The document describes a completion selection process using decision matrix analysis to evaluate multiple completion options for an offshore well with poor reservoir properties. An integrated team identifies key evaluation factors like sand prevention, production rate, and water shut-off. They then rank completion options like vertical cased and perforated, vertical gravel pack, and horizontal options. Calculations show a horizontal open hole gravel pack provides the best production and reserves recovery within constraints. The process promotes cross-discipline collaboration and ensures the completion addresses each group's priorities.
Roadmap to Membership of RICS - Pathways and Routes
Ā
Completion Selection Using Integrated Decision Making
1. Primary funding is provided by
The SPE Foundation through member donations
and a contribution from Offshore Europe
The Society is grateful to those companies that allow their
professionals to serve as lecturers
Additional support provided by AIME
Society of Petroleum Engineers
Distinguished Lecturer Program
www.spe.org/dl
1
2. Completion Engineers:
Decision Making with Cross
Discipline Integration
By Dan Gibson
From add energy
a global consulting engineering firm
www.addenergy.no
2
3. Dan Gibson is a Senior Completions & Well Integrity engineer with over 35
years of experience. He has worked in Facilities, Production, and finally
Completion Engineering. Dan and his wife have lived across the USA
(Anchorage, Denver, Houston) and around the world in Gabon, Congo, Egypt,
Scotland, and Australia. He understands both low cost, tight margin and
high value, high cost well environments and how to be successful in both.
Dan was an expert witness in the Deepwater Horizon Federal trial. He has
authored or co-authored a number of papers ranging from polymer flood
management to ice mechanics and most recently an innovative ICD system.
He is one of the most active members of SPE Connect where SPE members
can readily contact him and the entire SPE community with questions.
3
About the Author
4. Agenda
ā¢ Show a robust completion decision process
ā It is relatively quick
ā Powerful support for decision making
ā¢ Examine the Completion Decision Process for an
Example Well
ā Introduce an effective method to work with other discipline drivers
to select the best completion
ā¢ Look at a typical offshore problem, injection
conformance, and see how the process can help
ā Evaluation of a new technology (ICD)
ā¢ Look at a typical onshore problem, new technology
rod pumping unit evaluation
4
5. Evaluation Method - 1
Key Evaluation Factors
This decision process is based on Decision Matrix Analysis
which is one of the simplest forms of Multiple Criteria
Decision Analysis
5Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA)
ā¢ It provides a robust way to compare alternatives
ā¢ The key evaluation criteria, and their importance, are clear
Key Evaluation Factors Ranking Choice 1 Choice 2 Choice 3
Safety
Gas Mileage
Seats
Cup Holders
First - the Team needs to determine
what factors are important for this
completion
Getting the other stakeholders in the
room to discuss these factors is critical
What are some
of the key factors
you might think
about when
buying a car?
6. Methodology
Decision Matrix Analysis is the simplest form of Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA). For a lot of
decisions there is not a lot of hard data and decision making is based on approximate or subjective data.
For example, when comparing ideas at the āconceptā stage where little analytical work has been done.
Where this is the case, Decision Matrix Analysis may be all thatās needed. And, where facts and data do
exist, the can be used to help rank each evaluation factor.
Methodology
ā¢ Decision Matrix Analysis helps you to decide between several options, where you need to take
many different factors into account.
1. Set up the Rows to show the factors you need to consider. Brainstorrm many topics but pick only
the most important factors.
2. Weight the Factors from Most Important (5) to Least Important (1). The maximum number of
rows is 10 but typically only 5-7 are sufficient to cover only the most important factors.
3. Show the options to be evaluated as Column Headings in a table.
4. Force rank each option for each factor using the number of options from Worst (1) to Best (3). No
ties are allowed. High score must reflect ābestā option.
5. Multiply each score by the weight of the factor, and add up the weighted score for each option.
The highest score reflects the best option for those factors. If the factors change the scoring will
change.
