Drilling of a wellbore is accomplished through use of a machine referred to as a rig or drilling package. A rig can include components such as mud tanks, mud pumps, a derrick or mast, drawworks, a rotary table or topdrive, a drillstring, power generation equipment and auxiliary equipment. Drilling forms a hole known as a wellbore, where the term “borehole” may refer to the inside diameter of the wellbore wall (e.g., the rock face that bounds the drilled hole).
As to “mud”, it is a term used for drilling fluids that contain suspended solids. The term “mud weight” refers to mass per unit volume of a drilling fluid also known as “mud density”. Mud weight can control hydrostatic pressure in a wellbore and, for example, help to prevent unwanted flow of fluid(s) into the wellbore. The weight of mud can also help to prevent collapse of casing, an openhole, etc. Excessive mud weight can cause lost circulation by propagating, and then filling, fractures in rock.
As to a “drillstring”, as an example, it can include drillpipe, bottomhole assembly and possibly other tools used to make a drill bit turn at the bottom of a wellbore. A drill bit is the tool used to crush or cut rock. Various components of a rig can directly or indirectly assist the bit in crushing or cutting rock. The bit is located at the bottom of a drillstring and, for example, if it becomes excessively dull, one option may be to remove the drillstring from the wellbore for replacement of the bit. Most bits work by scraping or crushing rock, or both (e.g., via rotational motion). Some bits, known as hammer bits, pound the rock akin to a construction site air hammer.
A wellbore may be drilled according to a plan. A plan may include a route that deviates from vertical or a straight line. To achieve directional drilling, a drillstring can include a bend near a bit in a downhole steerable mud motor. Such a bend can point the bit in a direction different from an axis of the drilled portion of the wellbore, for example, when the entire drillstring is not rotating. By pumping mud through the mud motor, the bit turns while the drillstring does not rotate, allowing the bit to drill in the direction it points. When a particular wellbore direction is achieved, that direction may be maintained by rotating the entire drillstring (including the bent section). Rotary steerable tools allow steering while rotating, for example, with higher rates of penetration that may produce smoother boreholes.
Various events can occur during drilling of a wellbore that may impact cost, timings, future production, etc. Various technologies and techniques described herein are, for example, directed to planning, drilling or planning and drilling.
A method can include proposing a new well, accessing data associated with at least one other well, performing a statistical analysis of the accessed data for an issue for drilling of the new well to provide a probability of occurrence for the issue and an uncertainty as a function of depth. A system can include one or more processors, memory, an interface to receive information for a proposed new well and to receive data associated with at least one other well, instructions stored in a portion of the memory and executable by at least one of the one or more processors to perform a statistical analysis of the received data for an issue for drilling of the new well to provide a probability of occurrence for the issue and an uncertainty as a function of depth. One or more computer-readable storage media can include instructions to access data associated with at least one well, perform a statistical analysis of the accessed data for an issue for drilling of a new well to provide a probability of occurrence for the issue and an uncertainty as a function of depth. Various other apparatuses, systems, methods, etc., are also disclosed.
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.
Features and advantages of the described implementations can be more readily understood by reference to the following description taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings.
The following description includes the best mode presently contemplated for practicing the described implementations. This description is not to be taken in a limiting sense, but rather is made merely for the purpose of describing the general principles of the implementations. The scope of the described implementations should be ascertained with reference to the issued claims.
Various examples of technologies and techniques are described herein, for example, for identifying hazards, reducing risks and improving early detection of problems during wellbore drilling operations. As an example, recorded information from nearby wells (e.g., drilled within a relevant neighboring area), can be analyzed with respect to one or more types of issues (e.g., events). During an actual drilling process, additional data may be acquired and analyzed separately or in conjunction with the nearby well data. As an example, an analysis may provide for semi-automated or automated detection capabilities for a new well that is planned to be drilled or actually being drilled. Such capabilities may provide for early detection and avoidance of drilling problems (e.g., fluid influxes (kicks), fluid losses, drill-pipe or borehole washouts, sticking pipe, lost circulation, low rate-of-penetration (ROP), abrasive sands, etc.). As an example, an analysis may integrate with sensing, control and automation of a drilling process. As an example, a sensor, control algorithm, etc., may be adjusted (e.g., sensitivity, alarm limit, etc.) based at least in part on an analysis of data from one or more offset wells, optionally as a function of depth during drilling of a new well.
