian
Lane “Step Change in Drilling Efficiency in Mature
North Sea Fields from a New Motor and Bit
 Combination” SPE 56936 – SPE/IADC Offshore Europe,
Aberdeen 1999.
3. T.M.Gaynor, D.Chen, D. Stuart, L. Comeau –
“Tortuosity versus Microtortuosity – Why little Things
Mean A Lot” SPE/IADC 67818 – Amsterdam 2001
4. Brett J.F. – “The Genesis of Bit induced Torisional
Drillstring Vibration” SPE / IADC 21943 – 1991,
Amsterdam
5. Brett J. F., Warren T.M., Behr S.M. – “ Bit Whirl – A
New Theory of PDC Bit Failure” SPE 19571 – 1989 San
Antonio
6. Zannoni S.A., Cheatham C. A., Chen D. C. T, Golla C.A.,
“ Development and Field Testing of a New Downhole
MWD Drillstring Dynamics Sensor” SPE 26341 – 1993,
Houston
7. Dykstra M.W., Chen D.C.K., Warren R.M., Zannoni S.A.
– “ Experimental Evaluations of Drill Bit and Drill
String Dynamics” – SPE 28323 – 1994, New Orleans

Figuere 1 – Lennox field plan view

5 945 000

L5
L10X L2
7
L10Y
3 L6
5 943 000 L7 L9 6
Platform L1
6Z
L10Z L1z
L3
L6Z
L10
L4
L11
L8 L8Y L11Z
5 941 000
L8Z
110/14 B 110/1 BHPBillito
486 000 488 000 490 000

8
 Number of Bit Runs

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

L2
Poor Directional Control

3 x Washouts

L3
1 x Underguage
Steering Problems

Figure 3 - Cause of 12 ¼” hole trips

L4
3 x MWD Failures (Silicate)
Steering Problems

L5
3 x MWD Failures

9
Steering Problems

History

L6
Steering Problems
Try new bit / BHA (PDS)
Figure 2 – Lennox Wells - Vertical sections profiles normalised to a common plane.

Bit Runs for 12¼” Section

L7
Directional Control
Plug Back and Sidetrack

Putting Things In Perspective

Steering Problems

L8
Poor ROP
Stabilizers Hanging Up
Figure 4 - Lennox Conceptual Well – “Best of the Best” composite for 12 ¼” hole

Figure 5 – Conservative Estimate of Performance Improvement – Extending the initial PDC bit run

10
Figure 6 – “Stretch” Performance Improvement Estimate – Significant extension of PDC bitrun

Figure 7 – Actual performance on L11 12 ¼” Section

Actual Well Data

Lennox Well : 110/15-L11 Actual Performance
12 1/4" Section Bit Run Summary

0
Quaternary
20" Conductor
481ft MD
400 481ft TVD

Clevelys Mudstone
800

Cleveleys
1200 "Mid C" Marker
Vertical Depth

1600

Mythop Halite
2000 Blackpool Mudstone 13 3/8" Casing
2091ft MD
2075ft TVD
1
2400
Rossall Halite Slick-Bore with long-guage PDC Bit

2800
Ansdell Mudstone
Zone IA 2
3200 Zone IB Slick-Bore with TCI Bit
Scale: 1cm = 400ft

Zone IIA
Zone IIB
GOC
3600 Zone III (Fault) 9 5/8" Casing 110/15-L11 Survey
4487ft MD
3523ft TVD

-800 -400 0 400 800 1200 1600 2000 2400 2800 3200 3600 4000 4400 4800 5200 5600 6000 6400 6800
Scale: 1cm = 400ft Vertical Section Section Azimuth: 134.327° (Grid North)

11
Figure 8 - L10 Actual Performance in 12 ¼”

Lennox Well : 110/15-L10

Actual Data
12 1/4" Section Bit Run Summary
0

Quaternary
Dowbridge Mudstone
300
Preesall Halite
20" Conductor
485ft MD
485ft TVD
600 Clevelys Mudstone

900

1200
Cleveleys "Mid C" Marker
Vertical Depth

1500

1800
Mythop Halite
Blackpool Mudstone
2100 13 3/8" Casing
2092ft MD
2080ft TVD

2400

Rossall Halite 1 Slick-Bore with long-guage PDC Bit

2700
Ansdell Mudstone

3000 Top Reservoir

Zone IA
Slick-Bore with TCI Bit
Scale: 1cm = 300ft

2
Zone IB
3300 Zone IIA 3
GOC 4 Bit Re-Run

9 5/8" Casing 110/15-L10 Survey

3600 4513ft MD/3524ft TVD

-1200 -900 -600 -300 0 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800 2100 2400 2700 3000 3300 3600 3900 4200 4500 4800
Scale: 1cm = 300ft Vertical Section Section Azimuth: 280.000° (Grid North)

Figure 9 – Plan view of L10 and L7z Showing proximity of the heels.

9 5/8” shoe L10

Cross over to 5 1/2” Liner 7” liner hanger L10

9 5/8” shoe L7z

Blank pipe

Porous Zone
Porous Zone

Zone1 / Zone 2
Boundary layer

Sliding sleeves Slotted liner

ECP’s

L10

L10x

L10y L7z L10z

12
Figure 10 – FEWD / BHA Configuration Tool Configuration
Geopilot Quad combo with Caliper
PWD

Pulser Pin / Pin

Stab Pin / Pin

ACAL
Flex Collar
DM

BAT
HCIM

Geopilot
EWR4 CNP

DGR/DDS SLD

Bit
Stab Pin / Pin
Pin / Pin

Figure 11 – Plan view of L10 and L11 “as drilled”

BHP Billiton Lennox Multi-laterals

Scale: 1cm = 700ft Eastings
-8400 -7700 -7000 -6300 -5600 -4900 -4200 -3500 -2800 -2100 -1400 -700 0 700 1400 2100 2800 3500 4200 4900 5600 6300 7000 7700

4900 4900

L10 Lateral 4 (Main Well)

4200 9962 ft MD 4200

3500 3500

2800
L10 Lateral 3 2800

9679ft MD
2100 2100

1400 1400

9 5/8" Casing
700 700
4513 ft MD
Northings

Northings

0 0

L10 Lateral 2
-700 -700
9905 ft MD 9 5/8" Casing
4487ft MD
-1400 -1400

-2100 -2100
L10 Lateral 1
-2800
8785 ft MD -2800

-3500 L11 Lateral 1 -3500

9900 ft MD
-4200 -4200
Scale: 1cm = 700ft

Scale: 1cm = 700ft

-4900 -4900
L11 Lateral 2
-5600 9326 ft MD -5600

-8400 -7700 -7000 -6300 -5600 -4900 -4200 -3500 -2800 -2100 -1400 -700 0 700 1400 2100 2800 3500 4200 4900 5600 6300 7000 7700
Scale: 1cm = 700ft Eastings Reference is Grid North
DrillQuest 2.00.08.006

13
Figure 12 – Normalised Section of L10 and L11 8 ½”holes

BHP Billiton - Lennox Multilaterals - TVD Corridor

3505

3510
L11Z

3515 L10X
L10Y L11
Vertical Depth

3520 L10 L10Z

3525 L11
20 ft TVD Corridor Junction
3530
Scale: 1cm = 5ft

3535

3540

1200 1500 1800 2100 2400 2700 3000 3300 3600 3900 4200 4500 4800 5100 5400 5700 6000 6300 6600
Scale: 1cm = 300ft Vertical Section Section Azimuth: 280.000° (Grid North)

DrillQuest 2.00.09.005

14