7. Key Evaluation Factors Options
Evaluation Method -2
Key Evaluation Factors Importance
4 is High
Safety 4
Gas Mileage 3
Seats 2
Cup Holders 1
Next prioritize the evaluation factors
7Decision Matrix Analysis
ā¢ Team needs to agree to the ranking
ā¢ Different prioritization will result in different outcomes
ā¢ How powerful is it to agree on the criteria and their importance
Second - the Team needs to
determine the most important
factors for this completion
These are Ranked by the Team
as a Group which is important
when trading off priorities
8. Key Evaluation Factors Options
Evaluation Method -3
Key Evaluation Factors Importance
4 is High
Compact
Car
Pickup
Truck
Minivan
Safety 4
Gas Mileage 3
Seats 2
Cup Holders 1
Chose the alternatives to be evaluated
8Decision Matrix Analysis
ā¢ Limit the choices to real options for the problem
Third - list the options for this
evaluation
These are provided by the
person running the evaluation
9. Evaluation Method - 4
Fourth, the Integrated Team evaluates each option
9Decision Matrix Analysis
Ignore
Importance
when
Ranking
Use of a forced ranking system is required
ā High number = Most Important
ā¢ No ties if at all possible
ā Should Ignore Importance when scoring to ensure fairness
ā¢ In practice I hide the ranking column and even shift the rows
Key Evaluation Factors Importance
4 is High
Compact
Car
Pickup
Truck
Minivan
Safety 4
Gas Mileage 3
Seats 2
Cup Holders 1
Hide the
Priority
Values
Key Evaluation Factors Importance
4 is High
Compact
Car
Pickup
Truck
Minivan
Safety 4 1 3 2
Gas Mileage 3 3 1 2
Seats 2 2 1 3
Cup Holders 1 2 1 3
Hide the
Importance
Values
10. Evaluation Method - 5
Finally, calculate the weighted scores to determine the
best option
10Decision Matrix Analysis
Ignore
Importance
when
Ranking
ā¢ Multiply Importance times Option Score
ā¢ Should Ignore Importance when scoring to ensure fairness
ā In practice I hide the ranking column and shift the rows
Key Evaluation Factors Project
Importance
4 is High
Compact
Car
Pickup
Truck
Minivan
Safety 4 1 3 2
Gas Mileage 3 3 1 2
Seats 2 2 1 3
Cup Holders 1 2 1 3
Weighted Ranking 19 = 4*1+3*3+2*2+1*2
11. Evaluation Method - 6
Repeat and calculate the weighted scores to determine
the best option
11Decision Matrix Analysis
Ignore
Importance
when
Ranking
ā¢ Clear decision process
ā¢ Group Participation provides understanding for decision
ā¢ Easily documented for the record
Key Evaluation Factors Project
Importance
4 is High
Compact
Car
Pickup
Truck
Minivan
Safety 4 1 3 2
Gas Mileage 3 3 1 2
Seats 2 2 1 3
Cup Holders 1 2 1 3
Weighted Ranking 19 18 23
12. Well Completions Bring the Resource to
the Surface for Processing
How many Disciplines are represented in this figure?
ā¢How do completion decisions impact all of these
other disciplines?
12
Ground Level
Reservoir
WellCompletion
PipelineSeparation
Storage
13. Facility
Engineer
Completion Engineers Typical Interface
Map
13
Drilling
(Logistics,
Res DIF, well
control)
Reservoir
Engineer
(Depletion Plan)
Geology &
Petrophysics
(Reservoir Fluid &
Rock Properties)
Petroleum
Engineer
(Tubing Size,
Interventions, &
Production Ops)
Production
Chemistry
Completion
(Lifecycle view of:
Sand Face Completion,
Stimulation,
Completion Integrity,
etc)
14. First Example ā Multiple Interfaces
14
Drilling
(Logistics,
Res DIF, well
control)
Reservoir
Engineer
(Depletion Plan)
Petroleum
Engineer
(Tubing Size,
Interventions, &
Production Ops)
Geology &
Petrophysics
(Res Fluid & Rock
Properties)
Production
Chemistry
Facility
Engineer
(Sand production,
Emulsions)
Completion
(Lifecycle view of: Sand
Face Completion,
Stimulation, Completion
Integrity, etc)
15. Completion Selection Example
1. New Discovery, 50 ft net pay, Poor Perm
2. Pay is in two sands, thick 30 ft shale between
3. Reserves ~5 mmBO in offshore well
4. 75% of Reserves in the bottom sand with bottom
water production risk (strong aquifer)
5. PI is 0.5 BOPD/psi without any stimulation
6. Weak sand with 1000 psi drawdown limit
What Kind of Sand Face Completion is
Required?
15
Image: pet-oilblogspot.com
Lower Pay
Water
Shale
Upper Pay
Well
16. Calculate Well Life
Do some quick math and see how long it will take to get
the oil out;
5mmBO / (0.5 BOPD/psi * 1000 psi) = 27 years!
ā¢ PI = 0.5 BOPD/psi
ā¢ Sand Strength Drawdown limit = 1000 psi
As Completion Engineers we need to find the right
completion that will improve the value by getting the
oil out faster
How?