As an example, a drilling information system can include three components. In such an example, a first component can provide access to one or more databases that store offset well data as well as access to a framework for modeling a geologic environment; a second component can provide for monitoring measurements and associating such measurements with one or more types of events (e.g., fluid influxes (kicks), fluid losses, drill-pipe or borehole washouts, sticking pipe, lost circulation, low ROP, abrasive sands, etc.); and a third component can provide for real time control and automation, for example, for avoidance of one or more types of events (e.g., based on the first and second components). As an example, the second component may be applied to real time or stored data for offset wells and leveraged for purposes of drilling of a new well. Further, as an example, the third component may provide for real time monitoring to supplement offset well data for purposes of avoiding one or more types of events. The foregoing system can involve one or more statistical analyses to provide information germane to decision making, which may be manual, semi-automated or automated.
As an example, provided with relevant data, a system may automatically analyze the data to identify one or more problem zones. In such an example, the relevant data may include indicia of uncertainty (e.g., an associated metric or metrics that are indicators of uncertainty). For example, where the data stems from a wellbore that is a certain distance offset from a proposed new well, that data may be less certain than data that stems from a wellbore closer in proximity to the proposed new well. Thus, as an example, indicia of uncertainty may be based on distance of an offset well from a proposed new well (e.g., a metric based at least in part on the distance). As another example, a fault may actually exist or be thought to exist between a proposed new well and an offset well. Given the actual existence or perceived existence (e.g., based on some uncertain data, which may be quantitative, qualitative or quantitative and qualitative), data associated with the offset well may be deemed as having some degree of uncertainty. For example, stratigraphic layers may be offset in depth bordering a fault. Thus, the uncertainty for the offset well may be with respect to its depth location (e.g., depth X+/−Y % where the value Y may be indicia of uncertainty). Accordingly, the data from an offset well may be accurate yet have some degree of uncertainty with respect to how it would apply to a new well. Such uncertainty may optionally be determined and assigned to the data through use of a model of a geologic environment that can include representations of the offset well and the new well. Uncertainty may arise from any of a variety of factors, for example, manner of accessing data, manner of searching for data, age of data, equipment used to acquire data, amount of data acquired, degree of correlation to other data, training of person that acquired the data, training of person that interpreted data, etc.
As an example, a system may analyze data for purposes of reducing false alarms and improving identification of problems at an early stage in a drilling process. Such a system may perform an analysis by combining offset well history data with real time monitoring and warning data from a well being drilled.
As to data acquired during a drilling process, these data may be acquired via measurement-while-drilling (MWD) equipment and include data pertaining to, for example, tool orientation, downhole flow-rate measurements, gamma-ray measurements, etc. As an example, data associated with an offset well or a new well may be acquired in the presence of an event or a false alarm, which, in turn, allows for associating data with an event or condition(s) that gave rise to a false alarm. As to a false alarm, associated data may be analyzed to determine whether one or more degrees of uncertainty should be assigned to the data. For example, if the data were insufficient in amount (e.g., according to one or more criteria), then a degree of uncertainty with respect to the issue may be assigned when data are likewise deemed insufficient in amount. As another example, if data are noisy due to some type of operational interference or if data are otherwise deemed noisy (e.g., via an analysis for noise or given knowledge of operational conditions when acquired), then that data may be assigned a degree of uncertainty (e.g., using one or more statistical techniques).
