Infill drilling-lessons learnt in the past 20 years

Block 1, Forum 5 paper

Infill drilling-lessons learnt in the past 20 years

Linhua Guan, Texas A&M University
Yuqi Du, New Mexico Tech
Zhiming Wang, Chevron
Abstract:
It has been known that infill drilling can improve the recovery of hydrocarbon by accelerating
the hydrocarbon productions because most reservoirs in the real world are not homogeneous.
With the increasing demand for energy and higher oil and gas prices, more and more fields all
over the world are undergoing infill drilling. This paper describes the development of infill
drilling in the petroleum industry and summarizes what petroleum engineers have learnt in the
past 20 years about infill drilling. Various field examples are discussed on the successfulness
and failure of the infill drilling campaigns in the industry. The results of our study indicate that
when the reservoirs become more heterogeneous, the infill drilling works better.

Introduction
The importance of enhanced oil recovery technology (EOR) cannot be overemphasized,
especially in the context of a mature petroleum province or a country, such as the U.S., with
declining domestic production and increasing imports. The decline of domestic production and
increasing of petroleum imports reminds us of our increasing dependence on foreign
petroleum supplies. Combined with the fact that the probability of finding new discoveries is
continually decreasing reinforces the need for EOR oil recovery technology.
The significance of EOR lies in the promise it holds for increasing the expected production
from existing oil fields. In mature petroleum provinces, such as the onshore US in general,
growth of reserves in existing oil fields typically contributes more to the industrys continued
viability than the discovery of new fields. In other words, in thoroughly explored provinces,
better technology, more accurate reservoir characterization, and more effective production
from known fields typically add new reserves faster than exploration for new fields.
It has been known that infill drilling can improve the recovery of hydrocarbon by accelerating
the hydrocarbon productions because most reservoirs in the real world are not
homogeneous.1-7 Driscoll1 and Gould et al..2, 4 summarized the various factors that contribute
to increased recovery after infill drilling in 1980s:

Improved areal sweep

Areal heterogeneity

Improved vertical sweep

Lateral pay connectivity

Recovery of wedge-edge oil

Reduced economic limits

Recently, with the increasing demand for energy and favourable oil and gas prices, more and
more fields all over the world are undergoing infill drilling. The advances in reservoir
management provide a much clear picture of hydrocarbon distribution in the reservoirs which
helps petroleum engineers to plan highly effective well profiles and the advanced imaging
technologies allow the hydrocarbon field operators to select the best locations for infill drilling
to optimize well placement.
In the past 20+ years, many infill drilling projects have been put into production and lots of
valuable experiences have been gained on infill drilling. Therefore, the purpose of this paper
is to present lessons learned and best practices on infill drilling from published literatures and
provides a concise compendium to the current understanding of current industry infill drilling
practice.

Copyright World Petroleum Congress all rights reserved

Infill drilling-lessons learnt in the past 20 years

Block 1, Forum 5 paper
At the same time, this paper will discuss two recent developed fast techniques which can
rapidly determine the infill drilling potentials in mature, tight hydrocarbon basins and present
lessons learned on the application guidelines for those two fast methods to help independent
operators develop operational and design strategies for current and future infill drilling
projects.
The scope of this paper is the update of Gould4 and Wus5 reviews on lessons learned of infill
drilling in the petroleum industry. Consequently, all the infill drilling cases appear in open
literature before 1989 are not included in this paper. It should be noted that most of the
reviewed field studies are from SPE and only some of the papers have been peer reviewed.
Recent Infill Drilling Field Experience
Infill drilling of additional wells after initial development (primary and/or secondary) played an
important role in improving the oil and gas recovery in the tight hydrocarbon reservoirs.6
Generally speaking, the reservoir heterogeneity and layer continuity can be changed by the
well spacing. The infill drilling wells reduce the well spacing of the hydrocarbon fields and then
enhance the well connectivity. Wu, et al.7 reported the results of their study to determine the
impact of infill drilling on the waterflood recovery in West Texas carbonate reservoir in 1989.
Their study shows a certain degree of correlation between the waterflood recovery and well
spacing.
During the literature search, we found dozens of papers on field infill drilling projects since
1989. Table 1 summarizes some of the typical infill drilling projects reviewed in our study in
field name order, includes comments on reservoir type, rock type, initial well spacing, as well
as lessons learned from each case and case reference.
If the infill drilling projects are classified by field environment, the results will be that the
onshore fields are the majority. It seems that the infill drilling is not widely used in the offshore
reservoirs as a viable improved hydrocarbon recovery method which might be caused by the
unique characteristics of the offshore environments.

Table 1- Summary of Reviewed Infill Drilling Projects

Field name

Reservoir type

Rock type

Initial
well
spacing

Lessons Learned

References

Barrow
Island Field

Australia
offshore oil field

Highly complex
sandstones

40-acre

Field production
significantly increased.

29

Bombay
High

Offshore field in
India

N/A

32

East
Canton

Onshore oil field

in Ohio

F-pad

Oil field in
Prudhoe Bay
Norway offshore
oil field

Re-entry and clamp-on

infill wells improved field
recovery.
Infill wells increase
recovery factor from
11% to 13%.
Infill wells increased oil
recovery of 2.1 MMSTB
Through tubing infill
drilling increased
Gullfaks oil recovery.
The 659 infill wells have
not added GIP.