16
17. Completion Options ā 1
Vertical Cased &
Perforated
17
Water
Cement
PLUG
Well
Perforations
Casing
Vertical Gravel
Pack
Water
āGravelā
Well
GP Packer
Casing
GP Screen
Plug
18. Completion Options ā 2
Horizontal Cased & Perforated
Water
Cement
Well
Perforations
Casing
Horizontal Gravel Pack
Water
Screen
Well
āGravelā
Casing
Plug
Plug
19. How Can the Team Evaluate these
Various Options?
19
Drilling
(Horizontal Well,
Multiple Wells)
Reservoir
Engineer
(Depletion Plan)
Petroleum
Engineer
(Sand production
Impacts, OPEX,
Water Shut-Off, etc)
Facility
Engineer
(Sand prod,
emulsions)
Production
Chemistry
Geology &
Petrophysics
(Res Fluid & Rock
Properties)
Completion
(Lifecycle view of: Sand
Face Completion,
Stimulation, Completion
Integrity, etc)
20. Key Evaluation Factors Options
Evaluation Method - Factors
Key Evaluation Factors
Sand Prevention
Production Rate
Water Shut-
Off/Reserves
Contractor Capability
Each Completion Type will meet the Well requirements
slightly differently
20Decision Matrix Analysis
First the Team needs to determine what
factors are important for this
completion
Getting the other stakeholders in the
room to discuss these factors is critical
ā¢ It is now up to the CE to lead the discussion with the integrated
team to determine the best type of completion for this well
ā Lets look at the Decision Matrix Analysis
21. Evaluation Method - Factors
Key Evaluation
Factors
Project
Importance
4 is High
Sand Prevention 4
Production Rate 3
Water Shut-
Off/Reserves
2
Contractor Capability 1
Getting Folks to Agree on a Priority Ranking is critical to
selecting the right completion to deliver your most
important evaluation factors i.e. business value drivers
21Decision Matrix Analysis
Second the Team needs to
determine the most important
factors for this completion
These are Ranked by the Team
as a Group which is important
when trading off priorities
Note: This is an example only a real evaluation may have 20 evaluation factors
considered but only 5- 8 key evaluation factors in my experience
22. Evaluation Method - Options
Key Evaluation
Factors
Project
Importance
4 is High
Vertical
C&P
Vertical
OHGP
Horizontal
C&P
Horizontal
OHGP
Sand Prevention 4
Production Rate 3
Water Shut-
Off/Reserves
2
Contractor
Capability
1
Then Compare the Completion Options against the important
factors
ā¢ This is an example only. A real evaluation may have many
different completion options.
ā Note: OHGP = Open Hole Gravel Pack , C&P = Cased & Perfed
22Decision Matrix Analysis
Third the Completion
Engineer needs to determine
the completion choices for
this well
23. Evaluation Method - Evaluation
Fourth, the Integrated Team evaluates each completion option
ā¢ Use of a forced ranking system is required
ā High number = Most Important
ā¢ Should Ignore āImportanceā when scoring to ensure fairness
23Decision Matrix Analysis
Key Evaluation
Factors
Project
Importance
4 is High
Vertical
C&P
Vertical
OHGP
Horizontal
C&P
Horizontal
OHGP
Sand Prevention 4 1 3 2 4
Production Rate 3 1 2 3 4
Water Shut-
Off/Reserves
2 4 3 2 1
Contractor
Capability
1 4 2 3 1
Ignore
(hide)
Importance
when
Scoring
24. Key Evaluation
Factors
Project
Importance
4 is High
Vertical
C&P
Vertical
OHGP
Horizontal
C&P
Horizontal
OHGP
Sand Prevention 4 1 3 2 4
Production Rate 3 1 2 3 4
Water Shut-
Off/Reserves
2 4 3 2 1
Contractor
Capability
1 4 2 3 1
Weighted Ranking 19 =4*1+3*1+2*4+1*4
Evaluation Method - Calculation
Finally, calculate the āscoreā for each of the options using
the Ranking of the Important Factors
ā¢ Each completion selection is a compromise against the
Key Factors
24Decision Matrix Analysis
25. Evaluation Method - Result
25
ā¢ The ābestā option is a Horizontal Open Hole Gravel Pack
ā Vertical C&P clearly not the best option
Key Evaluation
Factors
Project
Importance
4 is High
Vertical
C&P
Vertical
OHGP
Horizontal
C&P
Horizontal
OHGP
Sand Prevention 4 1 3 2 4
Production Rate 3 1 2 3 4
Water Shut-
Off/Reserves
2 4 3 2 1
Contractor
Capability
1 4 2 3 1
Weighted Ranking 19 26 24 31
ā¢ Team participation means that everyone has buy-in
ā¢ And the risks that jeopardize success (Contractor Capability,
Water Shut-Off) are well identified and have to be managed
26. Calculate Well Life