As to an example of a technique for analysis of data, the technique described in U.S. Pat. No. 5,952,569, which is incorporated herein by reference, may be implemented. The technique described in U.S. Pat. No. 5,952,569 uses the theorem of Bayes for a model M and data D acquired during real time drilling of a well to determine a probability value of an event occurring during the real time drilling of that well where the posterior probability Pr(M|D) is [Pr(D|M) Pr(M)]/Pr(D). The technique described in U.S. Pat. No. 5,952,569 also includes a probabilistic comparator that compares vectors of data to representations of possible vectors of data which in turn can be assigned to alarms. Specifically, a vector Pr containing normalized posterior probabilities is generated based on Pr(M), which is a vector of the normalized prior probabilities of the model data, and a scaled logarithmic likelihood vector Is. However, as noted in U.S. Pat. No. 5,952,569, when the data contain a lot of noise, the track (event probability) could reach 100% and then fall back rapidly, or it could hover around 50%, which can leave assessments of such fluctuations in probability to a user.
In various examples, an analysis process may include use of Bayes theorem. For example, where data from multiple sources exist, the following equation (Equation 1) may be used:
where xr is a physical property, drt is a real time measurement from a new well and do is information from another source or sources (e.g., offset wells). In Equation 1 p(drt|xr) is the likelihood of measuring drt given the property xr and p(xr|do) is the likelihood log derived from the data from the one or more other sources (e.g., offset wells).
With respect to an alarm, for example, the following equation (Equation 2) may be used:
where xe is the likelihood of an event, and xrt represents features extracted from the real time data that are intended to indicate whether a problem is occurring and, for example, is based on the instantaneous measurements.
As an example, a system can provide two levels of control: one that monitors the probability of a problem event occurring, xe, and suggests control parameters based on this information, and one that reacts to alarms generated when the problem event occurs.
As mentioned, data may be uncertain for one or more reasons. As an example, where data are uncertain, an indicator may be provided with a probability of an event occurring based on that data. In such a manner, the probability value (or graphic) can be readily assessed. As an example of an alternative arrangement, a probability value (or graphic) may not be generated, stored or rendered where uncertainty of underlying data is deemed highly uncertain (e.g., according to a limit or limits).
As an example, uncertain data may be classified. As to classification of uncertain data (e.g., to assign a degree of uncertainty), one or more types of approaches may be taken. For example, an approach may rely on an analysis of data sufficiency, data noise, or, as mentioned, one or more physical factors (e.g., based on a model of geologic environment). As an example, a Bayesian classifier may be implemented to classify uncertain data. An example of a Bayesian classifier for uncertain data is described in an article by Qin et al. Bayesian Classifier for Uncertain Data” (SAC '10, Proceedings of the 2010 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing), which is incorporated by reference herein. In the article by Qin et al., error for a variable Z can be represented as a left error and a right error, which may be approximated by a left Gaussian distribution and a right Gaussian distribution, across an interval (e.g., A to B). The approach in the article by Qin et al. can also apply to “certain” data (e.g., A=B=Z); noting that a traditional Bayesian classifier works with the center points of uncertain intervals and computes the data distribution parameters based on the center points while the aforementioned uncertain Bayesian classifier considers centers, left and right boundaries and interval length. Such an approach can include training using training data and updating as more data becomes available.
As an example, for data from multiple offset wells, statistical analysis of the data (e.g., with respect to depth) may be performed to assign individual or overall uncertainty to the data. For example, a correlation process may correlate well log data (e.g., optionally using a model of a geologic environment) and then assign an uncertainty to the well log data from each well based on a correlation value (e.g., from −1 to +1 where +1 would be most certain). In such an example, the model may be history matched and considered to provide a “best” data profile such that a correlation value of +1 would be correlated with the “best” data profile.