Hugoton

Onshore gas
field in USA

Highly
heterogeneous
carbonate
Lowpermeability
sands
Heterogeneous
sandstone
Highly
heterogeneous
reservoirs
Shallow marine
carbonate

LeonardianRestricted
Platform

Oil field in
Permian Basin

Highly Complex
carbonate

80-acre

Infill wells developed

potential reserves.

14

Moxa Arch

Gas field in
Wyoming

640acre

Giant oil field in

Nigeria

Infill drilling on 160 acre

would increase reserves
by 68%.
Infill drilling, stimulation
and gas-lift improved
field recovery.

17

Niger Delta

Highly
heterogeneous
sands
Poorly connect
sands

Gullfaks
Field

Copyright World Petroleum Congress all rights reserved

40-acre
80-acre
N/A
640acre

N/A

27
19
28
8-10,
20-21

16

Infill drilling-lessons learnt in the past 20 years

Block 1, Forum 5 paper
North Kadi

Oil field in North

Cambay Basin,
India
Oil field in
Texas

Fluvial deposit
sands

N/A

33% infill wells achived

1.7% additionl reserves.

35

Stratified
dolomite

80-acre

12

Ozona

Onshore gas
field in Texas

Complex
turbidite sands

320acre

Seventy-six
West

Oil field in
Texas

Highly complex
sandstones

N/A

Tapis Field

Offshore oil field

in South China
Sea
Onshore field in
Texas

Highly
heterogeneous
sandstone
Dolomites

N/A

Continuity is the major

factor to the success of
infill drilling.
Infill wells greatly
increase Ozona
reserves.
Estimated 6 MMSTB of
remaining oil can be
developed by infill wells.
Integration study
increased reserves by
30%.
Infill wells and pattern
reconfiguration added
14.2 MMSTB reserve.

North Rlley

Wasson
San Andres
Field

80-acre

24-25
13
18
30

Successful Infill Drilling Experience

It is well known that internal reservoir heterogeneity can created significant fluid flow
anisotropy, which can trap the remaining mobile oil in the compartments poorly contacted by
the current well spacing and in zones inefficiently swept of waterflooding or gasflooding.
Therefore, it is not surprised to find (Table 1) that infill drilling has been successful in both
sandstone and carbonate reservoirs.
Holtz, et al.14 reported that Leonardian Restricted Platform Carbonate reservoirs exhibit
abnormally low recovery efficiencies. Cumulative production from those mature Permian
Basin reservoirs is only 17 percent of the STOOIP, less than half the average efficiency of
other carbonate reservoirs in the Permian Basin. Later, it was found that this poor recovery
efficiency is directly related to high degrees of vertical and lateral facies heterogeneity caused
by high-frequency, cyclic sedimentation in low-energy carbonate platform environments.
Because of their geologic complexity, the Leonardian Restricted Platform Carbonate
reservoirs have the potential of 683 MMSTB for reserve growth. Their study indicated that the
ultimate recovery efficiency of the above reservoirs can nearly triples when reservoir
development changes from 80-acre primary recovery to 10-acre secondary recovery.
It seems that the success potential of infill drilling is directly related to reservoir heterogeneity.
Holtz, et al. 15 have demonstrated that in their further studies in the Permian Basin. Normal
carbonate reservoirs in Permian Basin exhibit an average recovery efficiency of about 35
percent. However, those reservoirs producing from rocks deposited in restricted platform
settings are associated with even lower efficiencies, exhibit average efficiencies of less than
20 percent, reflecting the high degree of heterogeneity in these rocks. Because of their low
recovery efficiencies and high degree of heterogeneity, these reservoirs are ideal candidates
for studies of the potential for reserve growth.
The Moxa Arch Frontier Formation in Wyoming is very heterogeneous with permeabilities
ranging from 0,001 mD to more that 0.1 mD. The productive sand thicknesses vary from less
than 10 ft to over 70 ft. Effective drainage areas range from over 640 acres to less than 100
acres. Cipolla and Kyte17 concluded that infill drilling on 160 acre spacing within a portion of
the Moxa Arch field would increase reserves by 68% when compared to reserves for 320 acre
spacing based on their study.
Extensive infill drilling has been practiced in the West Texas carbonate reservoirs as a
method of modifying waterflood patterns and increasing pay continuity.37 The Seventy-six
West Field13 is one of nearly 300 south Texas fields with similar depositional, structural, and
production characteristics. Therefore, the infill drilling success of Seventy-Six West field can
be expected from other south Texas fields.

Copyright World Petroleum Congress all rights reserved

Infill drilling-lessons learnt in the past 20 years

Block 1, Forum 5 paper

Integration - The Key to the Success of Infill Drilling Projects

The integration study of sequence stratigraphy, log analysis, 3D seismic, reservoir simulation,
and drilling has increased Tapis Field reserves by 30% through rig workover, infill drilling from
existing platforms and installation of a new satellite platform.18 The Tapis field experience
further demonstrates the value of integration for mature fields.
Yeager, et al.26 conducted an integration study to determine the infill drilling potential for a
portion of the Bakersville Field in Coshocton County, Ohio. Their result indicated that the
existing wells are effectively recovering the gas in place. Therefore, potential infill locations
offsetting highly productive Beekmantown completions are likely to encounter reservoir
pressures significantly lower than the original 3,100 psia. Based on the results of their study,
the Bakersville operator decided not to drill proposed infill wells, thereby eliminating
unnecessary capital expenditures.
Rushing and Blasingame33 presented the results of the Clear Fork carbonate in the TXL
South Unit Field in the Ector County, Texas, using an integrated approach. The primary
evaluation tool was decline type curve analysis and well performance analysis was
complemented with petrophysical and geological studies, each representing different
reservoir scales. Based on their study results, Rushing and Blasingame identified the best
field areas for future infill drilling. At the same time, the integrated study is also the key to the
success of the infill drilling optimization of the naturally fractured tight-gas Mesaverde
Sandstone reservoirs in San Juan Basin.31 Therefore; it is the recommended method for
future infill drilling projects.