Of course, the calculation of the time to produce the
reserves for each option matches the evaluation
Vert C&P = 5mmBO / (0.5 BOPD/psi * 1000 psi) = 27 years
Vert OHGP = 5mmBO/ (0.5 BOPD/psi * 2000 psi) = ~14 years
Horiz C&P = 5mmBO / (2 BOPD/psi * 500 psi) = ~14 years
Horiz OHGP = 5mmBO / (2 BOPD/psi * 2000 psi) = ~4 years
An economic evaluation will prove that the higher
costs and higher complexity of the Horiz OHGP is
justified
ā¢ Economics are an outcome of the decision made ā not an
input 26
27. Facility
Engineer
(Sand prod,
emulsions) 27
Drilling
(Horizontal Well,
Multiple Wells)
Reservoir
Engineer
(Depletion Plan)
Geology &
Petrophysics
(Res Fluid & Rock
Properties)
Petroleum
Engineer
(Sand production
Impacts, OPEX,
Water Shut-Off,
Interventions)
Production
Chemistry
Completion
(Lifecycle view of: Sand
Face Completion,
Stimulation,
Completion Integrity,
etc)
Use of a rigorous process, leads to the best
completion that addresses each disciplines business
drivers
28. Lets Look at another Real Example
Seismic shows two offshore fault blocks are not being
drained
But the blocks are isolated from the aquifer and need
water injection to maintain reservoir pressure and
provide sweep
28
29. Offshore, Subsea, Example
Two Fault Blocks are isolated and undeveloped
ā Most of Reserves in East fault block (right hand block)
ā Unconsolidated, high perm (+1Darcy), reservoir sands
ā Plan on 20,000 BWIPD with majority to East fault block (PWRI)
29Ref: SPE 136539
Isolated
Fault Blocks
Injector(s)
1 or 2?
Producer(s)
1 or 2?
?
?
?
?
Injection
Manifold
Production
Manifold
EastWest
30. E W
Horizontal Wells a Challenge
ā¢ Vertical Wells would be give the best injection and reserves but
very high cost and delays to install new subsea tiebacks (production
& injection subsea pipelines)
ā¢ Drilling can reach both injector and producer locations from
existing manifolds but with difficult well paths (see figures)
ā¢ How do we best complete this complex injector?
30
Injector
Ref: SPE 136539
Producer
600 meters
400 meters
EastWest
EastWest
31. Geology &
Petrophysics
Petroleum
Engineer
Economics
(Marginal
Development
Costs)
Not a Simple Decision with all these Factors
31
Drilling
(Limited Drillable
Wellpath from Drill
Center)
Reservoir
Engineer
(Effective Sweep
Required)
Subsea
(Trees,
Controls,
Pipelines)
Completion
(Lifecycle view of:
Materials, Equipment,
New Technology,
Stimulation, Sand Face,
Fluids, etc)
32. Injector Options
Horizontal OHGP (Like Producers)
ā¢ Difficult to design to allocate 20,000 BWIPD into two zones
ā¢ Consequence of failure is very poor sweep/lost reserves
Horizontal Injection Control Device (ICD)
ā¢ Each ICD only ~50-100 BWIPD
ā¢ Need ~ 200 ICD screens but matrix injection sensitive to plugging
Most Reserves in Toe Block
Well
Screen with ICD
Casing
ICD
Most reserves in Toe blockScreen
Well
āGravelā
Casing
33. 33
New ICD Design to Control Flow
Inflow is modified by
changing the number of
open ports at each
screen
ā¢ Many different ways
have been patented.
ā¢ This is just one way
for this project.
Image: Schlumberger
Orifice restricts flow from
wellbore to
screen/formation
Shroud
Shroud removed for photo
34. New Technology ICD Solution
Develop āFracā Rate Injection Control Device (ICD)
ā¢ Can a contractor develop an ICD Screen w/over 5000 BWIPD of capacity?
ā¢ Would only need ~ 5 ICD screens and have more control on injection
Most reserves in Toe Block
Well
Screen with ICD
Casing
New ICD
Never been done before and doesnāt currently exist!
ā¢ Can Contractor Develop the new design in time for the project?
How do you evaluate this option compared to the options?
36. Injector Evaluation ā Factors - 1
Key Evaluation Factors Project
Importance
5 is High
Weighted Ranking
The Team got together and discussed all of the factors
and which were the most important
These Discussions helped all the stakeholders to
understand the tradeoffs with each completion design
Note: Example only
36
What are the key factors?
37. Injector Evaluation ā Factors - 2
Key Evaluation Factors Project
Importance
5 is High
Zonal Water Injection
(Reserves)
Cost
Schedule
Sand Control
Installation Sensitivity
(Two Fault Blocks)
Weighted Ranking
In a real analysis there may be many more factors.