As an example, offset well information may be combined with real time estimates of a problem event or problem events in a well being drilled. In such an example, data from offset wells and the well being drilled may be processed with respect to each type of event (e.g., fluid influx or “kick” during a drilling operation) that may occur during drilling (e.g., according to defaults or selections made from a list of types of events). Various types of data (e.g., recorded and stored signals) from the offset wells may be compared to a number of possible data (e.g., or signals) to compute a probability value of occurrence for an event as a function of depth (e.g., optionally multidimensional position) in each of the offset wells or collectively for a number of the offset wells. For example, the probability values of occurrence for the event in the offset wells can be combined to generate an overall probability of occurrence log. As an example, whether a collection of individual logs or an overall log, the log(s) may be stored and analyzed in the context of a model of a geologic environment, for example, to identify one or more events that correlate with subsurface properties. In the model, such properties may have already been derived from seismic, other previously recorded measurements, etc., to enable identification of subsurface structures and lithology information. As an example, given an event-related analysis of data from offset wells in an area that has been drilled (e.g., defined as having similar lithology sequences), a method can provide a reference model for one or more proposed new wells that includes probabilities of occurrence of an event or events over the path or paths of the one or more proposed new wells.
As an example, uncertainty as to the data underlying a probability of occurrence log for an event or for events may be determined. Uncertainty may be determined in one or more manners. As mentioned, uncertainty may be determined based on location of an offset well with respect to a proposed new well, based on quality of the data from an offset well or wells, etc. As another example, uncertainty may be based on the number of offset wells used to determine a probability of occurrence log for an event or events. In such an example, if relatively few offset wells are used as data sources, then this information can be stored with the probability of occurrence log for the event or events.
In addition to event probabilities of occurrence, other information can be gained from analysis of data from offset wells. For example, information such as estimates of pore and fracture pressure, models of rock hardness, susceptibility to swelling and estimates of parameters of models such as the bit-rock interaction may be gained from an analysis of data from one or more offset wells. Such data may form logs that differ from an event probability of occurrence log in that they provide estimates of physical properties. As an example, physical property logs and event-related logs from one or more offset wells may be combined to provide an event probability of occurrence log for a proposed new well. Further, such logs may be combined with real time data acquired during drilling of the new well (e.g., drilling fluid properties, bit type, etc.).
As an example, during planning, a method may include separating the probability of occurrence of an event from drilling parameters used in an offset well to create a new probability of occurrence of the event for use in drilling a new well (e.g., using appropriate drilling parameters, which may differ from those of the offset well). As another example, data from multiple offset wells may be accessed and analyzed in bulk, optionally with filtering as to depth, type or types of events experienced, etc. (e.g., using quantitative, qualitative or quantitative and qualitative filters). In either of the foregoing examples, results from analysis of the data are provided with respect to a new well, which may be a proposed new well (e.g., drilling has not yet commenced) or a new well that is being drilled. Techniques for providing results for a new well may include spatial interpolation, optionally using lithology, for example, as provided in a model of a geologic environment. Interpolation may include application of statistical techniques such as kriging. Kriging refers to various types of statistical techniques for interpolation to provide a value of a parameter at an “unobserved” location (e.g., spatial, spatial and time, etc.) from observations of values for that parameter at other locations (e.g., nearby locations). As an example, a system may provide for interpolation of data, probabilities, uncertainties or combinations thereof. In such a manner, information associated with one or more offset wells may be analyzed for purposes of planning, drilling or planning and drilling a new well.
As to drilling of a new well, a graphical user interface may be presented on a display (e.g., by execution of code, rendering, etc.) that provides information as to probability of occurrence for one or more types of events along with uncertainty of data underlying the probability or probabilities of occurrence. As an example, uncertainty of data may play an indirect role where a high uncertainty (e.g., according to one or more criteria) for a portion of a planned wellbore path causes the graphical user interface to not render a probability of occurrence over that portion of the planned well path as, due to the high uncertainty, the probability may be unreliable.
As an example, a graphical user interface may be presented as a traffic light for a drilling process corresponding to bit position (e.g., for a portion of rock slightly ahead of bit position) where, for example, a green light indicates low probability of occurrence with an acceptable level of uncertainty, a yellow light indicates a medium probability of occurrence with an acceptable level of uncertainty and red light indicates a high probability of occurrence with an acceptable level of uncertainty. In such an example, where uncertainty is unacceptable, the traffic light may render no colored lights, or optionally a different color light (e.g., blue) to indicate that due to uncertain data no probability of occurrence is being shown. In such an instance, drilling operators may resort to other information to continue the drilling process. A graphical user interface (e.g., “GUI”) may be rendered to a display, projected, etc., in various manners (e.g., via graphics processing instructions, via images, etc.) and may be interactive using commands received by input using a touchscreen, a pointing device, voice, mechanical motion, light, etc.
