0 Suka0 Tidak suka

0 tayangan10 halamanErrors inherent in Directional Surveying with MWD tools.

Apr 01, 2019

© © All Rights Reserved

Errors inherent in Directional Surveying with MWD tools.

© All Rights Reserved

0 tayangan

Errors inherent in Directional Surveying with MWD tools.

© All Rights Reserved

- Neuromancer
- The E-Myth Revisited: Why Most Small Businesses Don't Work and
- How Not to Be Wrong: The Power of Mathematical Thinking
- Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us
- Chaos: Making a New Science
- The Joy of x: A Guided Tour of Math, from One to Infinity
- How to Read a Person Like a Book
- Moonwalking with Einstein: The Art and Science of Remembering Everything
- The Wright Brothers
- The Other Einstein: A Novel
- The 6th Extinction
- The Housekeeper and the Professor: A Novel
- The Power of Discipline: 7 Ways it Can Change Your Life
- The 10X Rule: The Only Difference Between Success and Failure
- A Short History of Nearly Everything
- The Kiss Quotient: A Novel
- The End of Average: How We Succeed in a World That Values Sameness
- Made to Stick: Why Some Ideas Survive and Others Die
- Algorithms to Live By: The Computer Science of Human Decisions
- The Universe in a Nutshell

Anda di halaman 1dari 10

Traditionally there is a cone of error associated with directional surveys taken whilst

drilling with any given survey tool to account for the inherent resolution within and

accuracy of the tool.

However, there are many other more significant errors that are recognized to exist by

certain sectors of the industry, but not generally accepted and accounted for in practice.

This article does not propose any one solution, or endorse any commercial product.

However, when anti-collision and accurate well bore placement in a reservoir is required,

then the errors discussed herein should be borne in mind. It is also hoped that this article

will promote discussion and raise awareness of some very real issues in well-bore survey

accuracy.

The main areas this article tries to evaluate are;

a) Real Hole Curvature.

b) Bent sub effect on Bent Housing motor BHAs

c) Stretch of Drill Pipe under its own weight.

d) Thermal Expansion.

e) Stretch of Drill Pipe due to hydraulics and buoyancy.

f) Axial misalignment of pipe in the well bore.

If a man was walking along and was sensory derived apart from knowing the inclination

of his foot (say every time 90 degrees), then he would have no clue if he was; Walking

along a flat surface, walking up stairs, or walking down stairs. (fig 1).

Fig 1.

The same can be said for directional surveying. It is highly erroneous to assume a

constant curve (as with the Minimum Curvature method), when the actual well path is

very seldom constant. Failing to describe the well path between surveys can lead to

potentially catastrophic errors.

Assume a Steerable motor is in the hole, and the following surveys are reported (fig 2);

Fig 2.

However if the motor BHA was dropping angle at a rate of 1 degree per 100ft and a slide

of 15ft per stand was being conducted to compensate for this, the real situation would be

as follows (Fig 3);

Fig 3.

This equates to an error of 0.7 ft per 93ft of drilled hole (a little over 7.5 ft per 1000ft).

The same situation occurs when drilling with the new generation of rotary Steerable

systems, typically the strength of deflection is changed at a depth between survey

stations, so again a compound curvature is produced between surveys.

So far there is no officially recognized solution to this problem; however one method I

would suggest is the use of a “virtual” or “synthetic” survey to give reality to the survey.

Even though there is no definite proof that the inserted survey is correct, it at least gives a

more accurate result than the current practice of just recording the actual survey points.

Another way of describing the well bore better would be with the use of dynamic or “on

the fly” surveys. Some types of MWD tools can produce an on-going survey whilst in

drill ahead mode. As this data is normally from a single axis sensor it is considered to be

not useful as a definitive survey, but is often used by Directional Drillers to spot trends

whilst drilling ahead, however, this data could be harnessed to describe the well bore and

tied onto the official surveys.

For simplicity here a simple build section is considered, however there will be similar

errors in Northings and Eastings when the well is changing azimuth, and/or the well path

calls for a compound change in inclination and azimuth.

If the well bore were to be modeled before drilling, using these “virtual” surveys, a more

accurate well path could be described to estimate hole tortuosity. Similar, a more accurate

picture could be built up using traditional Torque and Drag models to predict loads on

equipment and Drilling Mechanic scenarios.

