UNCONVENTIONAL DRILLING
Top: Speaking at the 2022 IADC/SPE
International Drilling Conference in
Galveston, Texas, in March, Chesapeake
Energy’s Joe Kiefner (left) and Riley
Schultz discussed the company’s
experience drilling its fi rst horseshoe-
shaped well in South Texas.

Bottom: The successful U-turn well in
the Eagle Ford resulted in 9,200 ft of
treatable lateral in a lease space that
was only 5,000 ft wide.

Le as
Co m
ine ple
5,000 ft lease space
tio 4,3
00 ns
Ha ft t
ing Pro
ft t
re at
lin at
du Executing completions
rd re
E x
ist 4,9
00 9,200 ft treatable lateral
e L
ab le
ce ab
le r
lat e
lat er
a l
er “Casing went down just like we expect-
ed, within 10% of the expectations, as far
as final hookloads go. It was a relatively
smooth operation from the drilling side
and went according to our pre-planning
expectations.” As the team monitored drilling prog-
ress, they paid close attention to the tor-
tuosity plots – wary of the potential for
excessive doglegs – and made changes as
needed to meet their motor yield expecta-
tions in the turn. From an initial 7-in., 1.93°
bent housing mud motor, they followed up
with a 2.12° bent motor to help build the
curve. After drilling 1,000 ft of the turn,
26 ity even while drilling in the azimuth of
maximum horizontal stress.

“After we had raised the mud weight
there, for the rest of the well we saw no
more signs of hole instability,” Mr Schultz
said, calling this mud weight lesson a big
takeaway from the project and something
that Chesapeake has since applied to its
work on other U-turn wells.

al the rotation required to stay on plan was
deemed too high, and they switched to a
1.83° motor for the rest of the well, meet-
ing their pre-drill expectations for rate of
penetration, required weight on bit, and
pressures. The team also decided to adjust the mud
weight after seeing indications of hole
instability while making the turn, particu-
larly when they got almost exactly parallel
with the maximum horizontal stress. They
raised the mud weight from 10 ppg to 11.3
ppg based on an area-specific, real-time
mechanical earth model that showed the
higher weight would maintain hole stabil-
On the completions side, making sure
that the wireline and coil tubing was able
to convey around the turn was the team’s
main concern. Mr Kiefner noted they had
run more than 25 wireline simulations and
used several software systems to make sure
everything checked out for factors such as
toolstring weight and length, run-in-hole
and pull-out-of-hole speeds, and friction or
stretch coefficients. The subsequent com-
pletions activities went so smoothly that it
even felt a little anticlimactic, he said.

“From an execution standpoint, wire-
line and coil tubing, there were no issues
whatsoever. Anecdotally, the company (on
location) said that had we not told them
there was a downhole turn, they wouldn’t
have known it was any different – it went
that smoothly.”
The team also monitored the adjacent
legacy producer throughout the project to
ensure there was no adverse impact. “We
didn’t see anything that caused us any
level of concern from a fracking stand-
point, but it’s because we planned for that
and we spaced off of it accordingly,” Mr
Kiefner said. DC
For more information, see IADC/SPE 208801,
“Successful Planning And Implementation Of
First South Texas U-Turn Lateral.”
M AY/J U N E 202 2 • D R I L L I N G C O N T R AC T O R