IADC/SPE 59197
Deepwater Subsalt Development: Directional Drilling Challenges and Solutions
J. R. Cromb, SPE, Texaco Worldwide Exploration and Production, C.G. Pratten, SPE, M. Long, R.A. Walters,
Schlumberger
Copyright 2000, IADC/SPE Drilling Conference
This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2000 IADC/SPE Drilling Conference held in
New Orleans, Louisiana, 2325 February 2000.
This paper was selected for presentation by an IADC/SPE Program Committee following
review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the
paper, as presented, have not been reviewed by the International Association of Drilling
Contractors or 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 IADC or
SPE, their officers, or members. Papers presented at the IADC/SPE meetings are subject to
publication review by Editorial Committees of the IADC and SPE. 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 an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The
abstract 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
Gulf of Mexico deepwater drilling activity has increasingly
discovered economic hydrocarbon deposits lying below salt
formations. Subsalt reservoir development is becoming one of
the major challenges for operators, with the salt providing
challenges in both seismic interpretation and drilling.1 This
paper looks at how one operator successfully undertook a
subsalt development in Mississippi Canyon. The project
covered the completion of an exploratory well and the
directional drilling of two development wells which produced
from a state-of-the-art subsea system of wells, manifold and
flowlines. The Gemini development was one of the first
deepwater subsalt projects in the Gulf of Mexico and provided
unique challenges for the directional drilling operations. These
challenges included kicking off the well riserless in large-
diameter hole, controlling wellbore trajectory through more
than 3000 ft of salt and executing sidetracks to revised
bottomhole targets after initial geological evaluation
Success was achieved through detailed planning from a
directional drilling aspect that considered the geological,
engineering and economic requirements and novel application
of technology. In this paper we describe how these challenges
were met from the standpoint of wellbore trajectory,
bottomhole assembly design and operational procedures, and
we review the performance of the directional drilling
operations.
Introduction
The Gemini field is a joint subsea development between
Texaco (60%) and Chevron (40%) in the Gulf of Mexico in
Mississippi Canyon Block 292. The development is
approximately 90 miles southeast of New Orleans in a water
depth of 3400 ft (Fig. 1). Gemini is a subsalt field that was
discovered in 1995. In May 1996 the interval to be developed
was tested in the No. 1 exploratory well at a rate of 32
MMcf/D of natural gas and 627 B/D of condensate. The
subsea development consists of three production wells tied
into a four-slot cluster manifold; each well was approximately
50 ft from the manifold. The development plan called for the
drilling of two additional wells and completion of all three
wells during the period of January 1999 to September 1999.
The Diamond Offshore Ocean Star semisubmersible drilling
rig (Fig. 1 inset) was utilized for the drilling operations and
was also used concurrently to install the subsea system
components (manifold, trees, and jumpers). The production
from the field flows through two 12-in. flowlines back to the
Chevron VK 900 platform located 27.5 miles northwest of
MC-292 in 340 ft of water (Fig. 1).
Initial Well Planning
Initial targets allocated for the two new wells were based
on results from the No. 1 exploratory well. These two wells
would become the No. 3 and No. 4 development wells.
Surface locations were dictated by the need to tie into the four-
slot cluster manifold and by the anchor pattern of the Ocean
Star. Maximizing operational efficiency, the surface locations
were spaced at 50-ft intervals because the rig was required to
move from each wellhead without pulling anchors.
The targeted production zone was in the Allison sand at
approximately 11,300 ft TVD RKB. Both wells included
additional appraisal drilling for deeper targets, namely the
Dean sand and the Erin sand at a depth of 15,000 ft TVD
RKB. These targets lay directly below the Allison sand, and
reaching them would dictate an S-shape directional profile for
each well. Fig. 2 illustrates the target and wellhead locations.
The major influencing factor on the design of the
directional wells was the salt formation between 6807 and
9728 ft TVD RKB on the No. 3 well and between 7025 and
10,407 ft TVD RKB on the No. 4 well. At these depths it was
not possible to design a drillable wellbore trajectory that
would allow kicking off below the salt and meet the target
objectives. Additionally, it was felt that angle build should be
completed prior to drilling the salt, and therefore the kickoff
depth would have to be relatively shallow with respect to the
mud line at 3476 ft.
Casing requirements were considered before finalizing a