When drilling with a Steerable Motor BHA, the MWD tool is not coincidental with the

axis of the hole due to the effect of the bent housing which tends to offset the tubulars

slightly.

This is recognized in low angle Kick-offs and compensated for by performing a “cluster

shot”. This is a series of four surveys taken at the same depth, but with the pipe turned

approx 90 degrees. By vector addition of the four surveys a bias can be calculated for any

particular Tool-face. By knowing the tool-face when the survey is taken, the resulting

survey can be corrected accordingly.

Example.

The four MWD surveys are taken;

1) 10000ft 56.5 Inc 123.0 Azi Tool Face 75 deg

2) 10000ft 56.4 Inc 124.6 Azi Tool Face 167 deg

3) 10000ft 55.8 Inc 126.1 Azi Tool Face 248 deg

4) 10000ft 55.7 Inc 125.3 Azi Tool Face 340 deg

Fig 4.

Mathematically this can be expressed as;

X1 = Inc1 x Sin Azi 1 (shot 1 above) Y1 = Inc 1 x Cos Azi 1 (shot 1 above)

X2 = Inc 2 x Sin Azi 2 (shot 2 above) Y2 = Inc 2 x Cos Azi 2 (shot 2 above)

X3 = Inc 3 x Sin Azi 3 (shot 3 above) Y3 = Inc 3 x Cos Azi 3 (shot 3 above)

X4 = Inc 4 x Sin Azi 4 (shot 4 above) Y4 = Inc 4 x Cos Azi 4 (shot 4 above)

(Also note that if y < 0, then add 180 to final azimuth. If X and Y are both zero, then the

well is vertical). The actual Tool face angles have no part of the final calculation, but

should be recorded to ensure the tool faces are spaced sufficiently to give a meaningful

spread in the recorded surveys.

In the example above the final compensated survey = 56.08 Inclination and 124.76

Azimuth. The difference to taking a survey at an arbitrary tool-face can be seen.

By taking a cluster shot for every 10 degrees of inclination a bias can be built into the

surveys to compensate for the axial misalignment from the steerable motor bent housing

assembly.

Some operators choose to “sag correct” the directional surveys. This practice is to

account for the misalignment of the MWD tool axis due to the placement of stabilizers

(fig 5).

In the sketch below, which is a sample Steerable Motor BHA, it can be seen that the

MWD tool would in fact “sag” in the direction of the arrow. This correction does not take

into account the effect of the angular position of the bent housing Tool-Face, and so only

gives a partial correction with regards to inclination measurement.

Fig 5.

A sting of drilling tubulars will stretch due to its own weight. Also, as long as the Elastic

Limit of the pipe is not exceeded, the Grade of pipe should have no effect on the strain

(stretch) for a given stress (weight applied). To calculate the total effect different sections

should be calculated and effects are cumulative.

Taking weight in AIR. (Buoyancy does not affect stretching due to weight, but for the

sake of this effect may be considered as giving a piston effect to the tubulars)

Length change = (length of pipe x average weight) / (Mod of elasticity x CSA of pipe)

CSA of pipe = (OD2 – ID2) 0.7854

Eg.

5000 ft of drill pipe, 19.5 lb/ft

Total weight = 5000 x 19.5 = 97500

Average weight = 97500/2 = 48750 lbs

CSA = (5x5 – 4.23x4.23)0.7854 = 5.58 sq.in

Length change = (5000 x 48750) / (30000000 x 5.58) = 1.45 ft.

However, if the drill pipe had 500 ft of HWDP and 100ft 8” DC; 8” DC – say 150 lb/ft.

Total weight = Pipe + HWDP + DC = 97500 + 25000 + 15000 = 137500Average weight

= (97500 + 40000) / 2 = 68750 lbs

Length change is now = (5000 x 68750) / (30000000 x 5.58) = 2.05 ft.

However, there is also piston effect. Pressure differential acts on cross sectional areas.

Can cause section under investigation to shorten or lengthen.

Length change due to piston effect = L x Force / (Mod of elasticity x CSA of pipe)

L = section length.

Force = differential force. = Force outside – Force inside.

Force inside = Inside area x hydrostatic, (lbs force)Force outside – Outside area x

hydrostatic, (lbs force)

D) Temperature Effects.

Since the well bore is always at a temperature above ambient, thermal expansion of the

pipe in the hole will take place.