Various examples of techniques, technologies, etc., are described below, where
In the example of
In an example embodiment, the simulation component 120 may rely on entities 122. Entities 122 may include earth entities or geological objects such as wells, surfaces, reservoirs, etc. In the system 100, the entities 122 can include virtual representations of actual physical entities that are reconstructed for purposes of simulation. The entities 122 may include entities based on data acquired via sensing, observation, etc. (e.g., the seismic data 112 and other information 114).
In an example embodiment, the simulation component 120 may rely on a software framework such as an object-based framework. In such a framework, entities may include entities based on pre-defined classes to facilitate modeling and simulation. A commercially available example of an object-based framework is the MICROSOFT®.NET™ framework (Redmond, Wash.), which provides a set of extensible object classes. In the .NET™ framework, an object class encapsulates a module of reusable code and associated data structures. Object classes can be used to instantiate object instances for use in by a program, script, etc. For example, borehole classes may define objects for representing boreholes based on well data.
In the example of
In an example embodiment, the management components 110 may include features of a commercially available simulation framework such as the PETREL® seismic to simulation software framework (Schlumberger Limited, Houston, Tex.). The PETREL® framework provides components that allow for optimization of exploration and development operations. The PETREL® framework includes seismic to simulation software components that can output information for use in increasing reservoir performance, for example, by improving asset team productivity. Through use of such a framework, various professionals (e.g., geophysicists, geologists, and reservoir engineers) can develop collaborative workflows and integrate operations to streamline processes. Such a framework may be considered an application and may be considered a data-driven application (e.g., where data is input for purposes of simulating a geologic environment).
In an example embodiment, various aspects of the management components 110 may include add-ons or plug-ins that operate according to specifications of a framework environment. For example, a commercially available framework environment marketed as the OCEAN® framework environment (Schlumberger Limited, Houston, Tex.) allows for seamless integration of add-ons (or plug-ins) into a PETREL® framework workflow. The OCEAN® framework environment leverages .NET® tools (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, Wash.) and offers stable, user-friendly interfaces for efficient development. In an example embodiment, various components (e.g., or modules) may be implemented as add-ons (or plug-ins) that conform to and operate according to specifications of a framework environment (e.g., according to application programming interface (API) specifications, etc.).
The model simulation layer 180 may provide domain objects 182, act as a data source 184, provide for rendering 186 and provide for various user interfaces 188. Rendering 186 may provide a graphical environment in which applications can display their data while the user interfaces 188 may provide a common look and feel for application user interface components (e.g., for GUI generation, rendering and interaction).
In the example of
In the example of
In the example of
The framework 170 may provide for modeling the geologic environment 150 including the wells 154-1, 154-2, 154-3 and 154-4 as well as stratigraphic layers, lithologies, faults, etc. The framework 170 may create a model with one or more grids, for example, defined by nodes, where a numerical technique can be applied to relevant equations discretized according to at least one of the one or more grids. As an example, the framework 170 may provide for performing a simulation of phenomena associated with the geologic environment 150 using at least a portion of a grid. As to performing a simulation, such a simulation may include interpolating geological rock types, interpolating petrophysical properties, simulating fluid flow, or other calculating (e.g., or a combination of any of the foregoing).
As an example, the drilling modules 240 may include one or more modules of the commercially available TECHLOG® wellbore framework (Schlumberger, Houston, Tex.) which provides wellbore-centric, cross-domain workflows based on a data management layer. The TECHLOG® wellbore framework includes features for petrophysics (core and log), geology, drilling, reservoir and production engineering, and geophysics.