List them all, and then rank them all.
In the end only the most important factors ā top 5-8 really
matter.
37
38. Injector Evaluation - Factors
Key Evaluation Factors Project
Importance
5 is High
Zonal Water Injection
(Reserves)
5
Cost 4
Schedule 3
Sand Control 2
Installation Sensitivity
(Two Fault Blocks)
1
Weighted Ranking
In the end only the most important factors ā top 5-8 really
matter.
Re-rank the top factors after the team agrees which ones
will be used for the analysis
38
39. Injector Evaluation - Factors
Key Evaluation Factors Project
Importance
5 is High
Two
Vertical
OHGP
One
Hoizontal
OHGP
Horiz
Convāl
ICD
New
Frac
ICD
Zonal Water Injection
(Reserves)
5
Cost 4
Schedule 3
Sand Control 2
Installation Sens.
(Two Fault Blocks)
1
Weighted Ranking
The Completion engineer provides the options.
Usually these have been worked up before and there may
be reservoir model evaluations, cost estimates, and
schedules for each of these options to consider.
39
Hide the
factors and
Shuffle the
Rows in an
Actual
Evaluation
40. Injector Evaluation - Factors
Key Evaluation Factors Project
Importance
5 is High
Two
Vertical
OHGP
One
Horizontal
OHGP
Horiz
Convāl
ICD
New
Frac
ICD
Zonal Water Injection
(Reserves)
5 4 1 2 3
Cost 4 1 2 3 4
Schedule 3 1 4 3 2
Sand Control 2 4 1 3 2
Installation Sens.
(Across Two Fault
Blocks)
1 4 1 3 2
Weighted Ranking 39 28 40 43
Once they have been discussed the calculate the scores
and determine if there is a ābestā option
In this case three options appear similar but one has high
costs and slow delivery schedule.
41. Injector Evaluation - Factors
Key Evaluation Factors Project
Importance
5 is High
Two
Vertical
OHGP
One
Horizontal
OHGP
Horiz
Convāl
ICD
New
Frac
ICD
Zonal Water Injection
(Reserves)
5 1 2 3
Cost 4 1 2 3
Schedule 3 3 2 1
Sand Control 2 1 3 2
Installation Sens.
(Two Fault Blocks)
1 1 3 2
Weighted Ranking 21 33 36
If, after discussion, one option should not be considered
then drop it and rescore ----based on the prior scores
i.e. 4 => 3, 3=>2, etc
Do not change the numbers or allow the integrity of the
original evaluation to be lost or modified
41
42. Injector Evaluation - Factors
Key Evaluation Factors Project
Importance
4 is High
Two
Vertical
OHGP
One
Hoizontal
OHGP
Horiz
Convāl
ICD
New
Frac
ICD
Zonal Water Injection
(Reserves)
5 1 2 3
Cost 4 1 2 3
Schedule 3 3 2 1
Sand Control 2 1 3 2
Installation
(Two Fault Blocks)
1 1 3 2
Weighted Ranking 21 33 36
The best one required new technology but had the most
upside on reserves and rates
ā¢ This had to be worked harder to see if it was possibleā
The other, lower option, used on conventional technology
with more sensitivity to water quality and damage reserves
43. New Sand Face Injector Design
43Ref: SPE 136539
Shale SandstoneSandstone
Water
Swell Packer
The Completion Team and Contractor developed a new Frac-Thru ICD
Injector well design to meet everyoneās requirements
ā Sufficient water injection in both zones (REās)
ā Could be installed in complex well path (DE/CEās)
ā Use existing Subsea Injection & Producer manifolds (SSEās)
Multiple
Frac ICDāsSingle Frac ICD
44. Offshore, Subsea, Example
Completion Innovation effectively met needs of
Reservoir sweep, Subsea infrastructure, and Drilling well
paths to deliver a successful project quickly
44Ref: SPE 136539
Successfully Developed Both
Fault Blocks
ļ¼ Injected over 20k BWIPD
at a sustained rate
ļ¼ Produced 15k BOPD
ļ¼ Saved $80mm+ in well and
subsea costs
ļ¼ Developed previously
stranded reserves faster
Injector
Producer
45. Facility
Engineer
(Sand prod,
emulsions) 45
Drilling
(Horizontal Well,
Multiple Wells)
Reservoir
Engineer
(Depletion Plan)
Geology &
Petrophysics
(Res Fluid & Rock
Properties)
Petroleum
Engineer
(Sand production
Impacts, OPEX,
Water Shut-Off,
Interventions)
Production
Chemistry
Completion
(Lifecycle view of: Sand
Face Completion,
Stimulation,
Completion Integrity,
etc)
Use of a rigorous process, leads to the best
completion that addresses each disciplines business
drivers
47. Lets look at another Example
You are considering using hydraulic rod pump system
instead of conventional beam pump system
Many different options are available but, for this case,
you have not used hydraulic pump units in this field
before ā it is new technology to this location, people,
and wells
47
48. Hydraulic Rod Pump
By YouTube user "derekdz"
Conventional Beam Pump
Hydraulic Pump Unit
Hydraulic Pump Units
Source: HRPI
Source: NOV
What are some of
the key factors you
might think about
when choosing
between these
units?