From engineering tables the expansion of steel = Original Length x Expansion coefficient

x ∆T.

A typical expansion coefficient for steel is 13 x 10^-6.

By using the above equation, an average elongation would seem to be 0.86 inches per

100ft of pipe per 100 degree increase in temperature (F).

So the total expansion due to thermal effect will be;

Te = ((Pipe length, ft)/100) x ((Temperature change, F)/100 F) x 0.86.

If we enter the MWD temperature at survey depth as this will be in a circulating

condition we can assume temperature constant

We also need to know the ambient temperature – i.e. temp on deck when pipe is

measured.

According to the free-point when stuck formulae accepted by the industry;

1) Free point constant = Cross sectional area of pipe x 2500

And

2) Free point of pipe = (Stretch in inches x Free point constant) / Pull force.

In a drilling situation the pull force on the pipe can be equated to the buoyant weight of

the BHA (x Cos Inclination in a tangent section).

Transposing formula 2) for stretch gives

Stretch in inches = (Free point of pipe x Free point constant) / Pull force

Therefore in a drilling situation the stretch in the pipe equates to;

Stretch in inches = (Length of pipe from BHA to surface x Free point constant) / Buoyant

Weight of BHA).

a) Length of pipe to kick-off point

b) For the build section I estimate; Length of build section x cosine of tangent / 2

c) Length of pipe in tangent multiplied by cosine of tangent angle.

Therefore the correction to be made to survey depth = ((a+b+c) x Free point constant)) /

Buoyant weight of BHA

As Cross Sectional Area is know for both Drill Pipe and HWDP they can both be

modeled.

I assume that under the forces involved, and the smaller lengths the BHA component

stretch is negligible.

Notes.

The above ignores friction factors and unusual hole conditions.

Basic assumptions.

When taking a survey, the drill string is in tension and so the drill pipe is pulled against

the hole wall on build and drop off sections.

This will be on the high side of the hole in build sections, and on the low-side of the hole

in drop sections.

Across a theoretical tangent section, the pipe will either be pulled diagonally across the

hole, or lie flat along the bottom of the hole if there is no drop off section. (Fig 6)

Fig 6.

The Radius of curvature during build sections is: 180/ (Build Rate * Pi)

And the arc length of a circle is: (2*Pi*r)*Ǿ/360

(Where Ǿ is the angle subtended by the two defining radii, or in our case the difference

between the two inclinations).

Reasoning.

The length of the arc can be equated to the course length between surveys. By noting the

difference in inclination an initial theoretical radius of curvature can be calculated. By

then substituting the radius of curvature, less the hole radius a correction factor can be

derived that can be applied to the course length.

Fig 7.

The above tables illustrate my initial findings (fig 7). Going from 0 Inclination to 0.98

Inclination, this method estimates 0.15m in 157m of MD. (0.95m per 1000m of drilled

hole). This is taken in 17 ½” hole size.

Conclusion.

Though each of the above may seem small when taken individually, their cumulative

effect can be quite significant.

Service companies have invested lots of time, effort and financial resources in the

accuracy and precision of their MWD tools, but all this goes to waste when compared to

the possible gross errors in current running practices.

I am not aware of any company of commercial product that is handling these errors at

present, but would suggest there is a need to take these errors into account when drilling

in areas that have small tightly defined targets.

As a proof I suggest that operators consider “retro-correcting” surveys in areas where the

geology has been a surprise. The only factor that cannot be calculated after the drilling

phase is the Bent sub effect, as that needs to be done in “real time” whilst drilling the

well.

Perhaps it was not the formation that moved after all, but errors in the surveying practice.

Relief Well Drilling.

One of the most exacting applications in Directional Drilling is that of relief well drilling.

I have personally been involved with 2 successful relief well operations in recent years,

both of which involved the use of Magnetic Ranging tools.

However, if the above corrections we were conducted in tandem with the ranging tools on

these wells, I feel time and, of course, money could have been saved in achieving the

intersection.

Running logging tools on wire line creates yet another unknown in the true depth

measurement. It is well known that at the end of logging runs there are both the “loggers’

depths” and the “drillers’ depths”. When the tool is a magnetic ranging tool, then the

confusion further clouds the accuracy.

On a wire line logging run in Indonesia a little over 2 years ago, by applying the

calculations stated above to the drilling BHA, and the correction stated in (f) “axial

misalignment in the well bore” to the wire line depth data, the difference between the 2

depths was reduced from a little over 36ft to just under 3ft (total depth of well 13900ft).