Unsuccessful Infill Drilling Experience

The Hugoton gas field in the largest gas field in the Lower 48 states and several hundreds
infill wells have been drilled since the Kansas Hugoton infill drilling program started in 1987.8
Since then, many researcher have analyzed the performance of the Hugoton infill drilling
program.
McCoy, et al.8-10 compared the 659 Kansas Hugoton infill well performances and companion
original wells using official deliverability tests and production history data and they concluded
that the results from those infill drilling wells have not found any additional gas-in-place. At the
same time, they presented the pitfalls in the used of official deliverability and wellhead shut-in
pressure difference between infill wells and companion original wells to indicate additional
gas-in-place.
The further published Hugoton infill drilling studies20-21 also supported the fact that the
Hugoton infill wells and original wells are in pressure communication and the pressure
difference between each set of original and infill wells is caused by the pressure gradient in
the high permeability layer(s) between the two wells. The original wells already have drained
significant volumes of gas from the high permeable productive layers in the area of new infill
wells. Therefore, trapped or bypassed gas does not exist due to low areal heterogeneity of
the Hugoton field.
Xue, et al.22 compared the waterflood infill drilling and CO2 flood in the Monahans unit and
Johnson J.L. AB unit and they found that with waterflood infill drilling at 10-acre spacing, the
recovery factor can be as high as 30%. However, the economic analysis indicates that
waterflood on a 10-acre well spacing is less profitable when compared to CO2 flood.
Moreover, it is rarely reported that infill drilling practice has been applied to the fields whose
current well spacing is less than 10-acre even for the low-permeability hydrocarbon fields.

Vertical Infill Wells vs. Deviated/Horizontal Infill Wells

Tewari, et al.32 demonstrated that the sidetracking of problematic wells was a viable option in
the offshore Bombay High field for production of bypassed oil since it could reduce the well
inventories and saved valuable slot on the offshore platform. The results of their Bombay field
study indicated that limited success of workover jobs, poor cementation, bad wellbore
conditions, and early water breakthrough are the main reason to make infill wells susceptible
to channelling behind casing and cross flow between the layers. Based on their study, Tewari,
et al. concluded that the drilling of infill wells through clamp-on is a cost-effective technique for

Copyright World Petroleum Congress all rights reserved

Infill drilling-lessons learnt in the past 20 years

Block 1, Forum 5 paper
incremental oil recovery in the highly heterogeneous and multilayered carbonate field like
Bombay High.
Horizontal wells are usually drilled as development wells to recover incremental oil and to
accelerate oil from certain locations such as poorly floodable and drainable oil. Bower23
reported a case in Canada that the estimated potential incremental oil reserve can be as high
as 2.8 billion barrels due to horizontal infill wells.
Historic production and well performance data from Yibal field34 indicated that the later drilled
horizontal wells are comparable vertical wells on oil rates except the early drilled horizontal
wells. But, the later drilled horizontal wells have much higher water cut which made them
uneconomical. A further study suggests that the only parts of the perforated intervals
contribute to the fluid flow in the horizontal wells and it is confirmed by the recent production
logging.
A study on the 12,000 horizontal wells drilled in different regions of Western Canadian
Sedimentary Basin in 2004 indicated that the horizontal wells, in general, have been
economically, especially for the wells in tight gas heavy oil reservoirs, in a variety of reservoir
setting in Western Canadian Sedimentary Basins.36 However, this study also revealed that
about one out of three horizontal wells in Western Canada are not profitable. Therefore, it
may be prudent in many situations to drill vertical wells rather than horizontal infill wells due to
various reservoir uncertainty and risks, although horizontal wells may offer many advantages.

Blanket vs. Targeted Infill Drilling

Operators have historically used blanket infill drilling technique to drill infill wells in large
hydrocarbon basins. In this method, wells are drilled on uniform well patterns and spacing,
therefore, reservoir quality is not considered. Obviously, it is not the optimum development
strategy.
Yadavalli, et al.11 evaluated the waterflood infill drilling performance in the study area of the
Johnson J.L.AB unit in Ector County, West Texas. The economic evaluation for blanket and
targeted infill drilling scenarios indicated that the targeted infill drilling scenario resulted in a
higher recovery and better economic return than the blanket infill drilling scenario. Moreover,
they found that the optimum infill drilling pattern did not need to be a regular pattern.
Generally speaking, targeted infill drilling techniques can optimize a hydrocarbon field
development by maximizing economic returns and reducing capital expenditures. However,
targeted infill drilling methods often require a complete reservoir evaluation to identify areas of
the field with best quality rock and largest volume of remained hydrocarbon in place which will
make it uneconomical for some large hydrocarbon fields.
In the following sections, we will discuss two recent developed targeted infill drilling
techniques that do not need a complete reservoir evaluation to determine infill drilling
potentials in large tight gas basins.