well plan. A 36-in. conductor would be jetted 250 ft below the
2 J.R.CROMB, C.G.PRATTEN, M.LONG, R.A.WALTERS
mudline. Expected production rates were to require a 9 5/8
liner across the reservoir and two casing strings across the salt.
The casing program was designed to case off the salt with 11
-in. prior to drilling the reservoir. The casing strings were to
be a 20-in. surface string, 16-in. set in the top of the salt and
11 below the salt requiring 24-in., 17-in. x 20-in., 14 -in.
and 10 5/8-in. x 12 -in. hole sizes to be drilled. Since the
No. 1 well had no shallow water flow, it was not expected to
be an issue on these wells and the 24-in. hole would be drilled
riserless.
Building angle in the weak shallow formations would
dictate planning the well with low-angle buildup ratesno
more than 2/100 ft. This would push the kickoff point up into
the 24-in. hole section. The question then became whether to
drill a pilot hole for directional control and open to 24 in.
While 24-in. kickoffs have not been a feature of Gulf of
Mexico deepwater operations, they have been successful in
many other areas of the world. However, they are typically
planned and executed at lower buildup rates. The decision was
made to plan the wells with a 24-in. kickoff, open to seabed,
building angle at 1/100 ft until the 20-in. casing depth was
reached. Angle build would then continue in the 17-in x 20-in.
section at 2/100 ft until end of build, which would coincide
with the 16-in. casing depth in the top of the salt. This course
of action raised the question of whether the directional work
could be achieved by simultaneous drilling and underreaming.
Given that a drilling motor would be needed, options were
realistically limited to drilling a pilot hole and then
underreaming after drilling, or drilling with a bicenter or
steerable reaming while drilling tool tool. The first option
would provide confidence in achieving the planned build rate
and would also enable recovery of the trajectory if planned
build rates were not met in the 24-in. section. Because there
would be less directional control, the latter option was riskier
in terms of completing angle build prior to setting the 16-in.
string. Therefore, the decision was to drill a 17-in. pilot hole
and under-ream it at casing point.
The salt was to be drilled in 14 -in. hole, and it would be
necessary to start the dropoff for the S-shape profile in this
section. A dropoff rate of 1.5/100 ft was selected as
achievable in this salt.
The well designs could therefore be finalized: an S-shape
profile with maximum angle reached at the 16-in. casing shoe
depth and the angle dropped back to vertical at the Allison
sand target. The No. 3 well would require a tangent angle of
38.2 and would be drilled to the northeast along an azimuth of
55.3. The No. 4 well would be drilled to the northwest along
an azimuth of 307.3. The key to success would be achieving
planned buildup rate in 24-in. hole and dropping angle into the
target through the salt formation. Figs. 3 and 4 show the plan
and section views of the two wells.
Mud Program
With the salt formation limiting seismic interpretation of
the reservoir, the geoscientists would require as much
information as possible from these two wells. Therefore, for
logging purposes, water-based mud was the preferred mud
IADC/SPE 59197
system. Hole stability was a concern with the water-based
mud, because the exploration wells had experienced problems
and required synthetic mud for to complete drilling operations
to total depth. If problems were to occur while drilling, a
change to synthetic oil-based mud was planned as a
contingency.
Formation Evaluation
LWD measurements were used for formation evaluation in
real time and were transmitted to the surface with the MWD
system. High data transmission rates were used to ensure good
directional control without sacrificing borehole formation
data. Constant updates enabled the geologists to refine the
geological model and to push casing points to achieve
maximum benefit. Uncertainties with the surface seismic data
made real time formation evaluation data especially useful
after the borehole was below the salt. Offset data combined
with LWD and wireline data helped determine the best
possible placement of the borehole. The real-time information
was used by rig operations personnel to assist decision making
for a safe and continuous drilling program for each well.
Drilling Operations
The 36-in. conductor and 20-in. casing were to be batch-
set for maximum operational efficiency. Well No. 4 was to be
spudded first, followed by No. 3. The rig would then be pulled
over the No. 1 well and the blowout preventer (BOP) and riser
would be run to install the lock-down hanger. After work was
completed on No. 1, the BOP would be unlatched and the rig
would be pulled over to No. 4 for drilling ahead.
Well No. 4 was spudded on February 2, 1999. A 24-in.
jetting BHA including MWD tool was latched inside the 36-in.
casing, which was jetted to 3727 ft. The BHA was then
unlatched from the casing and used to drill ahead to kickoff
depth at 4398 ft.
The 24-in. kickoff BHA utilizing a 9 5/8-in. mud motor
