None.
Disclosed embodiments relate generally to methods for maintaining directional control during downhole directional drilling operations and more particularly to method for closed loop control of a drilling curvature while drilling.
The use of automated drilling methods is becoming increasingly common in drilling subterranean wellbores. Such methods may be employed, for example, to control the direction of drilling based on various downhole feedback measurements, such as inclination and azimuth measurements made while drilling or logging while drilling measurements.
One difficulty with automated drilling methods (and directional drilling methods in general) is that all directional drilling tools exhibit tendencies to drill (or turn) in a direction offset from the set point direction. For example, when set to drill a horizontal well straight ahead, certain drilling tools may have a tendency to drop inclination (turn downward) and/or to turn to the left or right. Exacerbating this difficulty, these tendencies can be influenced by numerous factors and may change unexpectedly during a drilling operation. Factors influencing the directional tendency may include, for example, properties of the subterranean formation, the configuration of the bottom hole assembly (BHA), bit wear, bit/stabilizer walk, an unplanned touch point (e.g. due to compression and buckling of the BHA), stabilizer-formation interaction, the steering mechanism utilized by the steering tool, and various drilling parameters.
In current drilling operations, a drilling operator generally corrects the directional tendencies by evaluating wellbore survey data transmitted to the surface. A surface computation of the dogleg severity (DLS) and gravity toolface of the well is generally performed at 30 to 100 foot intervals (e.g., at the static survey stations). While such techniques are serviceable, there is a need for further improvement, particularly for automatically accommodating (or correcting) such tendencies downhole while drilling; thus controlling the dogleg severity and toolface in a closed-loop manner.
A downhole closed loop method for controlling a curvature of a subterranean wellbore while drilling is disclosed. The method includes drilling the subterranean wellbore using a drilling tool. A set point curvature is received at a downhole controller. Sequential attitude measurements made at a single axial location on the drilling tool and a rate of penetration of drilling are processed to compute a curvature of the wellbore being drilled. The drilling direction is adjusted such that the computed curvature is substantially equal to the set point curvature.
The disclosed embodiments may provide various technical advantages. For example, the disclosed embodiments provide for real-time closed loop control of the dogleg severity and drilling toolface. As such, the disclosed methods may provide for improved well placement and reduced wellbore tortuosity. Moreover, by providing for closed loop control, the disclosed methods tend to improve drilling efficiency and consistency.
This summary is provided to introduce a selection of concepts that are further described below in the detailed description. This summary is not intended to identify key or essential features of the claimed subject matter, nor is it intended to be used as an aid in limiting the scope of the claimed subject matter.
For a more complete understanding of the disclosed subject matter, and advantages thereof, reference is now made to the following descriptions taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, in which:
It will be understood that the BHA may include substantially any suitable steering tool 60, for example, including a rotary steerable tool. Various rotary steerable tool configurations are known in the art including various steering mechanisms for controlling the direction of drilling. For example, the PathMaker® rotary steerable system (available from PathFinder® a Schlumberger Company), the AutoTrak® rotary steerable system (available from Baker Hughes), and the GeoPilot® rotary steerable system (available from Sperry Drilling Services) include a substantially non-rotating outer housing employing blades that engage the borehole wall. Engagement of the blades with the borehole wall is intended to eccenter the tool body, thereby pointing or pushing the drill bit in a desired direction while drilling. A rotating shaft deployed in the outer housing transfers rotary power and axial weight-on-bit to the drill bit during drilling. Accelerometer and magnetometer sets may be deployed in the outer housing and therefore are non-rotating or rotate slowly with respect to the borehole wall.