As indicated in
As to the data 215, it may be stored in one or more data storage devices locally, remotely, or locally and remotely. Such data may include seismic data, interpreted data, model data, measurement data, qualitative data, etc. Portions of such data may be relevant to the drilling modules 240 directly and/or the framework 270 directly. As shown in the example of
As an example, the GUI 301 includes a well graphic 310 illustrated with respect to depth, a log graphic 320 (e.g., optionally of probability of occurrence values for one or more types of events), one or more problem zone graphics 326-1 and 326-2, an uncertainty graphic 330, a probability of occurrence graphic 350 and a drill graphic 370. The modules 305 may include instructions for organizing and rendering that graphics 310, 320, 326-1, 326-2, 330, 350 and 370 (e.g., for execution by one or more processors, which may be CPUs, GPUs, CPUs and GPUs, etc.).
As an example, a search engine may provide a degree of uncertainty for a well (e.g., and its data) with respect to one or more search criteria. For example, a relevance score produced by a search engine for a well may be assigned to the well as indicia of its uncertainty with respect to the search criteria (see, e.g., the GUI 409), which may be event-related (see, e.g., E1, E2, . . . EN). As another example, alternatively or additionally, a relevance score may be used as a weight for data from a selected well when calculating a probability of an event occurring for a proposed new well.
Further, as to searching, a retrieval model can estimate relevance of various well data sets (e.g., documents) responsive to a query and rank the well data sets (e.g., documents) accordingly. However, such an approach may ignore uncertainty associated with the estimates of relevancy. In such a situation, if a high estimate of relevancy also has a high uncertainty, then a highly ranked well data set may be quite relevant or not quite relevant; and another well data set may have a slightly lower estimate of relevancy but the corresponding uncertainty may be much less. As an example, a framework for modeling uncertainty can introduce an asymmetric loss function having a parameter that can model the level of risk (e.g., a level that one is willing to accept). In such an example, by adjusting the risk preference parameter, the framework can adapt to different retrieval strategies. Such a framework is described in an article by Zhu et al., “Risky Business: Modeling and Exploiting Uncertainty in Information Retrieval” (SIGIR '09, Jul. 19-23, 2009). As an example, graphics may be generated based on uncertainty for data associated with wells and presented with respect to a map (e.g., a 2D map or 3D map). In such an example, color coding, size coding, etc., may be applied to show wells or portions of wells where data uncertainty is high for any of a variety of reasons (e.g., amount of data, proximity to a location, search-related, event-related, lithology-related, time-related, etc.).
As shown in
As to the example method 450, it includes a selection, block 452, an analysis block 454 and a generation block 456. As indicated, the selection block 452 may provide for criteria-based selection, manual selection, automatic selection, etc.; the analysis block 454 may provide for statistical, spatial, well-by-well, combined well, etc., analyses; and the generation block 457 may generate event probability and uncertainty using a well-by-well approach, a wells combined approach, or other approach. In the well-by-well approach, generation may occur for each selected offset well, which, in turn, may be combined for a proposed new well; whereas, the wells combined approach may pool data from various selected offset wells for generation of event probability and uncertainty.
The method 450 is shown in
As an example, a method can include proposing a new well; accessing data associated with at least one other well where at least a portion of the data includes indicia of uncertainty; performing a geostatistical analysis (e.g., Bayesian or other) of the accessed data for an issue for drilling of the new well to provide a probability of occurrence for the issue and an uncertainty for the accessed data; and rendering to a display a graphical representation of the well, the probability of occurrence for the issue and the uncertainty for the accessed data as a function of depth. Such a method may further include, for example, drilling the proposed new well, acquiring data during the drilling of the proposed new well (e.g., stemming from drilling of the proposed well), performing a geostatistical analysis based at least in part on the data acquired during the drilling of the proposed well for an issue for drilling of the new well to provide a probability of occurrence for the issue and an uncertainty for the acquired data. As an example, a method can include issuing an alarm based on a probability of occurrence for an issue and uncertainty of the data underlying the probability.