with bend set to 1.5 was run, and directional operations
began. The assembly drilled 1402 ft in 30 hr to the setting
depth of the 20-in. casing at 5800 ft for an average penetration
rate of 47 ft/hr. By casing point, 16.8 of angle had been built:
an average of 1.25/100 ft. Optimization of drilling parameters
resulted in good build rates while sliding and allowed the
BHA to be rotated for 59% of the footage.
The hole was displaced to 12.5-ppg mud, the assembly was
tripped out, and the 20-in. casing was run and cemented. The
rig then moved to the No. 3 well, and operations were
repeated. However, on this well the BHA was tripped after
jetting the casing to 3728 ft. The rig was then pulled over to
the manifold pile to install the subsea production manifold and
then back to No. 3 for drilling ahead. The kickoff BHA was
run and rotated down to kickoff depth at 4400 ft. The motor
again provided excellent directional response in the very soft
formation , which allowed the build rate to be controlled to
plan. 13.7 inclination was reached at the 20-in. casing depth.
The assembly drilled a total of 2064 ft in 38.5 hr, averaging 54
ft/hr. After displacing to mud, the 20-in. casing was set at
5760 ft.
IADC/SPE 59197 DEEPWATER SUBSALT DEVELOPMENT: DIRECTIONAL DRILLING CHALLENGES AND SOLUTIONS
On Well No. 4, 104 hr were needed to complete
operations, from tripping in with the 36-in. jetting assembly to
the start of running the 20-in. casing. The same operations
were completed on the No. 3 well in only 90 hr. This
significant improvement may be attributable to batch drilling
the section, which allowed improvements while operations
were fresh in the minds of the crew. The 24-in. kickoffs
exceeded expectations in terms of directional control, and the
first major challenge of the project was met.
Work was needed on Well No. 1, which required moving
the rig then running the riser and BOPs. The rig was pulled
back to No. 4, and the BOPs were latched to the wellhead on
February 16, 1999. The 17-in. pilot assembly again used a 9
5/8-in. mud motor with bend set at 1.5. This assembly was
used to finish building the curve to 33.3 with a rate of 2/100.
The BHA performed well and drilling progress was enhanced
through limiting sliding to 22.1% of the 1600 ft drilled. The
top of the salt was encountered at 7196 ft and drilling
continued to TD for the hole section at 7400 ft. The ROP
while drilling averaged 55 ft/hr before drilling into the salt. In
the salt, the ROP dropped to 1518 ft/hr. The formations
above the salt consisted largely of gumbo clays. A downhole
annular pressure measurement in the MWD string was used to
monitor cuttings loading through calculating ECD while
drilling. These measurements reduced the risk of packing off
and sticking the assembly. Although drilling rate was
controlled based on ECD readings, on two occasions it was
necessary to stop drilling and circulate to move gumbo up the
hole and away from the BHA. This was sufficient action to
keep the hole in good condition. At TD the BHA was pulled
and the hole was enlarged to 20 in. with an under-reamer
before running the 16-in. liner. Under-reaming was completed
in 29.5 hr on-bottom time at 54 ft/hr. The 16-in. liner was run
and cemented at 7350 ft.
The 14-in. steerable BHA was picked up with the bend
on the 9 5/8-in. motor set to 1.15. This BHA drilled the
remaining 3560-ft salt section while holding the 31.5 tangent
to the drop point and then dropping to vertical at 1.5/100 ft.
Of the 3955 ft drilled with this assembly, 3328 ft were
rotated84.1% of the total footage drilled. Total drilling time
for the section was 139 hr, with the average ROP at 28.5 ft/hr.
A single wiper trip was made to the shoe at 8714 ft. Dropoff
through the salt was achieved as planned, and at casing depth
the angle was down to 2.4. The second directional drilling
challenge had been metdrilling the salt in a single BHA run
while keeping the trajectory under the required control.
A string of 11-in. casing was run to 11,309 and a 10 5/8-
in. slick assembly was used to drill out. A test showed lower
leakoff than expected, and a squeeze job was undertaken.
After squeezing cement, the 10 5/8- x 12 -in. reaming while
drilling assembly was picked up. With an 8 -in. PDC pilot
bit, the reaming while drilling tool was placed above the
MWD/LWD tools. Such an assembly has proved very
successful where steerable directional work is not required. It
allows LWD measurements recorded with 6-in. tools to be
made in the 8-in. pilot hole instead of the 12-in. opened
hole. This is a great advantage because of the reduced
3
annular mud volume. Drilling proceeded through the Allison
target sand, but it was found to be poorly developed. For this
reason a decision was made not to drill ahead to the Dean and
Erin targets or to run the 9 5/8-in. liner. The well was
temporarily abandoned. The well reached TD at 12,769 ft. The
reaming while drilling assembly had made 1369 ft in 81.5 hr,
an average of 16.8 ft/hr, keeping the angle close to vertical
with an inclination of 0.65 at TD.
Operations below the 20-in. casing shoe had taken 27 days
