SPE 93761

Eliminating Multiple Interventions Using a Single Rig-Up Coiled-Tubing Solution

P.S. Kumar, SPE, S.V. Gisbergen, SPE, and J. Harris, Petroleum Development Oman, E. Ferdiansyah, M. Brady, SPE,
S.A. Harthy, and A. Pandey, Schlumberger

Copyright 2005, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.

This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2005 SPE Middle East Oil Show held in
Bahrain., 12 15 March 2005.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
information contained in a proposal submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to a proposal of not more than 300
words; illustrations may not be copied. The proposal must contain conspicuous
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O.
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.

Abstract
This paper describes new methods to economically improve
production levels in one of the mature fields of Petroleum
Development Oman. This field had been developed by infill
drilling programs, which were suspended in early 2001 to
review the development strategy. A reservoir management
team set a challenge to effectively conduct logging operations
and quickly utilize the data collected to identify and avail of
optimization opportunities, thus maximizing the production of
the wells whilst lowering overall costs. The optimization
activity consisted of clean-out, saturation logging, perforation
and stimulation. These activities were carried out either with
coiled tubing only utilizing conventional practises and e-line
coiled tubing, or with the combination of coiled tubing and
hoist through multiple well entries. Both of these methods
were successfull in that they resulted in incremental net oil
production but at relatively high costs.
This paper presents a methodology which enables clean-out,
logging, stimulation and perforation with one coiled tubing
intervention, which includes a plastic coated e-line coiled
tubing, coiled tubing perforating head and new perforation
technology. All systems are in complete compliance with the
most stringent safety criteria. The new method has a
considerable time and cost savings impact, and this is fully
illustrated in this paper with field trial case histories, in which
a multi-disciplinary team effectively targeted the most suitable
zones for perforation and stimulation using a state of the art
self diverting, non damaging, acid system. Technical and
economic comparisons are made with conventional practices.
The methodology is currently being employed in this field and
is potentially applicable to other fields.

Introduction
One of the matured fields of Petroleum Development Oman,
situated in North Oman and is mainly producing from the
Lower Cretaceous Shuaiba formation which is heavily faulted
and consists of intrashelf basin floor carbonate muds. Porosity
ranges from 30 to 35% while permeability ranges from 1 md
at the base of the Shuaiba to 200 md in thief zones. Average
matrix permeability is approximately 10 md. Permeabilities in
fault and fracture zones are believed to be orders of magnitude
higher than the average matrix permeability. Most of the
production comes from horizontal wells with 4 cemented
liner and perforated. The average current water cut from this
field is 93%. The high water cut presents longer term concerns
and Petroleum Development Oman has implemented a multidisciplinary effort with the ultimate goal of improving
production through a concerted CT and Hoist operations. A
very thorough evaluation of candidate selection is conducted
utilizing appropriate reservoir evaluation techniques, with
strong consideration to geology.
The development activities in this field traditionally have been
targeted by infill drilling with vertical wells until 1994
followed by horizontal wells. The infill well drilling was
suspended in early 2001. An integrated field review was
initiated to design the next era of this field development to
maximize the remaining value through effective well and
reservoir management. The well and reservoir management
team identified the need for data gathering through recording
reservoir saturations by running pulse neutron capture tools
(PNC) for identifying additional perforation opportunities. In
gas lifted wells the PNC logging was run on a coiled tubing
and in ESP (Electrical Submersible Pump) wells by pumping
the PNC tool inside the work string during hoist operations.
Based on the PNC logs, additional perforations were made in
many wells and the additional perforations improved the net
oil production from them. Hence, through PNC logging,
additional perforation and stimulation were given prime
importance in this field during the year 2004 in order to
maintain production levels. Various cost reduction measures
were applied to reduce the operating cost per barrel. One of
them is the novel idea of utilising coiled tubing for cleanout,
logging, mechanical water shut-off, perforation and
stimulation in one go. This paper describes the single rig-up
coiled tubing process that has eliminated multiple entries and
resulted in both cost reduction and less turn around time.