49. Pad
Construction
Field
Personnel
(Competency,
Operation, etc)
Not a Simple Decision with all these Factors
49
Drilling
(Well Design, Pad
design, rig access,
etc)
Reservoir
Engineer
Petroleum
Engineer
(Production
optimization, well
work, etc)
Completion
(Well design, tubing
wear, sand face
completion, etc)
50. Technology Comparison - Factors
Key Evaluation Factors Project
Importance
4 is High
Conv.
Walking
Beam
Hyd Pump 1 Hyd Pump 2
Capital Cost
Operating Cost
Prod Flexibility
Reliability/Up Time
Pumper Management
Contractor Capability
Weighted Ranking
To bring new technology into the field the Team gets
together and discusses all of the factors that influence the
decision and why they are important
These Discussions helped all the stakeholders to
understand the tradeoffs for each of the technology
Note: Example only
50
51. Technology Comparison - Factors
Key Evaluation Factors Project
Importance
4 is High
Conv.
Walking
Beam
Hyd Pump 1 Hyd Pump 2
Capital Cost 6
OPEX / Well Work 5
Prod Flexibility 4
Reliability/Up Time 3
Pumper Management 2
Contractor Capability 1
Weighted Ranking
Second, they rank the factors and decide which factors
are most important in the selection
These Discussions helped all the stakeholders to
understand why some factors are more important than
others
Note: Example only
51
52. Technology Comparison - Factors
Key Evaluation Factors Project
Importance
4 is High
Conv.
Walking
Beam
Hyd Pump 1 Hyd Pump 2
Capital Cost 6 1 2 3
OPEX / Well Work 3 1 3 2
Prod Flexibility 5 3 1 2
Reliability/Up Time 4 3 2 1
Pumper Management 2 3 1 2
Contractor Capability 1 3 2 1
Weighted Ranking
Third the team assesses each option against the factors to
determine they rank the factors and decide which factors
are most important in the selection
Note: Hide the Importance ranking if necessary
52
Ignore
(hide)
Importance
when
Ranking
53. Technology Comparison - Factors
Key Evaluation Factors Project
Importance
4 is High
Conv.
Walking
Beam
Hyd Pump 1 Hyd Pump 2
Capital Cost 6 1 2 3
OPEX / Well Work 3 1 3 2
Prod Flexibility 5 A Given. They must have Flexibility.
Reliability/Up Time 4 3 2 1
Pumper Management 2 3 1 2
Contractor Capability 1 3 2 1
Weighted Ranking
Note: Donāt be afraid to identify key factors during the
discussion and modify the assessment.
In this case, the team identifies a property (production
flexibility) that all the options must have or they are not
even feasible
53
Ignore
(hide)
Importance
when
Ranking
54. Technology Comparison - Scoring
Key Evaluation Factors Project
Importance
4 is High
Conv.
Walking
Beam
Hyd Pump 1 Hyd Pump 2
Capital Cost 5 1 2 3
OPEX / Well Work 4 1 3 2
Prod Flexibility ---- A Given ā They must have flexibility
Reliability/Up Time 3 3 2 1
Pumper Management 2 3 1 2
Contractor Capability 1 3 2 1
Weighted Ranking 27 =5*1+4*1+3*3+2*3+3*1
54
Finally, calculate the total score and see which option(s)
score highest
One item, Prod Flexibility, is dropped (in this example)
and no score given for that row
55. Technology Comparison - Evaluation
Finally, calculate the total score and see which option(s)
score highest
Note: Some of these scores really identify the challenges
and risks that need to be managed for success
ā¢ Up time, Pumper Management, Contractor Capability
55
Key Evaluation Factors Project
Importance
4 is High
Conv.
Walking
Beam
Hyd Pump 1 Hyd Pump 2
Capital Cost 5 1 2 3
OPEX / Well Work 4 1 3 2
Prod Flexibility --- A Given ā They must have flexibility
Reliability/Up Time 3 3 2 1
Pumper Management 2 3 1 2
Contractor Capability 1 3 2 1
Weighted Ranking 27 34 31
56. Technology Comparison ā Top Factors
You can be flexible and drop the lower ranked evaluation
factors.