including time spent squeezing the shoe. There had been no
unplanned trips and all hole sections had been drilled without
downhole equipment problems. Directionally, the well
trajectory had been kept to plan without compromising ROP
(Fig. 4).
The rig latched onto the No. 3 wellhead on March 21,
1999, and the 17-in. BHA was run as it was on the first well.
Drilling performance was similar but more steering was
required because of the higher maximum angle on well No. 3.
An average ROP of 36 ft/hr was used to drill 1338 ft of pilot
hole. Again, the annular pressure measurement was used to
monitor gumbo buildup in the annulus and optimize
penetration rate based on hole cleaning. Where necessary,
further action was taken by stopping and circulating. The salt
came in as expected at 6931 ft with the associated reduction in
drill rate to 17 ft/hr. On this well, the under-reaming was
fastercompleted in 23 hr on-bottom time at an average of 58
ft/hr.
The 16-in. liner was run, and the 14 -in. steerable
assembly was used to drill out the 16-in. float equipment and
shoe, and then drill ahead, maintaining the 37.8 tangent
through the salt down to 8807 ft. At this point the weather had
deteriorated. Rough seas caused the rig to heave up and down,
which put excess WOB on the BHA and PDC bit. The WOB
was varying as much as 30,000 lbf, which made it all but
impossible to slide and control a toolface with the PDC bit.
After 70 hr of drilling and more than 50 hr under these
conditions, the axial bearings in the motor were crushed,
causing it to fail. The BHA had made 1677 ft in 70 hran
average of 24 ft/hr. As dropoff had not yet commenced,
rotating percentage was 86% on this run.
With no improvement in the weather and a need for
steering down to control the angle drop, a milled tooth bit was
run on the new motor. The new BHA was used to continue
drilling the tangent section through the salt down to the
planned drop section at 9508 ft. From there, the angle was
dropped at 1.5/100 ft, achieving 5.6 at the 11 -in. casing
point. Slide drilling was again kept to a minimum with the
assembly rotated for 82.8% of the total footage for the hole
section. It should be noted that there was a significant
improvement in ROP with the mill tooth bit while drilling the
salt compared to the previous PDC bit. This section drilled at
35 ft/hr as opposed to 25 ft/hr on the previous bit run and 28
ft/hr on Well No. 4. The bottom of the salt was encountered at
10,506 ft, which meant a total of 3575 ft of salt had been
drilled on this well. The bit drilled a total of 2813 ft in 87 hr
and was pulled with seals effective and in good condition.
With a low-speed high-torque motor and 50 to 70 rpm from
4 J.R.CROMB, C.G.PRATTEN, M.LONG, R.A.WALTERS
surface, the bit would have been turning at up to 160 rpm
during the run.
A string of 11 -in. casing was run to 11,573 ft and a slick
assembly was used to drill out the float equipment. The same
reaming while drilling assembly run on Well No. 4 was used
for drilling the 12 1/4-in. vertical hole section down to 12,827
ft, the planned depth for setting the 9 5/8-in. liner. The ROP,
at 12.2 ft/hr average, was much lower than expected, probably
because of bit and reaming while drilling tool balling
problems in the water-based mud.
Attempts to run wireline logs at TD were unsuccessful. As
the tools could not get down past 11,615 ft (5 ft above the TD
of the 14 3/4-in. hole section and 42 ft below the 11 3/4-in.
shoe).
The reaming while drilling assembly was rerun and a
wiper trip was attempted but was unable to get past 11,755 ft
because the hole was packing off. An underreaming assembly
was run to ensure the hole was opened to 12 1/4 in. While
reaming and washing down, the hole started packing off again
and the hole stability appeared to be deteriorating rapidly.
Based upon the hole condition a decision was made to plug
and abandon the open hole and complete the No. 1 well. The
plan was to come back and sidetrack with the use of synthetic
oil-based mud in this section.
Despite encountering more problems than the No. 4 well,
this well reached TD from below the 20-in. shoe in 26 days.
Like No. 4, it was extremely successful from a directional
drilling aspect: the targets were hit precisely (Fig. 3).
However, the use of water-based mud had been a calculated
risk that resulted in an unusable wellbore. With no wireline
logs, the LWD data provided valuable information on the
subsalt geology.
Sidetrack Planning
New targets were selected for the No 3. well (Fig. 5) that
would require turning to the northwest after sidetracking
below the 11-in. casing shoe. A 10 5/8-in. hole size was to
be drilled. The Allison target would basically not move, but
synthetic oil-based mud would eliminate the formation
stability problems and provide a usable wellbore for
production. Drilling would continue for appraisal purposes to
a Dean sand target some 1000 ft west-northwest of the original
and then on to TD in the Erin sand. The well direction would
require a total turn of 130. The sidetrack was planned to
kickoff from the open-hole cement plug at 11,580 ft.
The No. 4 well required a completely new Allison target