This represents a reduction from 0.26% to 0.02%.

The one wild card in the depth corrections for wire line is to depth correct for cable

stretch, as data on the cable is not readily available. If any company can provide data on

this topic, I would be very grateful.

By analyzing the target well data in terms of surveys, BHA components, MWD logs

(temperature etc), a more accurate file can be generated on the final spatial position of the

well bore where intersection is required to take place. By then applying the same logic

and analysis models to the object (relief) well the well bore can be positioned closer to

the target well before the expensive ranging tools are deployed.

There will always be the cone of error around any definitive well position, but with the

application of the above corrections, this position can be identified and correctly focused

on for the purposes of the relief well operation. The use of mathematical models will

never (and should never, due to the number of variables involved), replace the tools in the

field; however by the use of these models and balancing them with good sense and

judgment, a great deal of time will be saved to accomplish the goal of a successful

intersection.

About the author.

Chris Henderson is the Directional Drilling Coordinator for Weatherford Drilling

Services in Beijing, China. He has 39 years experience in the oil industry, of which 26

years have been directly involved with Directional Drilling and has worked for both

operator (Dutch Shell) and various service companies. He has Shell Round One and

Round Two drilling certificates and holds a Bsc in Mechanical Engineering from Salford

University, England.

- Berkeley CatamaranDiunggah olehHabib Mukmin
- Basic Drilling Technology course summary.docxDiunggah olehCookie Brown Brown
- Problems for allowances in castingDiunggah olehMohit Passi
- floating and sinking pt 2Diunggah olehapi-266331282
- Land SurveyingDiunggah olehAbdissa Bekele
- 4851.32.493NR_2012-04Diunggah olehmicktunx
- E301Diunggah olehJohn
- 201301 Jpt Casing DrillingDiunggah olehMoh Mohamed
- Mdt pointsDiunggah olehanselmo_es
- Tutorial - Soil Overburden and Seismic Wave Propagation in AutoPIPEDiunggah olehJennifer Green
- PCC Inlay OverlayDesignSprdshtDiunggah olehJaime Figueroa
- 1020Diunggah olehvengurion
- Buoyant ForceDiunggah olehnorr_20
- Ada 400235_hssjskDiunggah olehAndrianaFatmaditya
- AN763 RS485 Wiring GuidelinesDiunggah olehcassiomec
- Defining Directional DrillingDiunggah olehEduardo Ustarez
- thorogood1991.pdfDiunggah olehAmirhossein
- 08-083-01_Final_Report_Rev00_with_attachments.pdfDiunggah olehhenryjjc
- aplicaciones flotacionDiunggah olehFidel Gomez
- TDFv511 Help EnglishDiunggah olehFlorică Alex
- CE 343-Lab-Summer-2012 From Dr Khaled GuzlanDiunggah olehfaris
- done-sitesafetymachineryDiunggah olehapi-302933102
- TLsystem Eng GerDiunggah olehHaytham Ammer Mushtaha
- PS Reference HandbookDiunggah olehThomas English
- 03 Survey Proposal TemplateDiunggah olehJohnRichieLTan
- 06_Drilling_Structures.pdfDiunggah olehandrew
- Definition of SurveyingDiunggah olehSagar Sharma
- S.U.G 1Diunggah olehdakuru4life
- GeoXT SW SetupDiunggah oleharchaeofreak
- 330254473 MRT Works General Specification Halaman 14 53Diunggah olehSiti Ratna Wulan