Fast Methods for Determining Infill Drilling Potentials

The recommended way to determine infill-drilling potential in a reservoir is to conduct a
complete reservoir evaluation involving geological, geophysical, and reservoir analyses and
interpretations. While it is accurate, this approach can be prohibitively time-consuming and
expensive for some large hydrocarbon fields.
As a matter of fact, it is almost economically impossible for operators to conduct a complete
reservoir evaluation when they are dealing with a large, mature tight hydrocarbon field which
has hundreds or even thousands of developing wells. It is not uncommon for a company to
have hundreds or even thousands of infill candidates to choose from in the tight hydrocarbon
fields. Therefore, for some large, low-permeability hydrocarbon basins with large data sets
and complex geology, the cost and time requirements of a conventional reservoir evaluation
study are not acceptable.
At the same time, the low-permeability wells are usually being produced not by major oil
companies, for the most part, by small independent operators. Research is the key to the

Copyright World Petroleum Congress all rights reserved

Infill drilling-lessons learnt in the past 20 years

Block 1, Forum 5 paper
survival of those low-permeability wells; however, those small independent producers do not
have the means to conduct their own research. Faced with the daunting task of trying to
determine where to drill several hundred infill wells in a tight hydrocarbon reservoir, many
operators have to rely on very simple analyses to select infill locations. This sometimes
results in wells being drilled in the wrong locations, and even worse, after seeing less-thanexpected infill performance, many operators will simply give up on infill drilling and this may
be missing significant opportunities.

Moving Window Technique

In the early 1990s, U.S. Department of Energy has released the Infill Drilling Predictive Model
(IDPM) for infill drilling of waterflood projects. This model can use a minimum amount of
reservoir and geologic description to determine if an existing waterflood project would benefit
from infill drilling.12 However, the IDPM requires knowledge of two important heterogeneity
elements which are not easily or often measured in actual fields. The two heterogeneity
elements are pay continuity and permeability variation among layers.
As an alternative approach to conducting detailed studies, various authors have used
empirical or statistical analyses to model variable well performance.37-45 In particular; McCain
et al.40 used a statistical, moving-window method to determine infill potential in a complex,
low-permeability gas reservoir. Later, Voneiff and Cipolla41 further developed the moving
window technique and apply it for rapid assessment of infill and re-completion potential in the
Ozona field.

Methodology
The moving window method is a rigorous, model-based analysis method. It is based on a
combination of the material balance equation and the pseudo-steady state flow equation,
simplified by assuming that many properties are constant within an individual moving domain.
The result is a linear regression equation that is applied within each window.46
The moving window technique is a set of empirically derived approximations and comparisons
that attempt to mimic what a reservoir engineer does when faced with a single infill location
evaluation. It can quickly evaluate the infill drilling potentials within weeks even with
thousands of wells. The primary advantages of the technique are its speed and reliance upon
well location and production data only.
Figure 1 shows the diagram of the moving window method and it consists of a multitude of
local analyses, each in an areal window centered on an existing well. The regression
coefficients for each window are determined by regressing parameters for the wells within
each window. The windows are limited in size, e.g., 3000 acres, and generally contain 5 to 20
wells. If the number of wells in a window is less than a minimum value, e.g., 3-5, a regional or
global regression is used instead of a local regression.

Figure 1. Diagram of the fast method showing how the window moves across area. The small
blue circles are the well locations and big circles are the moving domains.47

Copyright World Petroleum Congress all rights reserved

Infill drilling-lessons learnt in the past 20 years

Block 1, Forum 5 paper
Once the regression equation coefficients are determined for each window, performance can
be estimated for infill wells by substituting the appropriate values for candidate infill well
conditions. The result of this analysis is a prediction of BY for a new infill well offsetting each
existing well. The primary advantages of the moving domain technique are its speed and its
reliance upon only well location and production data. It is routinely used to conduct infill
screening studies of projects consisting of 1000s of wells and can be used to evaluate an
entire basin in a few man-days.

Applications
The Ozona Field is located in Crockett County in Southwest Texas and it contains two major
producing sands with about 1,800 wells.41-42 These sands are complex turbidite deposits
characterized by lenticular gas-bearing members at depths of 6,000 to 7,500 ft with
permeability from less than 0.001 mD to over 0.10 mD. The development of this field began
in 1960s on 320-acre well spacing, with subsequent infill drilling on 160 and 80-acre spacing.
Later, the 40-acre spacing was granted for the majority of the field in 1995.
The production and geological studies of the Ozona Field24-25, 41-42 show limited sand
continuity among wells and large variety in sand qualities over short distances. Therefore,
well interference was not expected in the majority of the field. The large number of existing
wells and the compartmentalized nature of the sands precluded detailed reservoir analysis to
determine the infill drilling potential in the Ozona field.
Voneiff, et al.41 applied the moving window technique first to determine the infill drilling
potentials in the Ozona field. The results of their study identified 1,246 infill candidates
representing 18 billion m3 of additional reserves in the field. Using this method, not only were
they able to quantify the number of infill wells and infill reserves, but they were also able to
identify the location of the infill wells in a short time frame.
Beside the applications in the Ozone field, the moving window technique also has been
successfully applied to Cotton Valley in east Texas,40 Milk River formation in Western Canada
Basin,43-44 Mesaverde formation in the San Juan Basin,44 Morrow formation in Permian
Basin,44 and Austin Chalk45 to quantify infill drilling potentials.