(Fig. 5), which necessitated coming up the hole to get
sufficient displacement. This new target was to be some 1300
ft east and 500 ft north of the initial target. A decision was
required on the feasibility of opening a window in the 11-in.
casing and sidetracking into the salt formation. The geological
requirements left little option, and a whipstock setting depth of
7534 feet was selected. This meant a salt section of over 3000
ft would have to be drilled, this time with more complex
directional work. The hole direction would require turning
through 70, and the hole would need to be under-reamed for
completion requirements. The sidetrack was planned for a 10
IADC/SPE 59197
5/8-in. pass through x 12-in. hole, with a 9 5/8-in. liner set
below the salt.
The Sidetracks
Well No. 3 was reentered and a slick assembly was run to
displace to synthetic oil-based mud, drill the abandonment
plugs and retainer, and dress off the open-hole cement plug to
11,580 ft for sidetracking. The following kickoff assembly
used a 10 5/8-in. milled tooth bit on an 8-in. motor with bend
set to 1.5. At sidetrack point, inclination was 6 and an MWD
high-side orientation was to be used. Before starting the
sidetrack, operations were suspended so repair work could be
done on the No. 1 wellhead. After time drilling approximately
10 ft of the sidetrack, the bottom of the cement fell away and
the assembly washed down to a depth of 11,797 ft. At this
point gas became a problem and the hole started packing off.
After pulling out, attempts were made to set an open-hole
cement retainer and a new sidetrack plug. The retainer hung
up at 11,619 ft and equipment could not get down far enough
to set a plug. It was decided to again plug and abandon the
open hole, and set a whipstock in the 11 -in. casing for the
sidetrack well path. Sidetracking out of a window required a
change in drilling program, with a 9 5/8-in. liner to be set
below the Allison target. The well was to be sidetracked using
a 12 -in. steerable reaming while drilling tool with an 8 -
in. milled tooth pilot bit. Below the liner 8 -in. hole would
be drilled.
After plugging the open hole a packer was set for seating
the casing whipstock for milling the window at 11,231 ft
sidetracking. The whipstock was set using a gyroscope survey
for orientation, and a window was milled using a conventional
three-trip milling system because a one-trip system was not
available on such short notice. The milling assembly drilled
formation to 11,271 ft, at which depth the sidetrack assembly
was picked up. Whipstock setting and milling operations took
3 days.
The sidetrack BHA consisted of a 12 -in. steerable
reaming while drilling with 8 -in. milled tooth pilot bit run
on an 8-in. mud motor with bend set to 1.5. The BHA was
used to build 5.5 of angle while making a 130 left turn at the
planned dogleg severity of 1.75/100 ft. The 12 1/4-in. hole
section was drilled to 13,058 ft, the setting depth for the 9 5/8-
in. liner. This bit run made 1787 ft in 55 hr of drilling at 32.5
ft/hr with a sliding percentage of 34.5%.
After a conditioning trip, the 9 5/8-in. liner was run and a
new BHA was used to drill the 8 1/2-in. tangent section below
the 9 5/8-in. shoe and intersect the Dean and Erin sand targets.
The assembly consisted of an 8-in. PDC bit run on a 6-in.
extended power motor with bend set to 1.15. TD was reached
at 16,012 ft; 2954 ft were made on the run in 64.5 hr of
drilling. Average ROP was 46 ft/hr with the assembly rotated
for 97% of the run.
After the sidetrack had been made, directional operations
went well and all targets were achieved in good drilling time.
The problems encountered below the 11-in. shoe were a
result of the loss of hole stability on the original well while
using water-based mud. The switch to synthetic oil-based mud
IADC/SPE 59197 DEEPWATER SUBSALT DEVELOPMENT: DIRECTIONAL DRILLING CHALLENGES AND SOLUTIONS
eliminated the problems and greatly improved drilling
performance. Average ROP below the 11 -in. casing on the
original well had been only 16.8 ft/hr whereas the sidetrack
averaged 39.7 ft/hr. Operations had taken 26 days from
reentering the well to TD (including the time spent repairing
the No. 1 wellhead). However, from starting whipstock
operations to TD took only 16 days.
For Well No. 4, a one-trip milling system saved valuable
time. Additionally, the synthetic oil-based mud from the No. 3
sidetrack was used for the entire operation. After making a
scraper run and conditioning the mud, a bridge plug was set on
wireline. The whipstock and mill assembly were run and set
42 right of high side using MWD orientation, which
eliminated the need for a gyroscope survey. Although the
window milling operation went well, it was difficult to mill
rathole in the salt and a trip to run a 9 7/8-in. bit below the
watermelon mills was necessary. After starting milling at 7510
ft, formation was drilled to 7584 ft. Including the trip for the
bit and a trip to wash through the BOPs and perform a
formation integrity test to 12.5 ppg EMW, the window milling
operation took 2.5 days. This was one day less than milling the
