The field of the invention is subterranean borehole cleanup tools and more particularly a debris retention tool that can function in a first configuration for flowing debris into the tool for capture and that can be reconfigured while at the subterranean location to a different flow scheme for another purpose after debris removal ends.
Debris cleanup tools that deliver pressurized fluid down a tubing string into an eductor device are illustrated in U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,276,452 and 7,789,154. The eductor exhaust is into the surrounding annulus where the flow splits. Some of the flow goes downhole to a mill that creates the cuttings and that flow enters the mill and takes the cuttings into a debris collection housing. The large cuttings are stopped by a screen and settle out in a debris retention space. The remaining flow with some small debris that passes the screen is sucked into the eductor inlet. The eductor outlet flow that does not travel down the annular space around the tool goes up to the surface in that same annular space. The eductor is installed as a bushing that is fixed in the housing of the debris collection device.
Once such devices were installed in a string and run into the well, they provided the above described flow pattern but had no facility to alter the flow pattern for another purpose. It was determined to be desirable to convert the flow scheme of the tool as described above to be able to flow through the tubing as before as well as to be able to shut off the eductor outlet and direct pressure through the debris collector body and out a lower end through the mill. Being able to do this is advantageous for the reason that the tool can be flowed internally in a reverse direction to the normal up flow from the mill and up to the eductor. In the event the tool gets obstructed this is a good way to get it cleared. An option to revert back to the original flow scheme can also be incorporated so that debris removal can take place after a blockage is removed. In a preferred embodiment the eductor is axially shifted to change the flow scheme through it. This can be configured as a onetime movement or cycling back and forth between the end positions is possible. Those skilled in the art will better appreciate more aspects of the invention from a review of the description of the preferred embodiment and the associated drawings while recognizing that the full scope of the invention is to be determined by the appended claims.
Older debris collection devices such as U.S. Pat. No. 4,276,931 used a complex valve arrangement where flow through the valve actuated it to move axially and such axial movement compressed a rubber ring to seal off a central passage and at the same time open a lateral port into an internal annulus that led to an eductor. Separate flow passages were used for normal reverse flow into the mill to collet debris on pivoting fingers as opposed to flow straight through the valve member for circulation flow through the mill such as when running in to agitate the debris already in the wellbore and to facilitate rapid running in.
A debris cleanup tool uses a movable eductor to reconfigure the flow scheme through the tool. During the debris pickup mode, pressurized fluid is delivered to through the tubing to the eductor inlet. The outlet of the eductor is into the surrounding annulus where the flow splits with most going to the surface and the rest down and into a mill making cuttings. The flow into the mill takes the cuttings to a collection volume and then screens the internal flow stream before directing it into the eductor inlet. The eductor body can be repositioned to close the eductor outlet to the annulus and open the outlet into the housing to allow reverse flow. In one embodiment a ball is dropped and pressure is built to break a shear pin to shift the eductor body and to open a bypass around the ball. The ball seat can be above or below the eductor outlet.
a is an alternative embodiment to
a is the view of
The basic tool is illustrated in U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,276,452 and 7,789,154 which are incorporated here as if fully set forth. The invention focuses on the eductor or the “jet bushing” as it is referred to in U.S. Pat. No. 7,789,154 as items 14 or 40. Both of these bushings show the single flow mode of operation and the present invention adds a feature to convert the flow mode to another mode as will be described using
The modifications to the prior jet bushing over the prior designs described above are in the internal configuration of the eductor 16 and its ability to move. In
At the other end, the eductor inlet 18 has shifted away from a spaced alignment with the outlet 20 in housing 12 and now seals 52 and 54 close off all the ports 20 to the surrounding annulus 22. Instead, the eductor inlet 18 is now an open conduit into chamber 56 and can direct flow down to the mill (not shown) as schematically represented by arrow 58. Flow can now be reversed through the debris collection tool to back flush the internal screen or to unclog the mill if it gets fouled with cuttings. Circulation can also be established as the housing 12 and the associated equipment are removed from the wellbore.
For the one time shifting embodiment of
Another option for the embodiment in
Another option is to be able to switch back and forth between the flow modes of
The above description is illustrative of the preferred embodiment and many modifications may be made by those skilled in the art without departing from the invention whose scope is to be determined from the literal and equivalent scope of the claims below.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
2327051 | Lyons et al. | Aug 1943 | A |
2915127 | O'Farrel | Dec 1959 | A |
3066735 | Zingg | Dec 1962 | A |
3382925 | Jennings | May 1968 | A |
4031957 | Sanford | Jun 1977 | A |
4088191 | Hutchison | May 1978 | A |
4276931 | Murray | Jul 1981 | A |
4296822 | Ormsby | Oct 1981 | A |
4499951 | Vann | Feb 1985 | A |
4541486 | Wetzel et al. | Sep 1985 | A |
4709760 | Crist et al. | Dec 1987 | A |
4796704 | Forrest et al. | Jan 1989 | A |
5533571 | Surjaatmadua et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
6065451 | Lebrun | May 2000 | A |
6102060 | Howlett et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6173795 | McGarian et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6176311 | Ryan | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6189617 | Sorhus et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6276452 | Davis et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6341653 | Firmaniuk et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6401822 | Baugh | Jun 2002 | B1 |
7383881 | Telfer | Jun 2008 | B2 |
7431091 | Themig et al. | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7434625 | Adams | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7628213 | Telfer | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7789154 | Davis | Sep 2010 | B2 |
20070272404 | Lynde et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20090200012 | Davis et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20100282472 | Anderson | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20100288485 | Blair | Nov 2010 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2006123109 | Nov 2006 | WO |