OTC-26808-MS

A Novel and Efficient Method for Wellbore Trajectory Design Assessment

and Optimisation by Integrating Wellbore Positioning into Subsurface
Mapping
Mondali Mondali, Muhammad Taufiq Tajuddin, PETRONAS Carigali; Philip Harbidge, and Arshia Gerami,
Schlumberger

Copyright 2016, Offshore Technology Conference

This paper was prepared for presentation at the Offshore Technology Conference Asia held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 22–25 March 2016.

This paper was selected for presentation by an OTC program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents
of the paper have not been reviewed by the Offshore Technology Conference and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect
any position of the Offshore Technology Conference, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the
written consent of the Offshore Technology Conference is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words;
illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of OTC copyright.

Abstract
This paper will describe a new method for using a computer workflow to automatically choose the safest
and lowest cost option wellbore trajectories with minimum input needed from the user. It allows oil and
gas industry operators’ drilling, subsurface and service provider users to plan, risk assess and lower the
cost of drilling wellbores by better understanding earlier in the planning and design phase to better invest
in time and money for the best wellbore trajectory options. Wellbore placement challenges include but are
not limited to choosing an optimal surface location, intersection of geologic target volume, avoiding faults
and geohazards, and an assessment of the wellbore commercial and engineering risks to drill successful
oil and gas production wellbores. This method involves a targeted approach focusing on drilling
operational parameters such as Drilling Difficulty Index (DDI) and a financial index such as Measure
Depth (MD) and additional engineering limiting factors or constraints such as Dog Leg severity (DLS),
Maximum Inclination (MI) and kick of depth (KOD). Utilising this technique improves the efficiency of
the risk assessment and optimisation aspects for a wellbore in the design phase. One of the most important
aspects of efficiency improvement is the ability for multi discipline teams to work on the same wellbore
design challenges in collaboration. High risk wellbore trajectory options are highlighted early on in the
design phase and removed from the viable surface to target wellbore options list.
Interactive model and wellbore data 3D visualisation helps the user choose wellbores which naturally
avoid geological faults, nearby wellbores, and provide improved wellbore designs to intersect hard
geologic targets. Geologic targets which represent the largest wellbore risk and cost are identified,
allowing for a major manual iteration of the surface location followed by the wellbore trajectory design.
In this practice, parameters are defined to separate all the possible wellbore trajectories and they are
arranged individually and finally, they are merged and tested for ultimate ranking to choose the best fit.
The ranking method described in this paper is non-weighted.
As part of a new operator Operational Excellence and Drilling the Limit initiative, the viability of the
trajectory optimiser has been reviewed for incorporation in upcoming drilling projects. During the design and
execution process for wells drilled offshore Malaysia, asset management, subsurface, geoscience and drilling
teams utilise data from a large number of models and data sources to perform the numerous and time
2 OTC-26808-MS

consuming trajectory design iterations. The trajectory optimiser addresses the cost and time spent in the design
and execution phase by reducing the time spent by over three weeks, which equates to over 300k USD in
project costs for a typical five well drilling campaign. Intangible cost savings can be significantly higher than
the project users reduced time saving. This method highlights both the lowest and highest risk well trajectory
options allowing for a higher degree of design Optimisation and equipment utilisation earlier in the project
lifetime which promotes improved production and lower drilling and potentially HSE risks in wellsite
operations.

Objectives/Scope
The oil and gas Industry is continually promoting improvements in the efficiency of the well construction
process including the well design phase. This well trajectory optimiser method can be implemented to improve
efficiency of the design and execution phase by allowing multi discipline users to find the best wellbore to pass
through a corridor of polygons in the most cost effective method with the lowest acceptable drilling risk.
Visualization software packages have become the industry norm for doing risk assessment of subsurface data
and the Wellbore Trajectory Optimiser method includes processes which allow the users to visualize the best
fit wellbore trajectories connecting a surface point to geologic target volumes by iterative testing with project
defined drilling constraint parameters. Utilizing the trajectory optimisation method processes, the rig or
platform location, wellbore trajectory design and geologic targets are interactively tested while working directly
inside the engineering and geologic subsurface model 3D defined data to optimise the design phase. This
process reduces the number of design look-see iterations bringing a significant reduction in time for oil and gas
drilling projects to progress quickly from the pre-drilling design phase to the operational phase. When
designing well trajectories there should be consideration of both the engineering and well placement objectives
to be able to best meet the drilling project requirements. These objectives should not be limited to surface
location and geologic target volume analysis, but should also be a tested against additional engineering and well
placement parameters which can be tailored and prioritized for each well trajectory as needed. Geohazards,
geologic target sizing and offset well proximity or anticollision risk should also be quantified after performing
the initial trajectory risk analysis process.

