Multilateral Wells: Maximizing Well Productivity

  • Rustom K. ModyEmail author
  • Martin P. Coronado
Conference paper


Oil well architecture is becoming more complex. The main driver for multilateral wells is their improved exposure of the productive formation per well. A single multilateral well can have significantly more payzone formation exposure than a single well. A multilateral well can have lateral branches into different formation layers, multiple branches into the same layer, or a combination of both. Advancements in horizontal and directional drilling, milling and sidetracking, and geo-steering have led to increasing levels of well architecture complexity. Coupled to this new well architecture, intelligent well completion technology developed rapidly. An intelligent well consists of permanent downhole sensors to measure various physical aspects of the well environment, and a means to regulate the flow from the well at various points based on information obtained for the sensors. In intelligent multilateral wells, each lateral can be independently monitored to establish real-time flowing conditions and flow from each adjusted as required. This two-component aspect to an intelligent well, sensing and control, make for a powerful tool in maximizing production efficiency.


Drilling Intelligent control systems Multilateral junction Multilateral well Oil Wellbore Well monitoring Whipstock 


  1. 1.
    Bonner J (2007) Multilateral technology then and now. E&PGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chambers MR (1998) Making multi-lateral wells cost effective. SPE 51244 presented at the 1998 annual technical conference and exhibition, Lagos, Nigeria, August 5–7Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ehlig-Economides CA (2000) Single well reservoir management – the ultimate multibranch well challenge. SPE 59447 presented at the 2000 Asia Pacific conference on integrated modeling for asset management, Yokohama, Japan, April 25–26Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Emerson B (2009) Multilateral junction has selective high-pressure fracturing capability. E&P, 84–85Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hill AD, Zhu D, Economides MJ (2008) Multilateral wells. Society of Petroleum EngineersGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hogg C (2002) Level 6 multilateral numbers increase. Oil Gas J, 63–67Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hogg C et al (1999) Level 6 multilateral succeeds in heavy oil field trial. Oil Gas J, 60–62Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hogg C (1999) World’s first TAML Level 6 multilateral completion: the Belridge project. World Oil, 49–50Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jabs M (2006) Pre-Manufactured level 6 multilaterals reduce risk and development cost in West Africa. Petrol Afr, 44–47Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jabs M, Crews D (1999) Pre-engineered multilaterals provide cost effective solutions. OffshoreGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lowson B (1997) Multi-lateral well planning. SPE/IADC 39245 presented at the 1997 Middle East drilling technology conference, BahrainGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    MacKenzie A et al (1999) Multilateral classification system with example applications. World Oil, 55–61Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Oberkircher J (2001) What is the future of multilateral technology. World OilGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Peterson E et al (2009) Development and Installation of an extended reach multilateral junction. SPE/IADC 119553 presented at the 2009 drilling conference and exhibition, Amsterdam, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Qahtani AM, Dialdin H (2009) Future advanced completion technologies to maximize recovery. OTC 20136 presented at the 2009 offshore technology conference, Houston, Texas, May 4–7Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ruszka J, Emerson B (2008) Extended reach, multilateral drainage or both? E&P, 39–43Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Salas JR et al (1996) Multilateral well performance prediction. SPE 35711 presented at the 1996 Western regional meeting, Anchorage, AlaskaGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Triolo DK, Mathes RA (1997) Review of a multi-lateral drilling and stimulation program. SPE/IADC 39242 presented at the 1997 Middle East drilling technology conference, BahrainGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Waddell KK (1999) Determining the risk in applying multilateral technology: gaining a better understanding. SPE 52968 presented at the 1999 hydrocarbon economics and evaluation symposium, Dallas, TexasGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Completions & Production, Baker Hughes IncorporatedHoustonUSA

Personalised recommendations