SearchDrilling, Wells & Decommissioning

Offset Well Analysis

Offset well analysis that reads the daily reports of every well in range, ranks them by the rock they drilled as well as distance, and cites the page behind each hazard.

See the demo Book a demo

See the far well found and the mud plan signed ↓

The problem

The offset that mattered was thirty wells down the distance list

Before a program review, the drilling engineer reads the dozen nearest wells and writes the offset section from them. That is all the time allows. A well that drilled the same sand on the same side of the fault can sit far down the list, unread.

Its trouble may never have reached the well database either. Older reports were loaded from typed summaries, so a kick written by hand in the margin of a scanned page is invisible to any search, and a well with half its reports missing reads as clean.

Built forDrilling engineersSenior drilling engineersGeomechanics specialistsWells data analystsAssurance reviewers

The Problem Today

Engineers pick offsets by distance, because no one has time to read what the far wells wrote down.

71%: of 121 well control incidents tied to pressure prediction published
957: hours to read the sample's daily reports, at two minutes each our estimate

Read page by page today

Reports
Mud logs
Scans
Notes

Notes in the marginHandwriting never reached the well database
Forty years of formsEach decade and holder wrote it differently

The Solution

Read each wellScans, typed forms, handwriting and database exports, page by page
Turn the lensRank by rock as well as distance: sand, fault side, hole size, depth
Hazards by hole sectionEach hazard tied to its passage, with a depth and a hole section
Into the plan, signedEngineer proposes, specialist rules on pressure, senior engineer signs

Built-in controls

Agents never set a mud weight
A proposer cannot check the same item
A thin record never counts as clean

What You Get

Engineers plan from what each well recorded, and the program shows who agreed to each change.

$2.16M: six days lost to the old kick, at a sample $360,000 rig day our estimate

The well you would not pickA far well in the same sand, found and cited
Too thin to tellWells with missing reports kept apart from clean ones
A signed offset summaryEach line cites its page, ready for the program

One program review, from lens to signature

Offset well analysis for 14-153: the kick nobody keyed in

A new well targets the N-2 Sand east of a fault. The draft program uses the 12 nearest offsets and carries 11.0 ppg in the 8-1/2 in hole.

demoThe field, the wells, the people and all of the numbers are sample data.

01Review prep
64 of 64 wells read, and the five nearest look clean at the N-2
Drilling engineer
The planned well sits at the center of a map with every well within the radius as a dot. Ranked by distance, the nearest show no trouble at the N-2. One of them, 14-006, looks clean only because its last 55 days of reports are missing, and the screen calls it too thin to tell instead.
02Review prep
Turned to same rock, a well 31st by distance comes first
Drilling engineer
Moving the lens from nearest to same rock re-ranks the wells on sand, fault side, hole size and depth. 14-031, 5.6 miles away across the fault on the east side, comes to the top with a kick in the N-2. The draft program did not include it.
03Review prep
A kick at 11,420 ft, written by hand in the margin of report 38
Drilling engineer
On the typed line: drilling ahead, circulating and weighting up. In the margin, by hand, the rest: a kick in the N-2 sand, 14 bbl pit gain, shut in, SIDPP 360, SICP 590, mud 11.2, raised to 11.9. No event for it exists in the well database. Beside the page, a sum shows the draft mud about 502 psi under it, if that sand pressure carries to the new well.
04Pressure ruling
East of the fault, three wells read near 7,000 psi across seven years
Geomechanics specialist
The engineer takes the kick into the plan, where it waits for a pressure ruling. The specialist opens the cited page, then the N-2 pressure across 23 wells. West of the fault the sand has drawn down with production; east of it, the readings sit flat. The draft used the west.
05Pressure ruling
She enters her own forecast: 11.9 ppg at the top plus 0.3 margin
Geomechanics specialist
The ruling is hers, typed in her own figures with a reason, not a preset. The 8-1/2 in mud plan now reads 11.0 to 12.2 ppg, waiting for the senior engineer to sign. Agents gathered the points and did the arithmetic; none of them set a weight.
06Sign-off
He opens the page himself before the sign button will work
Senior drilling engineer
Each hazard needs one person to propose it, the specialist on pressure, and the senior engineer to open its pages and sign. He cannot check his own work. Routine hazards wait in a lot that he can sign only after opening a sample, while well control items go one by one.
07Sign-off
The offset summary is built only from what people signed
Senior drilling engineer
The summary lists the offset list, with thin wells named as thin, and each hole section's hazards. Unsigned hazards say so and stay out of the file. Gates show what still blocks issue. The largest change sits on its own line: the mud plan moving from 11.0 to 12.2 ppg, with who ruled and who checked.
08Afterwards
Who proposed, who ruled and who signed, in order
Assurance reviewer
The trail runs from the agents' reading through the analyst's reading of the handwritten note and the engineer's check of it, the engineer's proposal, the specialist's ruling with its reason, to the signature. Nothing can be edited. An assurance reviewer can read and export it but act on nothing.

Mud weights used through the N-2, east wells first

Each row is read from the well's own reports and cited to a page.