Methods Procedures and Process

The trajectory optimisation method involves a sequence of processes which are intended to be utilized
by multi-disciplined users from the oil and gas industry in wellbore planning and execution phases. The
processes enable users to work in time based geo model data which allows subsurface users to design
wellbores in the traditional time domain environment early in the project time frame. This allows for
higher level risk indicators or wellbore constraints to be tested by the subsurface team. Using the method
early on in the oil and gas project time line allows the subsurface to start feasibility testing for potential
drilling project platform surface locations and well trajectories for meeting subsurface and drilling
operations constraints. Without performing proper project feasibility testing early on, the project design
phase; cost and drilling risks cannot be correctly quantified. If the drilling project risks and costs are not
properly quantified early on, it is possible unviable projects will be invested in or wells drilled with more
viable projects not being drilled to the production phase.
Well trajectory constraints are set to perform wellbore trajectory design risk assessment and allow the user
to pick the most optimal wellbores. The trajectory optimiser incorporates the drilling limitations applicable to
a broad spectrum of complex wells drilled in the oil and gas industry. Simple well trajectory designs for
exploration and more complex three dimensional development and redevelopment drilling projects can benefit
from utilizing this method. This method focuses on drilling operational parameters including Drilling Difficulty
Index (DDI), financial index, Measured Depth (MD) and engineering factors including Dog Leg severity
(DLS), Maximum Inclination (MI) and kick off depth (KOD), (or sometimes referred to as nudge depth). The
OTC-26808-MS 3

result will be that the drilling operator subsurface, drilling or service company teams will be able to consistently
perform this risk assessment task using the common visualization data which is typically only accessed and
used by the subsurface model users for geology and geophysical data analysis.
There are three main stages that make up the wellbore trajectory optimisation method: The first is the
interactive stage, the second is the optimized multi-well solution stage and the third is the best fit wellbore
trajectory design stage. The project subsurface Well Engineer can choose the desired time-depth relationship
(TDR) while picking geologic target zones and then move to the wellbore design stage. The engineer chooses
an option to use average velocity, a near well check shot, or a polynomial function using three dimensional
target boundaries to define the trajectory constraints. Using the interactive or best fit trajectory process the
output will be a single ranked well trajectory, or a group of well trajectories if the optimized process is
followed. The produced trajectories are then able to be visualized in both time and depth domains combining
the drilling and subsurface model data with the trajectories. Additional steps are to also move the well design
in the geologic seismic time domain model, this allows the trajectory to be modified, for example to maintain
a standoff distance from a fault plane or other geohazards identified in seismic model features. The final stage
is to define geologic corridors and target volumes for each viable well trajectory.
The trajectory optimiser design method uses two main sources of data for the risk assessment and cost
/ design optimisation work. Firstly, the visualization interface allows interpretation and interaction with
the three dimensional model data to define geologic targets, hazards and surface location. The wellbore
trajectory optimiser method then produces multiple wellbore trajectories automatically, these trajectories
are shown in the three dimensional space with the associated geologic targets and hazards. This allows the
subsurface Well Engineer to visualize all wellbore trajectories which pass the drilling constraints set. If
the wellbore optimiser does not produce sufficient wellbore options, the user can then modify the drilling
optimiser constraints, (DDI, MD, DLS, KOD and MI) to allow a trajectory to be created intersecting the
geologic targets even if the constraints are not all met.
For every wellbore trajectory iteration, the well trajectory data are saved and labelled for future
collaboration with drilling teams, service companies and other third party vendors who may be involved
in the wellbore construction process later in the design and execution phase. The method also requires that
if a drilling project has trajectory data from a third party, a data converter is utilized to convert existing
well trajectories into the wellbore trajectory optimiser model. This allows for the Well Engineer to
perform a well viability risk assessment, and perform final design editing iterations inside the 3D model
data consistent with the optimized trajectory data.
The process described above bridges the data gap which normally exists between subsurface geoscience
team data and the drilling model data. By following this method and the processes, geoscientists are now
able to design wells in compliance with the drilling constraints, inside the seismic time domain. The
ability to design in the early stage seismic model allows subsurface users to work on potential wellbore
trajectory designs at the wellbore drilling scoping phase of oil and gas drilling projects. The wellbore
trajectory optimiser produces single well or groups of wellbore data for performing further wellbore
trajectory assessments such as anti-collision, target sizing and relief well criteria.
The method involves a process which optimizes the time spent planning wellbore trajectories by producing
typically over 1500 wellbore trajectory options in under 90seconds. The subset optimized wellbore trajectories
can then be visualized and manipulated by the subsurface team or Drilling Well Engineers in collaboration with
other discipline Well Engineers. This results in significant time savings scaling from weeks to months by not
having to assess and analyse suboptimal well trajectories and also allows users to focus on an optimal subset
of wellbore trajectory options. Data integrity and time needed for data validation is no longer required when
following the Well Trajectory Optimiser method as it uses a common software platform for input, risk analysis
and results visualization. The process can be used to better understand which wellbore trajectories are more
likely to actually be drilled earlier on in the oil and gas project time line, typically the lower risk wells are drilled
first and with the higher risk wells can be left until the later stages of the drilling phase. These later stage wells
4 OTC-26808-MS