The PowerDrive® rotary steerable systems (available from Schlumberger) fully rotate with the drill string (i.e., the outer housing rotates with the drill string). The PowerDrive Xceed® makes use of an internal steering mechanism that does not require contact with the borehole wall and enables the tool body to fully rotate with the drill string. The PowerDrive® X5, X6, and Orbit rotary steerable systems make use of mud actuated blades (or pads) that contact the borehole wall. The extension of the blades (or pads) is rapidly and continually adjusted as the system rotates in the borehole. The PowerDrive Archer® makes use of a lower steering section joined at an articulated swivel with an upper section. The swivel is actively tilted via pistons so as to change the angle of the lower section with respect to the upper section and maintain a desired drilling direction as the bottom hole assembly rotates in the borehole. Accelerometer and magnetometer sets may rotate with the drill string or may alternatively be deployed in an internal roll-stabilized housing such that they remain substantially stationary (in a bias phase) or rotate slowly with respect to the borehole (in a neutral phase). To drill a desired curvature, the bias phase and neutral phase are alternated during drilling at a predetermined ratio (referred to as the steering ratio). Again, the disclosed embodiments are not limited to use with any particular steering tool configuration.
The downhole sensors 70 may include substantially any suitable sensor arrangement used making downhole navigation measurements (borehole inclination, borehole azimuth, and/or tool face measurements). Such sensors may include, for example, accelerometers, magnetometers, gyroscopes, and the like. Such sensor arrangements are well known in the art and are therefore not described in further detail. The disclosed embodiments are not limited to the use of any particular sensor embodiments or configurations. Methods for making real-time while drilling measurements of the borehole inclination and borehole azimuth are disclosed, for example, in commonly assigned U.S. Patent Publications 2013/0151157 and 2013/0151158. In the depicted embodiment, the sensors 70 are shown to be deployed in the steering tool 60. Such a depiction is merely for convenience as the sensors 70 may be deployed elsewhere in the BHA.
It will be understood by those of ordinary skill in the art that the deployment illustrated on
It will be understood that the disclosed embodiments are not limited to the above described conventions for defining borehole coordinates depicted in
Disclosed embodiments provide a closed-loop method for controlling the drilling curvature of a subterranean wellbore. It will be understood by those of ordinary skill in the art that the curvature of a wellbore is commonly defined in one of two ways (although numerous others are possible). First, the curvature may be quantified by specifying the build rate and the turn rate of the borehole. The ‘build rate’ refers to the change in inclination of the wellbore (and thus refers to a vertical component of the curvature). The ‘turn rate’ refers to the change in azimuth of the wellbore (and thus refers to a horizontal component of the curvature). The curvature of a wellbore is also commonly quantified by specifying the dogleg severity and the toolface of the wellbore (i.e., the magnitude and direction of the curvature). As used herein ‘dogleg severity’ refers to the magnitude of the curvature (e.g., in units of degrees per hundred feet of measured depth) and may be thought of as being related to the radius of curvature. The ‘toolface’ refers to the angular direction to which the wellbore is turning (e.g., relative to the high side when looking down the wellbore). For example, a toolface of 0 degrees indicates a borehole that is turning upwards (i.e., building inclination), while a tool face of 90 degrees indicates a borehole that is turning to the right. A tool face of 45 degrees indicates a borehole that is turning upwards and to the right (i.e., simultaneously building and turning to the right).
Method 100′ (
where Inc2 and Azi2 represent the most current inclination and azimuth measurements and Inc1 and Azi1 represent previously measured inclination and azimuth values (e.g., at a location 5 or 10 feet above Inc2 and Azi2). The toolface error TFerror is processed using the PI controller 126 to obtain a change in toolface TFdelta which is summed with the most recent toolface command value TFcommand(k−1) at 128 to obtain an updated toolface command value TFcommand(k).
In
It will be understood that DLSwell represents a change in angular direction in units of degrees. The computed value may be converted to the conventional units of degrees per unit measured depth, for example, degrees per 100 feet of measured depth by multiplying DLSwell by 100/(ROP·Δt) where ROP represents the measured rate of penetration of drilling and Δt represents the time interval between measuring Inc1, Azi1 and Inc2, Azi2.