window with the three trip system on No.3.
A steerable reaming while drilling tool with 8-in. milled
tooth pilot bit was again used for sidetracking; it ran on an 8-
in. extended power motor with 1.5 bend. The mill tooth bit
was selected because of the superior ROP in the salt that had
been achieved on Well No. 3. It would also minimize
orientation time and sliding problems with the large turn in
direction required. Previous experience indicated that a
drilling time close to 100 hr would be possible; this would be
plenty for steering the well onto the target line. The BHA was
used to sidetrack from 7584 ft and drill for 2689 ft in 99 hr.
The assembly setup achieved the directional objective, lining
up on the target, with an 18.7% sliding percentage. Average
ROP for the run was 27 ft/hr and the bit was pulled in good
condition. The bit was changed to a PDC bit and the BHA was
used to continue drilling the tangent through the base of the
salt. The base of the salt was reached at 10,716 ft, for a total of
3182 ft of salt drilled with the steerable reaming while drilling
assembly on this well. With a good leakoff at the window, the
intermediate liner run was eliminated and drilling continued
into the Allison target and on to TD at 12,100 ft.
Sliding in the salt with the PDC pilot bit was significantly
more difficult than with the milled tooth pilot bit. ROP while
sliding was 10 ft/hr opposed to the 20 ft/hr attained on the first
bit run. ROP in the salt averaged 25 to 27 ft/hr and 50 ft/hr
below the salt. This final assembly drilled a total of 1827 ft at
an average penetration rate of 41.5 ft/hr.
The No. 4 sidetrack proved a tremendous drilling success
and was completed, from setting the bridge plug to TD, in
only 11 days.
Summary and Conclusions
Total operation time from spudding the first directional
well to TD on the final sidetrack took 165 days. With reservoir
information below the salt largely limited to data obtained on
the No. 1 exploratory well, the project overcame both drilling
5
challenges and geological uncertainty to meet the expected
production targets. Fig. 6 is a plan view of the bottomhole
location for the three wells to be put on production.
A summary of drilling efficiencies achieved can be found
in Table 1. Despite the S-shape profile of the initial two
directional wells and the amount of turn required on the
sidetracks, nearly 27,000 ft were drilled with a BHA rotating
percentage of 80.1%: an excellent demonstration of directional
drilling efficiency.
Aside from the aborted cement plug sidetrack on Well No.
3, only two unplanned trips were made: one for an MWD tool
and one for changing the motor damaged while continuing
drilling operations with excessive rig heave.
Further efficiencies could be achieved on future projects
by eliminating the under-reaming run to open the 17-in. hole
to 20 in. and to drill out the 11 -in casing shoe with the
reaming while drilling assemblies. Improvements in bicenter
bit design may bring the confidence for simultaneously
drilling and under-reaming 20-in. hole, but it is more likely
that rotary steerable systems will bring the solution. Both
bicenter bit and steerable reaming while drilling tools are
being redesigned to provide the capability to drill out the shoe
track without damaging casing or bit.
The initial two wells proved the feasibility of riserless 24-
in. hole kickoffs on a deepwater operation where the required
build rates were achieved without problem. Use of annular
pressure measurements allowed control of the ROP based on
cutting loading and minimized the risk of stuck pipe and time
needed to circulate out gumbo. With a drilling motor in the
hole this was beneficial in limiting loss of hole angle while
circulating off-bottom. These two wells also demonstrated the
ability to achieve good drilling performance while maintaining
tight directional control in a shallow salt formation. Well No.
3, in particular, demonstrated the potential problems
associated with drilling below salt with water-based mud.
Water-based mud had been run to maximize data gathered
from wireline log but the hole problem prevented logging
success. The LWD logs were the only formation evaluation
data gathered.
Sufficient information was gleaned from these two wells to
allow the selection of alternative targets. The No. 3 well
illustrated the benefits of using synthetic oil-based mud below
salt, which allowed hole condition to be successfully
maintained while making a tight directional turn to the new
targets.
Well No. 4 was a milestone in subsalt development.
Sidetracking off a whipstock was accomplished for the first
time with a steerable reaming while drilling assembly from a
window in salt. This allowed significant displacement of the
sidetrack bottom hole location from the parent wellbore. As
well as proving the feasibility of appraising subsalt reservoirs
by drilling an initial pilot hole this sidetracking success should
open the possibility for future multilateral development of
subsalt reservoirs.
Nomenclature
BHA = bottomhole assembly
6 J.R.CROMB, C.G.PRATTEN, M.LONG, R.A.WALTERS IADC/SPE 59197