- Oil Recovery by Internal Gas DriveDiunggah olehDhiaa LaMi
- A Tutorial on Initialising an Eclipse reservoir ModelDiunggah olehDhiaa LaMi
- VLP.pdfDiunggah olehDhiaa LaMi
- Prevention Casing FailuresDiunggah olehDhiaa LaMi
- Capillary Pressure and Rock Wettability Effects on Wireline Formation Tester Measurements.pdfDiunggah olehreborn2
- Week5Diunggah olehJitendra Vaish
- 5 Workshop - Leeth - Cement-bond LogsDiunggah olehElok Galih Karuniawati
- Casing DesignDiunggah olehDhiaa LaMi
- Picket Plot, BU52Diunggah olehDhiaa LaMi
- lithology identification by IPDiunggah olehDhiaa LaMi
- QA-RD7AE-V8 English API Formula SheetDiunggah olehYogesh Gavali
- api_purchasing_guide_2015-08-29.pdfDiunggah olehQaiser Hafeez
- Fudmentals of petroleum engineeringDiunggah olehDhiaa LaMi
- PvtiDiunggah olehDhiaa LaMi
- The Use of the Modular Dynamic Tool in Petrophysical Parameters EvaluationDiunggah olehYash Gurjar
- Cased hole modullar dynamic testerDiunggah olehDhiaa LaMi
- Naturally Fracture Reservoir-well Testing InterpretationsDiunggah olehDhiaa LaMi
- Well Test AnswersDiunggah olehDhiaa LaMi
- IPR VLPDiunggah olehDhiaa LaMi
- saddle point and inflectionDiunggah olehDhiaa LaMi
- FULLTEXT01.pdfDiunggah olehAlexandru Croitoru
- 331129057-Review-of-Reservoir-Rock-Properties (1).pdfDiunggah olehserept
- Geo MechanicsDiunggah olehDhiaa LaMi
- Saturation-Exponent-in-IRAQi-Reservoirs-Baku-2015-_-SPE-177331-_-En.pdfDiunggah olehDhiaa LaMi
- Wettability and Capillary PressureDiunggah olehNikhil Shahane
- english grammarDiunggah olehDhiaa LaMi
- _Week7.pdfDiunggah olehDhiaa LaMi

- rr10802-strength-of-materialsDiunggah olehSRINIVASA RAO GANTA
- Using Ultraviolet Radiation for the Bleaching and Pilling Reduction of Knitted Cotton FabricDiunggah olehAmin Rezaei Do
- BookofGreeksEdition1.58Diunggah olehVirginie Belle
- Horton Calculations CH5Diunggah olehdstar13
- Bearing Reference Guide NSK 2016Diunggah olehLeroy
- List of Projects Floated for December 2017 IntakeDiunggah olehSudeep Upadhye
- RamsarDiunggah olehamir
- Concrete Cracking CheckDiunggah olehaleem_mohammed
- Einstein Questions, Buddha Answers Chapter OneDiunggah olehwmonsuksa
- Exam 2alt, F-13Diunggah olehSusan Chen
- Annals of Physics Volume 161 Issue 1 1985 [Doi 10.1016_0003-4916(85)90337-9] G Schäfer -- The Gravitational Quadrupole Radiation-reaction Force and the Canonical Formalism of ADMDiunggah olehArmando Garza
- 80-g580-502Diunggah olehReshma Chaturvedi
- Application of Impact Analysis for Aluminum Wheel With Inflated Tire - [S. Ishikawa, Y. Sakai, N. Nosaka]Diunggah olehpezz07
- jto-2005Diunggah olehNehal Gupta
- Java TutDiunggah olehSasa Leung
- nucleophilic substitution reactions (SN1 , SN2) AND elimination reactions (E1 , E2)Diunggah olehMakhdoom Jahania
- Chemistry Specification Copy-2Diunggah olehNaim Mokhtar
- riemann sum paperDiunggah olehapi-280634280
- 0051-0052 [31] Volumetric ApparatusDiunggah olehNattawat Teerawattanapong
- Armour and Its Attack by Artillery - Browne (1887)Diunggah olehmigss1074
- Magnetic Components Used in Train Pantograph to Reduce ArcingDiunggah olehSaurabh Mishra
- jeopardy game and probablity finalversionDiunggah olehapi-303801197
- Boiler Drum Level Control pid control.docxDiunggah olehrajishrrr
- Structures Technology for Future Aerospace Systems 2000 Computers StructuresDiunggah olehYsharath Chandramouli
- mcl341-27Diunggah olehVignesh Karthikeyan
- Hand_held_HPGe_NitroSpec.docDiunggah olehrsankar862
- Buildings Heat Moisture TransportDiunggah olehchemsac2
- Foam for TunnelingDiunggah olehgifanta
- 30mmDiunggah olehKang-Hyun Lee
- 2nd & Higher-Order2Diunggah olehB Naresh Kumar Reddy

## Lebih dari sekadar dokumen.

Temukan segala yang ditawarkan Scribd, termasuk buku dan buku audio dari penerbit-penerbit terkemuka.

Batalkan kapan saja.