Discussion
Guan, et al.46 have systematically evaluated the accuracy of the moving window technique
and they concluded that this technique can accurately predict infill well performance for a
group of infill candidates, often to within 10%. However, predicted infill potential for individual
wells can be off by more than +/-50%. The method can predict average infill well performance
reasonably well even when well productivity has decreased significantly due to depletion. At
the same time, the accuracy of predicted infill well performance, for either individual wells or
the average of a group of wells, decreases as heterogeneity increases. Moreover, the
accuracy of predicted average infill well performance increases as the number of wells in the
project increases.
Guan, et al. 47-48 also found that larger errors usually occur in sparsely drilled regions of the
reservoir. When the number of wells in a particular window is inadequate, the moving domain
technique defaults to a regional or global correlation, instead of a local correlation. A regional
or global correlation obviously will not predict local performance as accurately as a local
correlation. At the same time, the fast method is based on analysis of well locations and
production data; thus, if no wells are drilled in local regions of high permeability, the fast
method will not be able to predict higher infill performance for the particular area.
It appears that the fast method performs well in predicting the average infill well performance
for a group of wells. So we should examine the infill-drilling program for groups of wells when
we use this technology to evaluate infill-drilling potential. When we use this technology, we
can divide a basin or field into smaller areas and predict the distributions of infill performance
as a group for the smaller areas, rather than individual wells.
Based on the previous studies results we suggest using this fast method as an infill-screening
tool in the tight-gas basins consisting of thousands of wells. In this case, it is almost
impossible to conduct conventional reservoir studies while the moving domain technique can
be used to evaluate an entire basin in a matter of man-days. The result of this technique can
tell petroleum engineers what areas need to put more efforts in further studies.

Copyright World Petroleum Congress all rights reserved

Infill drilling-lessons learnt in the past 20 years

Block 1, Forum 5 paper

Rapid Inversion Method

Another approach for infill and recompletion candidate well selection, rapid inversion method,
has been recently developed by Gao and McVay49 at Texas A&M University. It uses reservoir
simulation combined with automatic history matching. In this method, a reservoir simulator
serves as the forward model, which calculates well production responses from reservoir
description data. Then, sensitivity coefficients are calculated internally and used in the
inversion of history production data to estimate the permeability field. Finally, based on the
estimated permeability field and forward model, the expected performances of potential infill
wells are determined.

Methodology
This rapid inversion method uses Modified Generalized Pulse-Spectrum Technique (MGPST)
to calculate sensitivity coefficients. The MGPST was first proposed by Chu et al.50 by using
the basic ideas of Tang et al.51 and it produces the sensitivity coefficients in one simulation
run. However, the linear system to be solved depends on the number of wells as opposed to
the number of parameters. Since the number of wells is usually much less than the number of
grid blocks, therefore, the MGPST is very efficient.
Since the rapid inversion method is simulation-based, all the data required to initialize a
reservoir simulator (e.g. reservoir property distributions, PVT properties, reservoir pressure)
are required to apply the method. However, since the goal of this method is rapid,
approximate estimation of infill potential, this approach does not conduct a detailed reservoir
characterization study. Instead, in an initial application, it simply uses whatever data are
available. For example, reservoir property maps are used if they are available; otherwise, the
model is initialized with uniform average values.
This use of reservoir simulation inversion technology in Gao and McVays method differs from
typical application of reservoir simulation in the scale of application. Since the goal of this
method is to determine infill or recompletion potential over large areas and for large number
of wells, often at scales exceeding individual reservoirs, the large-scale, coarse-resolution
permeability fields are determined rather than small-scale, fine-resolution property fields used
in conventional studies of individual reservoirs. Another difference of this proposed inversion
approach from conventional reservoir study is that instead of producing at historical rates and
matching on pressure, this approach produces wells in the simulation at estimated flowing
bottom-hole pressure and match on production data. This is because the method primarily
relies on readily available well location and production data.
This rapid inversion method uses Modified Generalized Pulse-Spectrum Technique (MGPST)
to calculate sensitivity coefficients. The MGPST was first proposed by Chu et al.50 by using
the basic ideas of Tang et al.51 and it produces the sensitivity coefficients in one simulation
run. In MGPST, the linear system to be solved depends on the number of wells as opposed to
the number of parameters such as Gradient Simulator method49. Therefore, for large field
case with large number of parameters, the MGPST is more efficient.

Application
The rapid inversion method has been applied in an actual production data from the 9township area from a large gas basin in the North America.49 The study field is a shallow gas
reservoir with approximately 42 years of production history and there are approximately 201
wells with production through 1/31/2004.
Using the estimated permeability distribution obtained by history matching production data
through 12/31/2000, reservoir performance was forecasted through 1/31/2004. There were 49
new wells that began production during this 3-year period. Figures 2 shows field-wide
predicted performance for infill wells, those wells first produced after 2001 and close to
existing wells.

Copyright World Petroleum Congress all rights reserved

Infill drilling-lessons learnt in the past 20 years

Block 1, Forum 5 paper

Field Cumulative Production, Bcf

20
18
16
14

cal
obs

12
10
8
6
4
2
0
2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Decimal year
Figure 2. Predicted field cumulative production for 34 infill wells.49

The results in the above field case application showed that in areas with existing wells with
sufficient production data to quantify reservoir quality, the proposed method can accurately
predict the production potential of groups of infill wells.