www.petroman.ir

SPE 94761

Challenge Definition
More than 90% of the wells are horizontal with 4
cemented and perforated liner with either gas lift or ESP
artificial lift completions. Most of the wells are producing at
more than 90% water cut. Typically the drawdown from these
wells ranges from 30 to 60% of the reservoir pressure. Also
the water is saturated with calcium carbonate (CaCO3) and the
gas contains approximately 3% carbon dioxide (CO2). Due to
the saturated nature of the water and high drawdown there is
often scales formation inside the tubing walls which required
cleaning out to enable entry to the perforations. In this
situation, any optimization activities require the following:
a. Clean-out
b. Logging
c. Water shut-off if any
d. Perforation if any
e. Stimulation
There are many ways of carrying out these activities.
However, cost effectiveness and a reduction in turn around
time were the challenges to the well and reservoir
management team and the service companies for carrying out
these jobs 1,2,3. Hence, we are comparing the single rig-up
coiled tubing solution with the two well proven technologies
of multiple entry coiled tubing operations and using the
combinations of coiled tubing and workover rig / hoist for the
gas lift wells.
Multiple Entry Coiled Tubing Operations
This method requires four three interventions but using only
coiled tubing units ie rigless or without a hoist. The sequence
of operations conducted is described below:
A) Cleanout of the horizontal cemented liner with
conventional coiled tubing.
B) PNC reservoir saturation logging with e-line coiled
tubing.
C) Perforating using conventional coiled tubing with
hydraulic firing head followed with stimulation treatment
across new perforations executed by running in and
retrieving a series of perforating gun strings under live
well pressure (RPGSP).
Table-1 shows the approximate well cost and the time frame
required for the full project from cleaning the well through
PNC saturation logging, placing additional perforations to
stimulating. The overall turnaround time for these operations
required was at least 3 months in cases where execution
proceeded without significant problems
Combination of Coiled tubing and Hoist operations
In this method there are three interventions, two coiled tubing
and one hoist operation. The sequence of operations is as
follows:
A) Cleanout of scale in the horizontal cemented liner with
normal interventions with normal coiled tubing
B) PNC logging with e-line coiled tubing.
C) Perforation and stimulation with a workover rig or hoist
unit.

The first two operations are not combined with the workover
rig/hoist operation because reservoir saturation logging under
flowing conditions is a requirement in order to avoid any
flushing, i.e water flowing back ino the formation showing
higher saturation against the high permeability zone under
static conditions as wells are producing more than 90% water
cut. Also it was observed that the stimulation was not effective
even with a polymer based diverting system in combination
with wash cups or straddle packer systems with minimal
spacing of 3 m due to the highly fractured environment.
Table-2 shows the approximate well intervention cost and
time required for these jobs. The turn around time in this case
is around 2 months.
One Rig-up Coiled Tubing solution- New Intervention
Method
This method calls for only one intervention with plastic coated
cable inside the coil tubing eliminating the multiple
interventions. This set up is capable of completing all four
objectives: well clean out, saturation logging, multiple zone
perforation and stimulation.
This method was possible with the development of technology
in the field of coiled tubing perforation, e-coil, and the
perforation gun systems. The following are the components of
the system:
A plastic coated logging cable. The logging cable provides
the electrical connection between the downhole tools and
the surface processing equipment. In conventional wireline
applications, the cable is always kept under tension, with
operating techniques and practices applied to maintain the
correct degree of cable tension and mechanical stability.
However, when installed in a CT string, there are
conditions under which a significant portion of the cable
may experience compression forces near the bottom end of
the string. If severe or sudden compression forces are
applied, the cable armor may distort. This will almost
certainly result in the loss of conductivity or insulation in
one or all of the conductors. To counteract such unstable
conditions encountered by cables installed in the CT string,
a jacked armored cable was developed specifically for CT
logging operations. An outer sheath or jacket is applied to
the cable during the manufacturing process to provide
several benefits. The coating and modified armor
construction for CT logging cables provides a more stable
cable structure under the varying forces experienced within
the CT string. In addition, the coating provides protection
from treatment fluids pumped through the CT string which
may degrade the mechanical or electrical performance of
the cable.
Coiled tubing logging/perforation head, which consists of
electrical quick connector with mechanical weak point for
electric line and dual flapper valve to prevent wellbore
fluid flow within coiled tubing. This logging/perforating
head has dual release mechanism (exceed flow limit and
overpull simultaneously), which will prevent unintentional
releases during logging and perforation.
CT deployment bar- is used to make up a long tool when
the tool string or bottom hole assembly can not be rigged