BOP =blowout preventer

ECD = equivalent circulation density
EMW = equivalent mud weight
LWD = logging while drilling
MWD = measurement while drilling
PDC = polycrystalline diamond compact
ppg = pounds per gallon
RKB=rig floor kelly bushing elevation
ROP = drilling rate of penetration
rpm = revolutions per minute
TD=total depth
TVD=true vertical depth
WOB = weight on bit

Acknowledgments
The authors thank the many people at Texaco Exploration
and Production and Schlumberger Oilfield Services who made
this project possible. A special thanks goes to the drilling
foremen of Texaco Exploration and Production, the crew of
the Ocean Star, and directional drillers and field engineers of
Schlumberger Oilfield Services, whose efforts at the rigsite
made the project a success.

References
1. Farmer, P., Miller, D., Pieprzak, Rutledge, J., and Woods, R,:
Exploring the Subsalt, Oilfield Review (Spring 1996), 8,
No.1, 50.
IADC/SPE 59197 DEEPWATER SUBSALT DEVELOPMENT: DIRECTIONAL DRILLING CHALLENGES AND SOLUTIONS 7

New Orleans

VK 900

MC 292 Gemini

Fig. 1- Map location of the Gemini field with inset photograph of the Ocean Star semisubmersible
drilling rig.

TEXACO WORLDWIDE EXPLORATION AND PRODUCTION

Mississippi Canyon 292 : Gemini Field
-2400 -1800 -1200 -600 0 600 1200 1800 2400 3000

2400 2400
PLAN VIEW
Scale (1 in = 600 ft)
NORTH >>>

1800 1800
Expanded view of surface
location
Allison Target Well 03
1200
Allison Target Well 04 1200
0 50 100 150 200

01
100
04 100

600 600

03
50 50

0 Surface Locations 0
<<< SOUTH

0
01 0

0 50 100 150 200

-2400 -1800 -1200 -600 0 600 1200 1800 2400 3000

<<< WEST EAST >>>

Fig. 2 - Plan view of surface and Allison target locations.

8 J.R.CROMB, C.G.PRATTEN, M.LONG, R.A.WALTERS IADC/SPE 59197

Vertical Section View

2000
TEXACO WORLDWIDE EXPLORATION AND PRODUCTION
Mississippi Canyon 292 : Well 03
36'' CASING @ 3728' MD
4000

20'' CASING @ 5760' MD, 5746.5 TVD

6000
INC = 13.3 DEG
True Vertical Depth (1 in = 2000 feet)

TOP OF SALT @ 6931' MD, 6807.4 TVD

Elev Ref: RKB(82.00ft above MSL)

16'' LINER @ 7080' MD, 6924' TVD

INC = 38.2 DEG
2000 PROJECTED @ 12827' MD
DEAN
8000 11 3/4 CASING @ 11573' MD
ALLISON

PBHL

BASE OF SALT @ 10506' MD

9728' TVD, INC = 23.9 DEG 1000
10000
TOP OF SALT
11 3/4 CASING @ 11573' MD, 10754' TVD
INC = 6.5 DEG 16'' LINER @ 7080' MD
TARGET NO. 01 (ALLISON) 12109' MD, 11288' TVD
INC. = 4.3 DEG 0
20'' CASING @ 5760' MD
12000 PROJECTED TO TD @ 12827' MD, 12004' TVD
INC = 3.9 DEG
0 1000 2000 3000

PLAN VIEW Scale (1 in = 1000 feet)

14000
TARGET NO. 02 (DEAN)

ERIN SAND - PBHL

16000
03 O. H. Proposal
0 2000 4000 03 O. H. Survey

Vertical Section Departure at 55.30 deg from (0.0, 0.0). (1 in = 2000 feet)

Fig. 3 - Plan and section view of Well No. 3 showing planned and drilled trajectories.

Vertical Section View

TEXACO WORLDWIDE EXPLORATION AND PRODUCTION
2000

Mississippi Canyon 292 : Well 04

36'' CASING 3726' MD 3726' TVD 0.00

4000

20'' CASING 5745' MD 5727' TVD 16.00

6000
True Vertical Depth (1 in = 2000 feet)
Elev Ref: RKB(82.00ft above MSL)

TOP OF SALT 7196' MD 7025' TVD 31.77

2000
16'' CASING 7350' MD 7155' TVD 33.03

TARGET NO. 03 (ERIN)

8000 TARGET NO. 02 (DEAN)
TARGET NO. 01 (ALLISON)

PROJECTED To TD @ 12769' MD
11-3/4'' CASING @ 11304' MD 1500
Grid North
Tot Corr ( E 1.12 )
10000 Mag Dec ( E 0.35 )
BASE OF SALT 10960' MD 10407' TVD 8.13
Grid Conv ( W 0.77 )
11-3/4'' CASING 11304' MD 10750' TVD 2.90
1000
TARGET NO. 01 (ALLISON) 11865' MD 11310' TVD 1.25