Discussion
It is shows in their paper49 apparent that performance was predicted more accurately for infill
wells than step-out wells. This is because the infill wells benefit from the more accurate
permeability distribution resulting from the production influence of nearby existing wells.
Since the method is based primarily on well locations and production data for a rapid
screening evaluation, predictions for individual well locations can possess significant error,
particularly for step-out wells or in areas without sufficient production data. Predictions for
step-out wells or in areas with insufficient production can be improved only by including other
types of data, e.g. seismic data.
Conclusions
This paper reviewed the infill drilling experiences as it is found in the open literature and
summarized what petroleum engineers have learned during the past 20 + years on field infill
drilling projects. Both onshore and offshore infill drilling projects have been included in this
paper. Various success and failure infill drilling cases are presented, which will help operators
to develop operational and design strategies for current and future infill drilling projects.
This paper also discussed two recently developed fast methods, moving window technique
and rapid inversion method, to determine infill drilling potentials in large, mature, tight
hydrocarbon basins. Both methods are primarily based only on the well locations and
production data, which are widely available in the field, and both can accurately predict infill
potentials for groups of infill candidates.

References
1. Driscoll, V.J., Recovery Optimization Through Infill Drilling Concepts, Analysis, and Field Results,
paper SPE 4977 presented at the 49th Annual Meeting of the Society of Petroleum Engineers of
AIME, Houston, TX, October 6-9, 1974.
2. Gould, T.L., and Munoz, M.A., An Analysis of Infill Drilling, paper SPE 11021 presented at the 57th
Annual Fall Technical Conference and Exhibition of the Society of Petroleum Engineers of AIME,
New Orleans, Louisiana, September 26-29, 1982.

Copyright World Petroleum Congress all rights reserved

Infill drilling-lessons learnt in the past 20 years

Block 1, Forum 5 paper
3. Barber, A.H., George, C.J., Stiles, L.H., and Thompson, B.B., Infill Drilling to Increase Reserves
Actual Experience in Nine Fields in Texas, Okalahoma, and Illinois, paper SPE 11023, JPT, August,
1983.
4. Gould, T.L., Sam Sarem, A.M., Infill Drilling for Incremental Recovery, paper SPE 18941, JPT, March
1989.
5. Wu, C.H., Laughlin, B.A., and Jardon, M., Infill Drilling Enhances Waterflooding Recovery, paper SPE
17286, JPT, October 1989.
6. Thakur, G.C. and Satter, A., Integrated Waterflood Asset Management, PennWell, 1998.
7. Wu, C.H., et al., An Evaluation of Waterflood Infill Drilling in West Texas Clearfork and San Andres
Carbonate Reserves, SPE paper 19783 presented at the 1989 SPE Annual Technical Conference
and Exhibition, San Antonio, 8-11 October.
8. McCoy, T.F., Fetkovich, M.J., Needham, R.B., and Reese, D.E., Analysis of Kansas Hugoton Infill
Drilling, paper SPE 20756 presented at the 65th SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition
held in New Orleans, Louisiana, September 23-26, 1990.
9. McCoy, T.F., Fetkovich, M.J., Needham, R.B., and Reese, D.E., Analysis of Kansas Hugoton Infill
Drilling Program, paper SPE 20779, JPT, June 1992.
10. Fetkovich, M.J., Ebbs, D.J., and Voelker, J.J., Mutiwell, Multilayer Model to Evaluate Infill Drilling
Potential in the Okalahoma Hugoton Field, paper SPE 20778, SPE Reservoir Engineering, August
1994.
11. Yadavalli, S.K., Brimhall, R.M., and Wu, C.H., Case History of Waterflood Infill Drilling in the
Johnson J.L. AB Unit, paper SPE 21817 presented at the Rock Mountain Regional Meeting and
Low-Permeability Reservoirs Symposium held in Denver, Colorado, Aril 15-17, 1991.
12. Fuller, S.M., Sarem, A.M., and Gould, T.L., Screening Waterfloods for Infill Drilling Opportunities,
paper SPE 22333 presented at the SPE International Meeting on Petroleum Engineering held in
Beijing, China, 24-27 March 1992.
13. Hamilton, D.S., Reservoir Heterogeneity at Seventy-Six West Field, Texas: An Opportunity for
Increased Oil Recovery From Barrier/Strandplain Reservoirs of the Jackson-Yegua Trend by
Geological Targeted Infill Drilling, paper SPE 22672 presented at the 66th Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition of the Society of Petroleum Engineers held in Dallas, TX, October 6-9,
1991.
14. Holtz, M.H., Ruppel, S.C., and Hocott, C., Analysis of Reserve Growth Potential in LeonardianRestricted Platform Carbonate reservoirs, Permian Basin: An Integrated Approach, paper SPE 22900
presented at the 66th Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition of the Society of Petroleum
Engineers held in Dallas, TX, October 6-9, 1991.
15. Tyler, N., Galloway, W. E., Garrett, C. M., Jr,, and Ewing, T. E., Oil Accumulation, Production
Characteristics, and Targets for Additional Recovery in Major Oil Reservoirs of Texas, 1984, The
University of Texas at Austin, Bureau of Economic Geology Geological Circular 84-2, p. 29.
16. Ofoh, E.P., Geological Heterogeneity in the Niger Delta: A Case for Additional Recovery Through a
Combined Effort of Geologically Targeted infill Drilling, Stimulation, and Gas-Lift Installation, paper
SPE 24745 presented at the 67th Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers held in Washington, DC, October 4-7, 1992.
17. Cipolla, C.L., and Kyte, D.G., Infill Drilling in the Moxa Arch: A Case History of the Frontier
Formation, paper SPE 24909 presented at the 67th Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition of
the Society of Petroleum Engineers held in Washington, DC, October 4-7, 1992.
18. Abdullah, M.A.Y., and Olsen, B.S., Tapis- New Opportunities from a Maturing Field, paper SPE
54339 presented at the 1999 SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition held in
Jakarta, Indonesia, 20-22 April 1999.
19. Shirzadi, S.G. and Lawal, A.S., Multidisciplinary Approach for Targeting New Wells in the Prudhoe
Bay Field, paper SPE 26093 presented at the Western Regional Meeting held in Anchorage, Alaska,
26-28 May 1993.
20. McCoy, et al., Analysis of Kansas Hugoton Infill Drilling: Part III 1993 Update and Infill Well Case
Histories, paper SPE 26189 presented at the SPE Gas Technology Symposium held in Calgary,
Alberta, Canada, 28-30 June 1993.
21. Ryan, T.C., Oberst, R.J., and Hansen, C.D.: Analysis of Infill Drilling in Kansas Hugoton, paper SPE
27921 presented at the SPE Mid-Continent Gas Symposium held in Amarillo, Texas, 22-24 May
1994.
22. Xue, G., Mallk, Z.A., Wu, C.H., and Mamora, D.D.: A Comparative Technical and Economic Analysis
of Waterflood Infill Drilling and CO2 flood in West Texas Carbonate Reservoirs, paper SPE 27642
presented at the 1994 SPE Permian Basin Oil and Gas Recovery Conference held in Midland, Texas,
16-18 March, 1994.
23. Bowers, B., Bielecky, J., Drummond, K, Ku, J., and Wall, B., Impact of Horizontal Drilling on Western
th
Canadian Supply of Conventional Crude Oil, paper No 95-98 presented at the 46 Annual Technical
Meeting of Petroleum Society of CIM, May 14-17, 1995.
24. Cipolla, C.L., and Wood, M.C.: A Statistical Approach to Infill-Drilling Studies: Case History of the
Ozona Canyon Sands, paper SPE 35628, SPE Reservoir Engineering, August 1996.