www.petroman.ir

SPE 94761

up in one go. It comprises an upper and lower wireline

electrical connection with a shearable center seal section of
a diameter appropriate to the BOP seal element diameter.
A new detonator which is completely safe against stray or
static voltages. This detonator needs > 200 V to start the
initiation, which makes it totally safe against a stray or
static voltage.
The electrical system from logging truck to the gun are
fully compliant to the operators and service companys
explosive field safety procedures. This is possible because
both of the system (logging truck and CT unit) are from
the same service provider and are fully certified to perform
perforation.
It also possible to perform underbalance perforation with this
setup. This underbalance is created by switching on the gas lift
system of the well or by displacing the wellbore by lighter
fluid. Table-3 shows the typical well cost and time required
for this method. The turn around time required for this method
is less than 15 days.
Field Trials
Well A.
Since we wanted to demonstrate continuous improvement in a
structured manner, we at first introduced only the perforation
and stimulation in one go in this well. This well was selected
as a candidate for trial based on the pulse neutron capture,
saturation log recorded in September 2003. The main
objective was to add 50 meters of perforations and to stimulate
these new perforations with the same coiled tubing unit. These
operations were expected to increase production by 30 m3/d
net oil. The well was producing 430m3/d gross with 29 m3/d
net oil and 92.5% BS&W before the start of the job.
The perforation was performed in three runs. The well was put
through the test separator before proceeding to the stimulation
to evaluate the effectiveness of underbalanced perforation.
The short duration test showed that the gross hadincreased to
500m3/d with 57 m3/d net and ~89% BS&W. Afterward the
top two perforations were stimulated with the assistance of a
surfactant based self-diverting acid4,5 system and the well
responded to produce 572 m3/d gross with 63 m3/d net oil i.e.
a gain of 34 m3/d net oil against the expectation of 30 m3/day.
Well-B
This well was identified for water shut-off as the existing
active perforations in this well are at same elevation as the top
perforations and interfering with offset producers as shown in
Figure 3. Hence, it was proposed to shut-off the existing
perforations in this well and perforate the intervals having
more than 65% oil saturation. Expected outcome from the
additional perforation was 24 m3/d net oil gains.
Accordingly this well was planned for a single rig-up coiled
tubing solution project. A dummy run was made with a
clean-out trip followed by PNC saturation logging. The
saturation log was interpreted and a decision to isolate all of
the existing perforations was made. Accordingly a bridge plug
was set to isolate all the existing perforations. Then 41 meters