The dogleg severity error DLSerror may then be scaled, for example at 135, via dividing by a maximum achievable dogleg severity DLSmax (e.g., the maximum dogleg severity that the drilling tool can achieve). This ratio (the scaled dogleg severity error) may be processed using the PI controller 136 to obtain a change in steering ratio SRdelta which may be summed at 138 with the most recent steering ratio command value SRcommand(k−1) to obtain an updated steering ratio command SRcommand(k). It will be understood that the PI controllers 120 and 130 may be iterated each time new inclination and azimuth values are measured and used to compute TFwell and DLSwell. They may also be iterated when new command toolface and dogleg severity values are received downhole.
While not depicted it will be understood that controllers comparable to those depicted on
where, as defined above, ROP represents the measured rate of penetration of drilling and Δt represents the time interval between measuring Inc1, Azi1 and Inc2, Azi2.
The demand tool face and dogleg severity and the measured dogleg severity and toolface may also be compared at 116, for example, using a parametric model that equates the measured curvature with a demand (or set point) curvature of the drilling tool and a deviation. For example, multiple build rate and turn rate measurements may be acquired (e.g., as described above with respect to elements 110, 112, and 114 of
Substantially any suitable parametric model may be utilized. For example, a suitable four-parameter parametric model may be given as follows:
BR=C11[SR·DLSmax·cos(TF)]+DR
TR=C22[SR·DLSmax·sin(TF)]+WR (7)
where BR and TR represent the build and turn rate components of the measured curvature (e.g., as defined above in Equations 5 and 6), SR represents the steering ratio of the drilling tool, DLSmax represents the maximum achievable dogleg severity of the drilling tool, TF represents the toolface, DR and WR represent the drop and turn rates of the drilling tool (i.e., the deviations from the setpoint curvature), and C11 and C22 represent model parameters.
One example of a suitable six-parameter parametric model may be given as follows:
where C11, C12, C21, and C22 represent model parameters.
The attitude controller 212 in the first inner loop 210 may include substantially any suitable controller configured to automatically control the trajectory of drilling. One suitable example is disclosed in U.S. Patent Publication 2013/0126239 which is incorporated by reference herein in its entirety. Sugiura and Jones describe another attitude example of an attitude controller in Sugiura and Jones, “Automated Steering and Real-Time Drilling Process Monitoring Optimizes Rotary Steerable Underreamer Technology”, IADC World Drilling, June 2008. In alternative embodiments, the attitude controller may include other control schemes including, for example, adaptive control, model predictive control, linear-quadratic-Gaussian control, and the like. These controllers may be continuous or discrete as well as linear or non-linear.
The curvature controller 222 may be configured to increment the demand inclination and azimuth 224 at some predetermined time interval (e.g., once per minute). For example, the inclination and azimuth increments may be computed as follows:
ΔInc=G·DBR·ROP/N (9)
ΔAzi=G·DTR·ROP/N (10)
where ΔInc and ΔAzi represent the inclination and azimuth increments, DBR and DTR represent the demand build rate and demand turn rate (which together represent the demand curvature), ROP represents the measured rate of penetration (e.g., in units of feet per hour), N represents an interval (e.g., the number of increments per hour such as N=60 for increments every minute), and G represents a gain factor. The gain factor may be computed from the measured curvature, for example, as depicted at 230 on
As described above with respect to
The borehole curvature (the dogleg severity and toolface or the build rate and turn rate) may also be computed from navigation sensor measurements made at first and second axially spaced navigation sensors. Such methods are disclosed for example in U.S. Pat. No. 7,243,719 which is fully incorporated by reference herein. While such measurements may be suitable they require precise calibration of the first and second navigation sensors. It may therefore be advantageous to compute the wellbore curvature using a single navigation sensor as described above.
The rate of penetration may also be measured using continuous measurements from a single navigation sensor (at a single axial location in the bottom hole assembly), for example, using an expected open loop steering response (e.g., an expected open loop dogleg severity). For example, the rate of penetration may be computed as follows: ROP=β/(Δt·DLS) where β represents a wellbore angle change between first and second survey stations, DLS represents the open loop steering response, and Δt represents the time interval between measuring Inc1, Azi1 and Inc2, Azi2 as described above. The wellbore angle change may be computed, for example, as described in commonly assigned PCT Patent Application WO 2014/160567, which is fully incorporated by reference herein.