Copyright World Petroleum Congress all rights reserved

Infill drilling-lessons learnt in the past 20 years

Block 1, Forum 5 paper
25. Cipolla, C.L., and Mayerhofer, M.: Infill Drilling & Reserve Growth Determination in Lenticular Tight
Gas Sands, paper SPE 36735 presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference & Exhibition held
in Denver, Colorado, 7-9 October 1996.
26. Yeager, D.L., Frantz, Jr., J.J., Moody, M.A., and Neese, M.A.: Evaluation of Infill Drilling Potential of
the Beekmantown Formation, Bakersville Field, Coshocton County, Ohio, paper SPE 37335
presented at the 1996 SPE Eastern Regional Meeting held in Columbus, Ohio, 23-25 October 1996.
27. Wozinak, D.A., Wing, J.L., and Schrider, L.A.: Infill Reserve Growth Resulting From Gas Huff-n-Puff
and Infill Drilling A Case History, paper SPE 39214 presented at the 1997 SPE Eastern Regional
Meeting held in Lexington, Kentucky, 22-24 October 1997.
28. Vikane, E., Samsonsen, B., and Lorentzen, K.E., Through Tubing Infill Drilling as a Method for
Increased Oil Recovery on the Gullfaks Field, paper SPE 39358 presented at the 1998 IADC/SPE
Drilling Conference held in Dallas, Texas, 3-6 March 1998.
29. Allard, D.N., Hillyer, M.G., Gerbacia, W.E., and Rychener, L.M., Empirical Risk Assessment of Infill
Drilling Location, Barrow Island, Australia, paper SPE 56816 presented at the 1999 SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition held in Houston, Texas, 3-6 October 1999.
30. Thai, B.N., et al., Denver Unit Infill Drilling and Pattern Reconfiguration Program, paper SPE 59548
presented at the 2000 SPE Permian Basin Oil and Gas Recovery Conference held n Midland, Texas
21-23 March 2000.
31. Al-Hadrami, H.K., and Teufel, L.W., Influence of Permeability Anisotropy and Reservoir
Heterogeneity on Optimization of Infill Drilling in Naturally Fractured Tight-Gas Mesaverde Sandstone
Reservoirs, San Juan Basin, paper SPE 60295 presented at the 2000 SPE Rocky Mountain
Regional/Low Permeability Reservoirs Symposium in Denver, CO, 12-15 March 2000.
32. Tewari, R.D., Mittal, A.K., and Patra, S.K., An Overview of Re-Entry and Clamp-on Infill Drilling for
Incremental Recovery in Offshore Field, paper SPE 64438 presented at the SPE Asia Pacific Oil and
Gas Conference and Exhibition held in Brisbane, Australia, 16-18 October 2000.
33. Rusing, J.A., and Blasingame, T.A., Reservoir Characterization and Infill Drilling Study of a LowPermeability Carbonate: An Evaluation of Blanket Versus Targeted Infill Drilling Strategies, paper
SPE 84282 presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition held in Denver,
Colorado, 5-8 October 2003.
34. Mijnssen, F.C.J., et al., Maximizing Yibals Remaining Value, paper SPE 84939, SPE Reservoir
Evaluation & Engineering, August 2003.
35. Ghosh, B.N., Sarkar, S.D., Lohiya, J.P., and Das, T,K., Improved Oil Recovery by Infill Drilling in a
Mature Field, A Success Story, paper SPE 89368 presented that the 2004 SPE/DOC Fourteen
Symposium on Improved Oil Recovery held in Tulsa, Oklahoma, 16-21 April 2004.
36. Singhal, A.K., and Selwyn, J., Some Lessons on Application of Horizontal Wells from the Western
Canadian Experience, paper SPE 89372 presented at the 2004 SPE/DOC Fourteen Symposium on
Improved Oil Recovery held in Tulsa, Oklahoma, 16-21 April 2004.
37. French, R.L., Brimhall, R.M., and Wu, C.H., A Statistical and Economic Analysis of Incremental
Waterflood Infill Drilling Recoveries in West Texas Carbonate Reservoirs, paper SPE 22624