can be safely drilled after the logging while drilling and engineering data is obtained from drilled offset wells.
This results in a reduced potential of catastrophic drilling events occurring earlier on in the project design phase.
Subsurface and drilling teams will program in geohazards, fault plane, pressure ramp zones and well
geomechanical data along with offset wellbore positional data for the assessment of wellbore collision risk and
also target information for geologic target volume intersection analysis. The process will rank each wellbore
trajectory for all of the required parameters and from this the teams can work up the best trajectories. The
ranking method in this paper is non-weighted.

Chart 1.0 —Wellbore Trajectory Optimisation Integrating Wellbore Position into Sub-Surface
OTC-26808-MS 5

Figure 1.0 —Wellbore Trajectory Optimisation inputs entered

Figure 2.0 —Choosing Best Fit Wellbore Trajectory Optimisation

Figure 3.0 —Interactive Design Wellbore Trajectory Optimisation

6 OTC-26808-MS

Figure 4.0 —Wellbore Trajectory Optimisation, Defining Hazard Limits

Figure 5.0 —Wellbore Trajectory Optimisation Connecting Platform Location with Geological Targets

Figure 6.0 —Wellbore Trajectory Optimiser Testing Wellbore Trajectory with Assigned Constraints
OTC-26808-MS 7

Introduction. Outline the problem and briefly explain the solution

The planning and design phase of oil and gas drilling projects can represent a significant time interval and
the proportion of the project cost. The teams of users involved in the oil and gas project design work are
typically subsurface geologic basin design team, seismic, petrophysics and the drilling operations
workforce with additional service companies included in the mid to latter stage of the design phase.
Drilling ‘Time Line’ or ‘Performance Benchmark’ objectives are normally set to ensure the wellbore
is drilled ready for production plan and under budget. Key Performance Objectives (KPO) include average
drilling rate of penetration (Ave ROP), measured depth and from this the cost projection can be calculated
and improved on where necessary. Other common performance objectives are KOD, DLS and intersecting
geological targets and avoiding hazards. Time saved from following the Wellbore Trajectory Optimiser
method and the improvement in data integrity significantly reduces time optimizing wellbores, removing
the need to export, reformat and quality check data between multiple software platform databases.

Statement of Theory and Definitions

● Design phase risk assessments processes can become disjointed where drilling team well engineers
work on separate model data from the subsurface well engineer model data. By applying common
well trajectory optimiser constraints to calculate and display optimized well trajectories using both
data models provides an efficient and collaborative solution to the challenge of performing a
consistent oil and gas drilling project wellbore trajectory risk assessment.
● Wellbore trajectory constraints are entered by the user using a combination of the DDI tolerance,
MD, MI, KOD and DLS constraints. The DDI tolerance allows for all the possible well trajectories
to be tested for Drillability. Well trajectories passing the DDI constraint represent lower risk of
catastrophic drilling events such as stuck pipe, lost in hole or twist off events, high levels of
exposure drill string and bottom hole assembly damage, low Average Rate of Penetration, (Ave
ROP), hole cleaning and wellbore hole quality. The MD constraint is directly linked to well cost
where a well can assume a USD cost per foot allowing for a level of cost comparison to be done
for the well trajectories produced. The MI constraint is directly related to completion production,
drilling performance and is associated with any wireline conveyed service requirements for the
well. The KOD is associated with the MD, DDI requirements and also related hazards and geologic
target position relative to the surface location. The DLS constraint is closely related to wellbore
hole quality, the decision process for choosing the most appropriate bottom hole drilling and
logging assembly and casing run limits where achieving more than the minimum required dogleg
is required to safely and efficiently intersect the geologic targets and missing the hazard zones. The
DLS constraint can also be used to test if drilling the wellbore will result in significant damage to
the bottom hole assembly or poor casing running rates when wellbore trajectory maximum
specified DLS design limit is exceeded.

Description and Application of Equipment and Processes.