of perforation were added in the heel of the horizontal section

using the same coiled tubing unit. These perforations were
stimulated using a surfactant based self diverting acid system.
The well produced with a gross of 523m3/d with a net oil of
25 m3/d. Since these jobs are of high value it was felt that the
operational efficiency could be improved and a rigorous
evaluation of performance was undertaken. In this process all
the job objectives and steps involved were analysed along with
their risks. This was performed by the multi-disciplinary team
consisting of a reservoir engineer, a production technologist,
an operations engineer, a service specialist, the job supervisors
and technicians. The main objective of this exercise is to
reduce the time and cost of operations through generation of
novel ideas. Typically the ideas and the suggestions are
tabulated as shown in Figure-4. Suggestions like combining
the cleanout trip with the dummy run was introduced in all
later jobs and the operation time has been improved
dramatically.
So far there have been 10 wells serviced using the single rigup
coiled tubing solution with different combinations of
activities. Table-4 compares the expected gains with the actual
oil gains from these ten wells. The table shows that the overall
production targets were met and so the faster turn around time
did not adversely affect the performance of the wells. Indeed
the overall production targets have been superceded by use of
the single coiled-tubing rig up solution.
Conclusions
This methodology of employing a single rig-up coiled
tubing solution eliminated multiple interventions of coiled
tubing and workover rig/hoist.
This has also resulted in a cost saving of approximately
100,000 USD per well i.e. around 1 million dollar saving
was realized during the year 2004.
It can be seen from table-4 that 9 wells out of 10 were
successful in achieving the objective of the operations.
This was possible only through proper candidate selction
by multidisciplinary team efforts.
The detailed analyses and consideration of operational
processes further enhanced the efficiency of the operation.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Petroleum Development
Oman and Ministry of Oil and Gas for granting permission to
publish this paper. The authors would also like to thank the
Northern directorate well services team for help rendered in
making the process a successful one.
References
1. Alexander Sas-Jaworsky.: Practical Considerations for
Enhancing Coiled Tubing Well Control Operations, paper
SPE 60739 presented at the 2000 SPE/ICoTA Coiled
Tubing Roundtable held in Houston, TX, 5-6 April 2000.
2. Lyle Laun, et al.: Improved CT Operational Efficiency by
Use of Detailed Planning, paper SPE 74821 presented at
the SPE/ICoTA Coiled Tubing Conference and Exhibition
held in Houston, Texas, U.S.A., 9-10 April 2002.
3. S.P. Engel and Mackey, P.: Opportunities To Improve the

www.petroman.ir

SPE 94761

Success Rate of Coiled-Tubing Operations, paper SPE

68429 presented at the SPE/ICoTA Coiled Tubing
Roundtable, held in Houston, Texas, 7-8 March 2001.
4. M. Al-Mutawa et. Al, Field Cases of a Zero Damaging
Stimulation and Diversion Fluid from the Carbonate
Formations in North Kuwait, SPE 80225, SPE
International Symposium on Oilfield Chemistry held in
Houston, Texas, U.S.A., 58 February 2003.
5. P.Santhana Kumar, Stan Van Gisbergen, Jeremy M.
Harris, Ahmed M. Al-Naabi, and Abdulsattar Murshidi,
Mark E. Brady, Erik Ferdiansyah, Salah Al Harthy,
Stimulation Challenges and Solutions in Complex
Carbonate Reservoirs, SPE 93413, to be presented at the
Middle East Oil Show held in Bahrain, 12-15 March 2005.

www.petroman.ir

SPE 94761

Item

Cost

Days

CT Cleanout (w/ conventional CT)

PNC logging (w/ E-line CT)
Additional Perforation & Stimulation with CT utilizing RPGSP system (w/ conventional CT)
Total

17,000
60,000
210,000
287,000

2
2
6
10

Cost

Days

17,000
60,000
250,000
327,000

2
2
7
11

Table-1:- Proven Technology Using Multiple Entries Coiled Tubing

Item
CT Cleanout (w/ conventional CT)
PNC logging (w/ E-line CT)
Additional Perforation and Stimulation (w/ Hoist)
Total

Table-2:- Proven Technology Using Combined Coiled Tubing and Workover Rig / Hoist Entries

Cost

Days

-CT Cleanout (w/ E-line plastic coated CT)

-PNC logging (w/ E-line plastic coated CT)
-Additional Perforation(w/ E-line plastic coated CT)
-Stimulation (w/ E-line plastic coated CT)

17,000
50,000
133,000
28,000

2
1
2
1

Total

228,000

Item

Table-3:- One Rig-up Coiled Tubing Solution -New Technology

Sl. No

Well No.