But you must be very careful not to change the rankings
just to get the answer somebody else wants
56
Key Evaluation Factors Project
Importance
4 is High
Conv.
Walking
Beam
Hyd Pump 1 Hyd Pump 2
Capital Cost 3 1 2 3
OPEX / Well Work 2 1 3 2
Prod Flexibility --- A Given ā They must have flexibility
Reliability/Up Time 1 3 2 1
Pumper Management --- Low Rated
Contractor Capability --- Low Rated
Weighted Ranking 8 14 14
57. Conclusions
ā¢ Completion Engineers help integrate various business drivers
from each discipline to maximize value
ā Completion Engineers manage the decision process during
completion selection
ā Other Disciplines can use this process to help their decision making
for critical choices
ā¢ Engagement of stakeholders a key function of this process
ā Discussions and buy-in to the decision the real value
ā¢ Interplay and Assessment of the various factors vary by
context of the field/well
ā¢ A review of some examples show how the process really
works to improve decision making and deliver business value
57
58. Society of Petroleum Engineers
Distinguished Lecturer Program
www.spe.org/dl
58
Your Feedback is Important
Enter your section in the DL Evaluation Contest by
completing the evaluation form for this presentation :
Click on: Section Evaluation
Editor's Notes
Decision Matrix Analysis is the simplest form of Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA), also known as Multiple Criteria Decision Aid or Multiple Criteria Decision Management (MCDM). Sophisticated MCDA can involve highly complex modelling of different potential scenarios, using advanced mathematics. A lot of business decision making, however, is based on approximate or subjective data. Where this is the case, Decision Matrix Analysis may be all thatās needed.
Methodology
Decision Matrix Analysis helps you to decide between several options, where you need to take many different factors into account.
To use the tool, lay out your options as Column Headings in a table. Set up the Rows to show the factors you need to consider. Weight the Evaluation Factors from Most Important (5) to Least Important (1). Force rank each option for each factor using the number of options from Worst (1) to Best (3). No ties are allowed.
Multiply each score by the weight of the factor, to show its contribution to the overall selection. Finally add up the total scores for each option. The highest scoring option will be the best option.
If there are a lot of factors to be considered evaluate them all but also look at the 3 or 4 most important to see which Option addresses those factors best.
The most important aspect of this process is getting everyone to agree on the many factors and then select and agree to the most important factors for THIS decision.
The options are simplified here but should be a short listā¦.not every car made in the world. But the real choices faced by this teamā¦
The discussion is quite useful and should be kept professional and calm.
This process allows for a neutral and fair evaluation that is transparent so everyone can see, and buy-in, and accept the final decision.
In this case the minivan is best. But if we were evaluating buying a taxi or a race car the Evaluation could have been different. If you cange any of the Evaluation Factors you may get a different result.
If there is a tie, or the answers are very close, it may suggest that there are more than one right answer and both maybe considered as options for the next round of evaluation.
How many of Completion Decisions get made by the Completion Engineer (CE) without consulting anyone else?
The CE realizes the most value for each well by working with each of the other development disciplines
Decision Matrix Analysis is the simplest form of Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA), also known as Multiple Criteria Decision Aid or Multiple Criteria Decision Management (MCDM). Sophisticated MCDA can involve highly complex modelling of different potential scenarios, using advanced mathematics. A lot of business decision making, however, is based on approximate or subjective data. Where this is the case, Decision Matrix Analysis may be all thatās needed.
Methodology
Decision Matrix Analysis helps you to decide between several options, where you need to take many different factors into account.
To use the tool, lay out your options as Column Headings in a table. Set up the Rows to show the factors you need to consider. Weight the Evaluation Factors from Most Important (5) to Least Important (1). Force rank each option for each factor using the number of options from Worst (1) to Best (3). No ties are allowed.
Multiply each score by the weight of the factor, to show its contribution to the overall selection. Finally add up the total scores for each option. The highest scoring option will be the best option.
If there are a lot of fractors to be considered evaluate them all but also look at the 3 or 4 most important to see which Option addresses those factors best.
Getting Folks to Agree on a Priority Ranking is critical to selecting the right completion to deliver your most important evaluation factors i.e. business value drivers
There may be many different factors that should be considered. Listt hem all and then rank them all. Finally select the most important factors and rank them again for (for example as shown 1 to 4)
Completion engineer should have developed these before hand. They may have been evaluated in a reservoir model, drilling plan, costs, and schedules all of which is needed for a good discussion.