Well	Pressure in the sand	Equal to	Mud used
14-031	7,002 psi	11.8 ppg	12.1 ppg
14-036	7,004 psi	11.7 ppg	12.1 ppg
17-104	7,010 psi	11.7 ppg	12.0 ppg
14-014	5,996 psi	10.2 ppg	10.7 ppg
14-022	5,836 psi	9.9 ppg	10.3 ppg

demoSample data, from the working solution. The three east wells sit near 7,000 psi; the nearest wells on the west side read far lower.

Around the review

Offset well data behind the summary, from hazards to thin files

What the engineer, the analyst and the senior engineer open while the program is in review.

Planned wellbore with hazards by hole section, each linked to the offset passage it came from — **Hazards by hole section**18 hazards for the planned well, drawn from 267 trouble passages in 64 wells, each at its depth in the planned wellbore and tied to its page.

One offset well: depth against days with trouble marks, its rock score, mud weights by hole section and reports found — **One offset well**Depth against days with each trouble report marked, why the well ranks high on rock, mud by section, and reports found against expected.

Wells too thin to tell, with what survived of their reports and whether the records desk has been asked — **Too thin to tell**Nine wells kept under 40% of the reports they should hold. No trouble on those pages proves nothing, so they do not count as clean.

Reading desk of hard-to-read report values, each with two possible readings and a confidence, waiting for an analyst — **The reading desk**Pages the agents could not read with confidence, each with the two readings it weighed. A person reads them, and a second person checks.

The agents' run over 64 offset wells, step by step, with the kinds of report read and what each agent handed on — **How the wells were read**The run, agent by agent: wells found, 28,700 reports read, pages sent to the analyst, trouble found by depth and section, scores and hazards drafted.

Offset review settings: search radius, thin-record floor, rock score weights, reading confidence, retention and roles — **Settings**Search radius, the too-thin floor, the weight on same sand and the reading confidence floor. A change takes effect once a second person signs it.

demoSample data, from the working solution.

Three people stand behind a change to the mud plan

Each one reads the cited page first. The person who proposes never checks.

Drilling engineer

Sees: The lens, the ranked wells and each passage
Signs: Proposes offsets and hazards for the plan

Geomechanics specialist

Sees: Sand pressure by year and the mud weights used
Signs: Rules on every pressure finding, with her own forecast and margin

Senior drilling engineer

Sees: Each hazard's pages, opened before signing
Signs: Signs hazards and lots, settles disagreements, issues the summary

Wells data analyst

Sees: Hard-to-read pages and wells with missing reports
Signs: Confirms readings, with a second person checking

What the agents leave to engineers on a well plan

They read, rank and cite. These calls stay with people.

No mud weight from an agentThe section writer never writes a weight, a casing depth or a well control step into the plan.

Shared pressure is a ruling, not a readingTwo wells in the same sand are scored alike; whether one's pressure carries to the other is the specialist's call.

Silence is not safetyA well whose reports are mostly missing is marked too thin to tell, and a thin well on the list blocks the summary.

The planned well's mud is not a chat answerQuestions about its mud, pressure or hole are routed to the senior engineer by name, with no figures.

Forty years of offset well data, read the way it was written

Read only. A value counts when its page has been opened and confirmed.

Daily drilling reportsTyped, scanned and handwritten, from each holder and decade

Rig tour sheets and mud reportsThe hour-by-hour detail and the weights actually used

Mud logging and directional reportsShows, gas and where the hole really went

The well databaseLocations, depths and the events that were keyed in

Pressure testsFormation tests read against the sand and the fault side

What drilling engineers ask about offset well analysis

What is offset well analysis?

Offset well analysis studies wells already drilled near a planned well to find the trouble it may meet. This offset well analysis reads every daily report from every well in range, ranks the wells by the rock they drilled as well as by distance, and ties each hazard to its source page.

How is offset well selection different here?

Distance is one input. The lens also scores sand, side of the fault, hole size and depth, so a far well that drilled the same section can outrank a near one that did not. The engineer still picks the list.

Can it read handwritten and scanned reports?

Yes, page by page. Values it is unsure of go to the reading desk with both possible readings, where an analyst confirms them and a second person checks. A page with an unconfirmed reading blocks the hazard that cites it.

Who decides the pore pressure and the mud weight?

People. The specialist rules on each pressure finding with her own forecast and margin, and the senior drilling engineer signs. Agents gather the points and show the arithmetic.

What happens to wells with missing reports?

They are counted against what they should hold and marked too thin to tell when too little survives. They are not counted as clean, and a thin well on the offset list blocks the summary until someone rules on it.

Does the offset well review replace the well program?

No. It produces a signed offset summary that goes into the next revision of the program when the senior engineer issues it.

Drilling, Wells & Decommissioning

Name a well you are planning
and its radius.

We will read every well in range, rank them by the rock they drilled, and show you the pages.

Book a demo Browse solutions

Offset Well Analysis

The offset that mattered was thirty wells down the distance list

The Problem Today

The Solution

What You Get

Offset well analysis for 14-153: the kick nobody keyed in

64 of 64 wells read, and the five nearest look clean at the N-2

Turned to same rock, a well 31st by distance comes first

A kick at 11,420 ft, written by hand in the margin of report 38

East of the fault, three wells read near 7,000 psi across seven years

She enters her own forecast: 11.9 ppg at the top plus 0.3 margin

He opens the page himself before the sign button will work

The offset summary is built only from what people signed

Who proposed, who ruled and who signed, in order