Well-A

Well-B

Well-C

Well-D

Well-E

Well-F

Well-G

Well-H

Well-I

10

Well-J

Brief Job Description

Additional Perforation and

stimulation
Saturation Logging/Water
Shut-Off/Add perf
Saturation logging and
stimulation
Water Shut-Off /Add
Perf/Stim
Water Shut-Off /Add Perf
/Stimulation
Saturation
logging/Production Logging/
Water Shut-Off /Add
perf/Stimulation
Saturation logging /Add
Perf/Stimulation
Saturation logging /
Production
Logging/Stimulation
Saturation logging /
Production Logging /Water
Shut-Off/Stimulation
Saturation logging and
stimulation
TOTAL

Actual
Oil Gain,
m3/d

Expected
Oil Gain,
m3/d

34

Before

After

Gross

Net

%
Water
Cut

Gross

Net

%
Water
Cut

30

458

29

93.7

556

63

88.7

23

24

570

99.6

523

25

95.2

-3

23

567

30

94.7

611

27

95.6

11

50

507

32

93.7

646

43

93.3

214

105

1221

31

97.5

1580

245

84.5

31

30

1106

100.0

460

31

93.3

57

26

343

22

93.6

1022

79

92.3

26

15

582

30

94.8

662

56

91.5

88

36

1237

33.5

97.3

950

121

87.3

23

181

43

76.2

245

51

79.2

489

362

Table-4 Comparision of Actual oil gains with expected gains from the wells where single rig-up coil tubing technology was implemented

www.petroman.ir

SPE 94761

CT Connector

Logging/
Perforating Head

In je c t o r
H ead

S w ivel

L u b r ic a to r
Deploym ent Bar

S h e a r S e a l/
Com bi BO P

CCL

Q uad B O P

W e ll H e a d
Firing Head

P erforation G un

Figure -1 Surface Rig-up

Figure-2 Typical Perforation Bottomhole Assembly

www.petroman.ir

SPE 94761

Well - B

750

100

Axis 1
Calendar Day Oil Rate ( m3/d )
Calendar Day Liquid Rate ( m3/d )
Test Liquid Rate (m3/d)

600

80

Axis 2
Water Cut ( % )
Test.Bsw ( % )
Average Days of Prodn ( Date )
Lift Gas ( Kscm/d )

450

60

300

40

150

20

1997

98

99

750

01

02

03

100

Nearby Well

Axis 1
Calendar Day Oil Rate ( m3/d )
Calendar Day Liquid Rate ( m3/d )
Test Liquid Rate (m3/d)

600

2000

80

Axis 2
Water Cut ( % )
Test.Bsw ( % )
Average Days of Prodn ( Date )
Lift Gas ( Kscm/d )

450

60

300

40

150

20

1
1997

98

99

2 3
2000

Figure-3 Interference between wells

www.petroman.ir

01

02

4
03

SPE 94761

Ideas
High Value / Difficult:
High Value / Easy:
1. Combine the last two perforating runs (3rd 1. Hold a kick-off meeting prior to commencement of operations
2.
Preview the job activities.
& 4th 60m) using RPGSP
3.
Confirm accommodations for the unit crew.
2. Investigate chemical shutoff instead of
4.
Mobilization
5.
Field supervisor travels to the field one to two days prior to ensure
bridge plug for water shutoff
that site is prepared, ready and safe for operations and that the
3. Reduce log interpretation turn around time.
permit is signed.
6.
7.

V
A
L
U
E

8.
9.
10.
11.
12.

Give a green light for mobilization of the equipment from the

base.
Combine the dummy run with saturation log and drift the liner for
the bridge plug OD
Perforate during the night
Run stimulation assembly in tandem with last perforation run
Start early in the morning in order to be able to complete two
perforating runs during day time.
If cant perforate at night, RIH with perforating guns the night
before so you can perforate first thing in the morning.
Use two cranes; one for holding the CT injector head while the
other crane picks up the perforating assembly.

Low Value / Easy :

Low Value / Difficult:

1.

Ease of imImplementation

Figure-4 Service the Limit Servicing the Well On Paper (SWOP)

www.petroman.ir

Check and do preventive maintenance on the

wellhead sufficiently in advance and to
incorporate wellhead maintenance in coiled
tubing sequence