12000
PROJECTED To TD 12769' MD 12214' TVD 0.65

16'' CASING @ 7350' MD 500

TARGET NO. 02 (DEAN)

14000

20'' CASING @ 5745' MD

TARGET NO. 04 (ERIN) 0
36'' CASING @ 3726' MD

16000 -2000 -1500 -1000 -500 0

PLAN VIEW Scale (1 in = 500 feet)
0 2000 4000
Vertical Section Departure at 306.87 deg from (0.0, 0.0). (1 in = 2000 feet) 04 O. H. Proposal
04 O. H. Survey

Fig.4 - Plan and section view of Well No. 4 showing planned and drilled trajectories.
IADC/SPE 59197 DEEPWATER SUBSALT DEVELOPMENT: DIRECTIONAL DRILLING CHALLENGES AND SOLUTIONS 9

TEXACO WORLDIDE EXPLORATION AND PRODUCTION

Mississippi Canyon 292 : Gemini Field

-2400 -1800 -1200 -600 0 600 1200 1800 2400 3000

2400 2400
PLAN VIEW Allison Target Well 04 ST Erin Dean
Scale (1 in = 600 ft)

Allison
1800 1800
Well 03 ST Targets
Well 04 BHL
Well 03 BHL
NORTH >>>

1200 1200

600 600

01
04
03
0 01 0
<<< SOUTH

-2400 -1800 -1200 -600 0 600 1200 1800 2400 3000

<<< WEST EAST >>>

Fig. 5 - Plan view of sidetrack target locations.

TEXACO WORLDWIDE EXPLORATION AND PRODUCTION

Mississippi Canyon 292 : Gemini Field
-2400 -1800 -1200 -600 0 600 1200 1800 2400 3000

2400 PLAN VIEW 2400

Scale (1 in = 600 ft) Well 03 ST BHL
Well 04 ST BHL

1800 1800
NORTH >>>

1200 1200

600 600

01
04
<<< SOUTH

03
0 01 0

-2400 -1800 -1200 -600 0 600 1200 1800 2400 3000

<<< WEST EAST >>>

Fig. 6 - Plan view of final sidetrack bottomhole locations.

10 J.R.CROMB, C.G.PRATTEN, M.LONG, R.A.WALTERS IADC/SPE 59197

Drilling Efficiency Indicators

Well 03 BHA %
Hole size Bit Mud Runs Feet Hrs ROP Rotate Comments
24" MT sea water 1 2064 38.5 53.6 40.2 Kick off build to 13.5 deg
17" MT phpa 2 1338 37.0 36.2 39.0 Trip for MWD. Build to 38.0 deg
20" UR UR phpa 1 1338 23.0 58.2
14 3/4" PDC / MT salt phpa 2 4490 157.0 28.6 82.8 Rig heaving trip for motor, p/u MT bit
Hold then drop to 5.6 deg
10 5/8" MT salt phpa 1 Drill out shoe track
10 5/8' x 12 1/4" RWD + MT salt phpa 1 1185 97.5 12.2 100.0
Total 9077 330.0 27.5 76.2 Average 2 BHA/Hole section

Well 04 BHA %
Hole size Bit Mud Runs Feet Hrs ROP Rotate Comments
24" MT sea water 1 1402 30.0 46.7 59.2 Kick off build to 16.8 deg
17" MT phpa 1 1600 43.0 37.2 77.8 Build to 33.3 deg
20" UR UR phpa 1 1600 29.5 54.2
14 3/4" PDC salt phpa 1 3955 139.0 28.5 84.1 Hold then drop to 2.4 deg
10 5/8" MT salt phpa 1 Drill out shoe track
10 5/8' x 12 1/4" RWD + PDC salt phpa 1 1369 81.5 16.8 100.0
Total 8326 293.5 28.4 81.4 Average 1.5 BHA/Hole section

Well 03 stk BHA %

Hole size Bit Mud Runs Feet Hrs ROP Rotate Comments
10 5/8' x 12 1/4" SRWD + MT sobm 1 1787 55.0 32.5 65.5 Build 5.5 deg to 18.9, turn 130 deg
8 1/2" PDC sobm 1 2954 64.5 45.8 97.1 Hold angle and direction
Total 4741 119.5 39.7 85.2 Average 1 BHA/Hole section

Well 04 stk BHA %

Hole size Bit Mud Runs Feet Hrs ROP Rotate Comments
10 5/8' x 12 1/4" SRWD + MT / sobm 2 4516 143 32.5 65.5 MT bit for ROP + steerability in salt
SRWD + PDC Turn 68 deg then drop to 18.9 deg
Hold angle and direction
Total 4516 143.0 31.6 85.2 Average 2 BHA/Hole section

Table 1 Drilling efficiency indicators.