Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
  • Like
  • Save
Otter Paper
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Now you can save presentations on your phone or tablet

Available for both IPhone and Android

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply
Published

Geosteering

Geosteering

Published in Business , Technology
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
  • Hi Dr. Stromberg, May I please ask to get the NMR course file that you have uploaded in the website?

    My email is v.b.tariel@gmail.com

    Cheers
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
632
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1

Actions

Shares
Downloads
0
Comments
1
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1.  
  • 2. Introduction
    • Introduction to Otter
    • Drilling Targets & Requirements
    • GeoVision Images and Geosteering
    • Data-flow and Communication in the decision process
    • Case Study
      • Otter 210/15a-T1
    • Conclusions
  • 3. Field Location
  • 4. Otter Field Summary 36.5 api Oil density 443 scf/bbl GOR 78.5 C Temp 1970m SS 92m Standoff 2062m SS Crest OWC Oct. 2002 subsea tie-back to Eider First Oil Approval 2001 Dev. Plan 2000 TotalFina 210/15a-6 Appraisal 1997 Fina 210/15a- DST 7650 BOPD Appraisal 1994 3D Seismic 1977 Philips 210/15-2 DST 4746 BOPD Discovery Brent Gp. Sandstones (98m thick N:G 90% Phi 24% Sw 32% Perm 400 mD Reservoir Easterly tilted fault block 4.3 km 2 Trap
  • 5. Stratigraphy
  • 6. Well T1
  • 7. Otter Well T1
  • 8. Geoteering Targets – Well T1 210 m 8 m T10 Sand 3000 m OWC N S
  • 9. Geosteering Objectives
    • Maintain Standoff from OWC
    • Target Best Quality Rock (T10 sands)
      • 8m target (upper part 4 m target)
    • Avoid poor quality sandstones above T10
    • Avoid Coals in Top Ness immediately below T10
    • Reinterpret structure real time and adjust trajectory to account for sub-seismic faults
  • 10. Geosteering Issues
    • Lag time
      • Time between receiving data and making the decision (analysis time)
      • Time between making the decision and achieving the target objective (trajectory adjustment time)
        • 4 deg per 30m, if you want to change the trajectory by 6 deg then 45 m is required
      • Distance between the bit and the measurement device
    • Things can change during the lag time
      • Be prepared for the unexpected
    • No real ‘look ahead’. You can look up and look down but not ahead
  • 11. GeoVision Resistivity Logging PowerDrive VADN PowerPulse MWD 6 bps for real-time image GVR Gamma Ray Azimuthal Ring resistivity electrode for high resolution laterolog resistivity Button Resistivity electrodes for azimuthal images (deep, medium, shallow) PDC bit 3.5 m 21 m
  • 12. GeoVision Resistivity Logging Recorded Mode Image 70 ft
  • 13. GeoVision Resistivity Logging
  • 14. Data Flow and Communication Operations Geology & Petrophysics (TFEE UK) Geosteering Specialist Schlumberger (War Room) Well Site Geologist INTERACT Real Time Data
  • 15. T1 Trajectory and Areas of Uncertainty Top Brent Sub-seismic faults Throw on main fault Coal? N S
  • 16. Forward Model N S
  • 17. Staying in the Target Zone OUT OF TOLERANCE Target Zone 330 m of pay Ness plots as T20-T30 Caution
  • 18. Landing the Well 9m low to prognosis Resistive Conductive
  • 19. Landing the Well N S Dip = 4.7 deg Azimuth = 294
  • 20. Landing the well Good quality T10 Poorer quality T10 Actual Prognosis Good quality T10 Poorer quality T10 T20 T30 T20 T30
  • 21. Faults 2770m 2770 m
  • 22. Tagging The Coal In the Ness RHOBB RHOBU Penetrating Coal From Top Below Coal Above Coal Below Coal Above Coal 2810m 2770m Fault
  • 23. Sub-Horizontal to Coal
  • 24. Top Ness Coal & Sub-Seismic Faults N S
  • 25. Problematic (Shaley?) Section Encountered 2840 m 2812 m Ness T10 Fault 2854 m N S Increased GR Decrease RT Separation of ROBB and ROBU – close to bed boundary- thin bed
  • 26. Tagged Heather? 2810m 2854m T20/T30 L Heather T10 Prognosis Actual
  • 27. Based on Image Dips - Structural Cross-Section Indicates Silty T10 Unit not Heather. N S
  • 28. Based on Image Dips - Structural Cross-Section Indicates Silty T10 Unit not Heather. N S
  • 29. Main Fault BN/BS
  • 30. Logging Response Into BS BN - Silty T10 BS Prognosis Into T10 Prognosis Into NESS
  • 31. Dip as Expected – Maintain Pay Zone N S
  • 32. Tagged Coal at TD (Top Ness Confirmed)
  • 33. Pre-Drill N S
  • 34. Post Drill Interpretation OWC 50 m Sand N/G: 95% (218 m) Pay N/G: 91% (210 m) Average Permeability: 1500 mD Average Porosity: 25% N S
  • 35. Conclusions – Real Time Images
    • Real time images and log data allow rapid adjustment of the structural model
    • The well trajectory can be continually adjusted to maximise pay
      • 4 deg per 30 m
    • Side tracks can be avoided
    • Reduced rig time
    • Reduced well time
    • Value added data for structural review and reservoir interpretation
  • 36. Acknowledgements Logicom for 3D visualisation of RAB images Otter Partnership