The Wellbore Trajectory Optimisation Method relies on using a single computer software platform. Oil
and Gas drilling Platform, subsurface geological model, target and wellbore trajectory data are stored and
optimized using a single software platform.
The process involves defining geological target locations, drilling hazards and boundaries in 3D. The
user iteratively tests the drilling platform surface position. The geological targets are linked to the
optimized surface position locations and geological targets are assigned to wellbore trajectories. The next
process is to risk assess and tests each trajectory against the drilling project specified drilling constraints.
The optimized wellbore trajectories are further risk assessed for wellbore positioning geological target
8 OTC-26808-MS

size analysis, anticollision and engineering risk analysis and optimisation. Each wellbore section is then
risk assessed before drilling the next section until the wellbore TD is reached.

Presentation of Data and Results

● A five wellbore oil producing offshore Malaysia drilling campaign took over one hundred weeks
from initial project award to start of the drilling phase. The tangible cost benefit of three months
saved from project team costs and savings in the project pre drilling design phase can be quantified
in financial terms but there are intangible optimisation benefits from allowing the subsurface and
drilling teams to work more interactive and collaboratively. A potential reduction in the oil and gas
industry cost saving can be quantified as a tangible saving of over 300k USD saving for a single
five well drilling project cost before the drilling phase is started. The additional intangible cost
savings are optimal allocation of platform or rig surface position, slot and wellbore geologic target
allocation using the lowest cost and drilling difficulty risk trajectory earlier in the project.
Constructing the most efficient wellbores and their completions ultimately results in the projects’
assets providing the highest probability of meeting or exceeding drilling, safety and production
targets. The resulting project savings alone can be considered in multiples of millions of USD per
oil and gas drilling project. With increased resource utilization of the drilling, platform and
completion hardware, production and profitability and significant reduction in the project envi-
ronmental impact will result from following the Wellbore Trajectory Optimisation Method.

Conclusions
●The oil and Gas industry benefit from utilizing the Wellbore Trajectory optimiser method is
significant. The benefit from drilling the most viable oil and gas assets will result from following
the Wellbore Trajectory Optimiser method. An associated benefit will come from the improved
efficiency of wellbore utilization to drill the best geologic targets and constructing the most
efficient and economically viable wellbores in the safest way allowing for earlier and safer well
collision avoidance risk assessments. This helps the drilling and subsurface teams to meet or
exceed the wellbore trajectory objectives by integrating wellbore trajectory and positioning data
with subsurface data, collaborating and utilizing the data by processing the data within a single
software platform.
All multiwell drilling projects, both offshore and onshore can benefit from following the trajectory
optimisation method described in this paper reducing time spent in the planning phase and allowing for
more relevant engineering and optimisation effort to be targeted to the relevant wellbore trajectories,
geological targets and platform locations.

Acknowledgments.
Briefly cite or acknowledge special help from individuals or organizations.
Thanks to PETRONAS Carigali, Kuala Lumpur Wells and Subsurface Teams for their contribution to
this paper. Thanks also to Paul Hultzsch, and Jason McMullan, Schlumberger Kuala Lumpur for the
allocation of programming and development time for the Wellbore Trajectory Optimiser project.

Nomenclature
DDI : directional drilling difficulty index ref IADC/SPE 59196
DLS : dog leg severity industry standard degrees/100ft or degrees/30m
KOD : kick of depth or nudge depth
MD : measured depth or along hole depth
MI : maximum inclination, well trajectory maximum inclination
OTC-26808-MS 9

TDR : time depth relationship, geological model time based seismic data related to true vertical
depth defined data
TVD : true vertical depth, normally referenced to a common drilling project reference datum
TD : Total Drilled Depth
3D : Three Dimensional
Ave ROP : Average rate of penetration
KPO : Key performance indicators

References
References should be listed in alphabetical order by the author’s last name. In the text, please cite
references in the text by placing the author’s name and year in parentheses. [Note: this is a change from
OTC previous reference style, which required references to be numbered in the order in which they were
cited.] Information should be as complete as possible and in the following order:

1. Rushmore: ‘Drilling Performance Reports’ 1995-1998

2. C. Chatfield: ‘Statistics for Technology’ Chapman and Hall 1979
3. J.F. Brett and K.K. Millheim: ‘The Drilling Performance Curve: A Yardstick for Judging Drilling Performance’ SPE
15362 (1986)
4. A. W. Oag and M. Williams: ‘The Directional Difficulty Index –A New Approach to performance Benchmarking’
IADC/SPE 59196
5. W. H. Press, S. A. Teukolsky, W. T. Vetterling, B. P. Flannery: ‘NUMERICAL RECIPES IN C: THE ART OF
SCIENTIFIC COMPUTING’ (ISBN 0-521-43108-5)