presented at the 1991 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, 6-9 October.
38. Wu, C.H., Lu, G.F., Gillespie, W., and Yen, J., Statistical and Fuzzy Infill Drilling Models for
Carbonate Reservoirs, paper SPE 37728 presented at the 1997 SPE Middle East Oil Show &
Conference, Bahrain, 15-18 March.
39. Soto, B.R., Wu, C.H, and Buleba, A.M., Infill Drilling Recovery Models for Carbonate Reservoirs A
Multiple Statistical, Non-Parametric Regression, and Neural Network Approach, paper SPE 57458
presented at the 1999 SPE Eastern Regional Conference and Exhibition, Charleston, West Virginia,
21-22 October.
40. McCain, W.D. Jr., Voneiff, G.W., Hunt, E.R., and Semmelbeck, M.E., A Tight Gas Field Study:
Carthage (Cotton Valley) Field, paper SPE 26141 presented at the 1993 SPE Gas Technology
Symposium, Calgary, 28-30 June.
41. Voneiff, G.W. and Cipolla, C., A New Approach to Large-Scale Infill Evaluations Applied to the
Ozona (Canyon) Gas Field, paper SPE 35203 presented at the 1996 SPE Permian Oil and Gas
Recovery Conference, Midland, Texas, 27-29 March.
42. Cipolla, C. L., and Wood, M.C., A Statistical Approach to Infill-Drilling Studies: Case History of the
Ozona Canyon Sands, SPE Reservoir Engineering, August 1996, p196-202.
43. Hudson, J.W., Jochen, J.E., and Jochen, V.A., Practical Technique to Identify Infill Potential in LowPermeability Gas Reservoirs Applied to the Milk River Formation in Canada, paper SPE 59779
presented at the 2000 SPE/CERI Gas Symposium, Calgary, 3-5 April.
44. Hudson, J.W., Jochen, J.E., and Spivey, J.P., Practical Methods to High-Grade Infill Opportunities
Applied to the Mesaverde, Morrow, and Cotton Valley Formations, paper SPE 68598 presented at the
2001 SPE Hydrocarbon Economics and Evaluation Symposium, Dallas, 2-3 April 2001.
45. Kyte, D.G. and Meehan, D.N., Horizontal Spacing, Depletion, and Infill Potential in the Austin Chalk,
paper SPE 36721 presented at the 1996 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Denver,
CO, October 6-9.
46. Guan, L., McVay, D. A., Jensen, J. L., and Voneiff, G. W., Evaluation of a Statistical Infill Candidate
Selection Technique, SPE paper 75718 presented at the 2002 SPE Gas Technology Symposium,
Galgary, Alberta, April 30-May 2.

Copyright World Petroleum Congress all rights reserved

Infill drilling-lessons learnt in the past 20 years

Block 1, Forum 5 paper
47. Guan, L., McVay, D. A., and Jensen, J. L., Parameter Sensitivity Study of a Statistical Technique for
Fast Infill Evaluation of Tight Gas Reservoirs, CIPC paper 2004-163 presented at 2004 Canadian
International Petroleum Conference, Calgary, June 8-10.
48. Guan, L., McVay, D. A., and Jensen, J. L. and Voneiff, G. W., Evaluation of a Statistical Method for
Assessing Production Potential in Mature, Low-Permeability Gas Reservoirs, Journal of Energy
Resources Technology, 126(3), 2004.
49. Gao, H., and McVay, D.A., Gas Infill Well Selection Using Rapid Inversion Methods, paper SPE
presented at the 2004 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition held in Houston, TX, 26-29
September.
50. Chu, L., Reynolds, A.C. and Oliver, D.S., Computation of Sensitivity Coefficients for Conditioning the
Permeability Field to Well-test Pressure data, In Situ (1995) 19, 179.
51. Tang, Y. N. and Chen, Y.M.., Generalized Pulse-Spectrum Technique for 2-D and 2-Phase History
Matching, Applied Numerical Mathematics (1989) Vol. 5, 529-539.

Copyright World Petroleum Congress all rights reserved