Sand Prevention: Horiz OHGP has highest rating as a well executed GP has very little chance of failure. We found no failures in database. Vertical GP had some failures.
Rate: Horiz GP gives the best chance to improve PI and maximize rate.
WSO: Horiz GP the hardest to successfully shut-off water. Vertical C&P best.
Contractor: Horiz GP can fail in execution and result in a standalone screen and a sand production. Picking the right contractor and system key to success. Vert C&P is less sensitive to contractors capability for all aspects.
Simply add up the scores.
Best score is optimum decision for this evaluation
Ties means that 2 options are similar. Often look at the most important factors ātop threeā and see if any difference then.
Decision Matrix Analysis is the simplest form of Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA), also known as Multiple Criteria Decision Aid or Multiple Criteria Decision Management (MCDM). Sophisticated MCDA can involve highly complex modelling of different potential scenarios, using advanced mathematics. A lot of business decision making, however, is based on approximate or subjective data. Where this is the case, Decision Matrix Analysis may be all thatās needed.
Methodology
Decision Matrix Analysis helps you to decide between several options, where you need to take many different factors into account.
To use the tool, lay out your options as Column Headings in a table. Set up the Rows to show the factors you need to consider. Weight the Evaluation Factors from Most Important (5) to Least Important (1). Force rank each option for each factor using the number of options from Worst (1) to Best (3). No ties are allowed.
Multiply each score by the weight of the factor, to show its contribution to the overall selection. Finally add up the total scores for each option. The highest scoring option will be the best option.
If there are a lot of fractors to be considered evaluate them all but also look at the 3 or 4 most important to see which Option addresses those factors best.
In the real analysis there were many more factors than this considered. This has been simplified for the presentation.
Zonal water injection (conformance) was the most important factor. Each option must provide this to be considered.
Cost on list due to the marginal nature of the project and big cost difference between options and impact on economics. Cost usually not on list.
Schedule on list due to the big difference in timing between options. Schedule normally not on list.
Sand control on list as important because of the unconsolidated nature of reservoir. Sand control had to be provided.
Installation was on list due to the ability to install (reliably) in an uphill well across two fault blocks (for some options).
Decision Matrix Analysis is the simplest form of Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA), also known as Multiple Criteria Decision Aid or Multiple Criteria Decision Management (MCDM). Sophisticated MCDA can involve highly complex modelling of different potential scenarios, using advanced mathematics. A lot of business decision making, however, is based on approximate or subjective data. Where this is the case, Decision Matrix Analysis may be all thatās needed.
Methodology
Decision Matrix Analysis helps you to decide between several options, where you need to take many different factors into account.
To use the tool, lay out your options as Column Headings in a table. Set up the Rows to show the factors you need to consider. Weight the Evaluation Factors from Most Important (5) to Least Important (1). Force rank each option for each factor using the number of options from Worst (1) to Best (3). No ties are allowed.
Multiply each score by the weight of the factor, to show its contribution to the overall selection. Finally add up the total scores for each option. The highest scoring option will be the best option.
If there are a lot of fractors to be considered evaluate them all but also look at the 3 or 4 most important to see which Option addresses those factors best.
One option, drilling two vertical wells, has the highest cost and slowest delivery. But is the best at the other factors. This analysis shows clearly that we could trade off cost and schedule and get an acceptable outcome.
Elimanating any option after discussion is OK. Be flexible with the evaluation. But DO NOT lose integrity in the evaluation and change the numbers,.
New Frac ICD allowed for fracture into the fault blocks and allowed the operator to bypass formation damage (skin) and inject at high rates to recover more oil faster.
Conventional ICDs are matrix injection only and if damage occurs have very limited options to remove from well. The rate cannot be increased if required to change pressure support.
Decision Matrix Analysis is the simplest form of Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA), also known as Multiple Criteria Decision Aid or Multiple Criteria Decision Management (MCDM). Sophisticated MCDA can involve highly complex modelling of different potential scenarios, using advanced mathematics. A lot of business decision making, however, is based on approximate or subjective data. Where this is the case, Decision Matrix Analysis may be all thatās needed.
Methodology
Decision Matrix Analysis helps you to decide between several options, where you need to take many different factors into account.
To use the tool, lay out your options as Column Headings in a table. Set up the Rows to show the factors you need to consider. Weight the Evaluation Factors from Most Important (5) to Least Important (1). Force rank each option for each factor using the number of options from Worst (1) to Best (3). No ties are allowed.
Multiply each score by the weight of the factor, to show its contribution to the overall selection. Finally add up the total scores for each option. The highest scoring option will be the best option.
If there are a lot of fractors to be considered evaluate them all but also look at the 3 or 4 most important to see which Option addresses those factors best.