It will be understood that the toolface control and ROP estimation obtained from a single navigation sensor may be calibrated against the two-sensor measurements described above. Such calibration may prove advantageous as the two sensor measurements may in some instances have increased accuracy but at the expense of a slower response time. For example, the two-sensor response may be on the order of 50 feet of measured depth while drilling while the one sensor response is on the order of 5 feet of measured depth. ROP information (drilling speed) may be integrated in the downhole tool to compute the distance between two sensor (inclination and azimuth) measurement points.
During the course of a drilling operation, measured depth errors may accumulate (e.g., due to small errors in the computed rate of penetration and the errors inherent in mathematical integration). The measured depth may be calibrated (i.e., adjusted) on occasion based on measured depth values obtained at the surface. For example, the surface measured depth may be downlinked at some interval (e.g., once per hour, once every 2 drill stands, and the like) and compared with the downhole computed measured depth. Any discrepancy between the surface measured depth and the downhole computed measured depth may then be evaluated and used to correct the downhole computed measured depth. Alternatively, surface measured ROP may be downlinked to the tool on occasion to calibrate downhole computed ROP.
It will be understood that in practice the rate of penetration may be obtained from multiple sources and computed (and acquired) downhole using multiple redundant methods (e.g., the multiple methods set forth above). These multiple measures may be processed in combination to obtain an appropriate value. For example, in one embodiment the multiple rate of penetration measures may be averaged to obtain an average measure. Alternatively and/or additionally one measure obtained at a lower frequency may be used to calibrate another measure obtained at a higher frequency. For example, a two-sensor measure may be used to calibrate a one-sensor measure. And uphole measure may also (or alternatively) be used to calibrate downhole measures of the rate of penetration. The disclosed embodiments are not limited in these regards.
The methods described herein are configured for downhole implementation via one or more controllers deployed downhole (e.g., in a steering/directional drilling tool). A suitable controller may include, for example, a programmable processor, such as a microprocessor or a microcontroller and processor-readable or computer-readable program code embodying logic. A suitable processor may be utilized, for example, to execute the method embodiments described above with respect to
Although closed loop control of drilling curvature and certain advantages thereof have been described in detail, it should be understood that various changes, substitutions and alterations may be made herein without departing from the spirit and scope of the disclosure as defined by the appended claims.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
6877241 | Barr et al. | Apr 2005 | B2 |
7136795 | Downton | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7243719 | Baron et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7243735 | Koederitz | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7350410 | Ekseth | Apr 2008 | B2 |
7556105 | Krueger | Jul 2009 | B2 |
7584788 | Baron et al. | Sep 2009 | B2 |
7823655 | Boone | Nov 2010 | B2 |
8118114 | Sugiura | Feb 2012 | B2 |
8393412 | Camwell et al. | Mar 2013 | B2 |
8676558 | Pirovolou | Mar 2014 | B2 |
20020104685 | Pinckard et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20030024738 | Schuh | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030034178 | Cargill | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20040118608 | Haci et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20090058674 | Papouras et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090090555 | Boone | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090159336 | Boone | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20100096186 | Ekseth | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20130126239 | Panchal et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
20130151157 | Brooks et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130151158 | Brooks et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130341091 | Sugiura | Dec 2013 | A1 |
20140151121 | Boone et al. | Jun 2014 | A1 |
20140196950 | Bayliss | Jul 2014 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2014160567 | Oct 2014 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Sugiura and Jones, “Automated Steering and Real-Time Drilling Process Monitoring Optimizes Rotary Steerable Underreamer Technology”, IADC World Drilling, Jun. 2008. |
International Search Report issued in related PCT application PCT/US2015/064153 dated Mar. 7, 2016, 4 pages. |
Written Opinion issued in related PCT application PCT/US2015/064153 dated Mar. 7, 2016, 9 pages. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability issued in International patent application PCT/US2015/064153 dated Jun. 22, 2017. 11 pages. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20160160628 A1 | Jun 2016 | US |