As an example, proposing a new well can include modeling a geologic environment using a numerical technique that relies on a grid of the geologic environment. In such an example, the modeling of the geologic environment can include analyzing seismic data acquired from the geologic environment.
As an example, a method can include importing data from a geological environment modeling framework prior to the performing a geostatistical analysis where performance of the geostatistical analysis occurs using one or more drilling modules executed by a computer.
As an example, an issue may be a fluid influx issue, for example, where a method includes storing an instruction to call for an increase in mud weight during drilling of a proposed new well to mitigate the fluid influx issue and, during drilling of the proposed new well, based on the stored instruction, calling for the increase in mud weight (e.g., where a controller responds to the call and acts to increase the mud weight). As to other issues, issues such as fluid losses, drill-pipe or borehole washouts, sticking pipe, lost circulation, low ROP, abrasive sands, etc., may be specified. As an example, a method may include storing an instruction to call for a decrease in mud weight during drilling of a proposed new well to mitigate the fluid loss issue and, during drilling of the proposed new well, based on the stored instruction, calling for the decrease in mud weight (e.g., where a controller responds to the call and acts to decrease the mud weight).
As to a fluid, it may be liquid, gas, liquid and gas, etc. As an example, a fluid may include dissolved material (e.g., dissolved organics, inorganics, or organics and inorganics).
As to control, as an example, a method can include storing instructions for preventive control for an issue, based on a probability of occurrence for the issue and uncertainty of the data underlying the probability. Such preventive control may aim to mitigate an issue during drilling of a proposed new well.
As an example, a system can include one or more processors; memory; an interface to receive information for a proposed new well and to receive data associated with at least one other well where at least a portion of the data comprises indicia of uncertainty; instructions stored in a portion of the memory and executable by at least one of the one or more processors to perform a geostatistical analysis (e.g., a Bayesian or other analysis) of the received data for an issue for drilling of the new well to provide a probability of occurrence for the issue and an uncertainty for the received data; and instructions stored in a portion of the memory and executable by at least one of the one or more processors to render to a display a graphical representation of the well, the probability of occurrence for the issue and the uncertainty for the received data as a function of depth. Such a system may further include a base station and a mobile station where the mobile station may include a display for presentation of graphics.
As an example, a system can include instructions stored in a portion of memory and executable by at least one of one or more processors to render to a display a graphical user interface for entry of search terms, transmission of the search terms to a search engine and return of search results that list the at least one other well. As mentioned, the GUI 409 may provide for entry of search terms (e.g., field entries, events, etc.), transmission of search terms to a search engine (see, e.g., “Search” button control graphic) and provide for return of search results (see, e.g., the GUI 405, which may be a color coded map of search results as wells).
As an example, one or more computer-readable storage media can include computer-executable instructions to instruct a computing device to: access data associated with at least one well where at least a portion of the data comprises indicia of uncertainty; perform a geostatistical analysis of the accessed data for an issue for drilling of a new well to provide a probability of occurrence for the issue and an uncertainty for the accessed data; and store to memory information for rendering a graphical representation of the well, the probability of occurrence for the issue and the uncertainty for the accessed data as a function of depth. Such an example may also include instructions to instruct a computing device to: receive real time data acquired by drilling equipment during drilling of the new well; and perform a geostatistical analysis of the received data for an issue for drilling of the new well to provide a probability of occurrence for the issue and an uncertainty for the received data. As an example, one or more computer-readable storage media can include computer-executable instructions to instruct a computing device to store to memory information for preventive control during drilling of a new well where the preventive control is based at least in part on the probability of occurrence for the issue and the uncertainty of the received data.
As an example, a limit as to acceptability or unacceptability of uncertainty may optionally be depth dependent. For example, events may be handled more readily at shallower depths and therefore a higher degree of uncertainty may be acceptable than for deeper depths where more time, equipment, cost, etc., are involved and where remedies may be more limited. Thus, an uncertainty scale may be depth dependent and, accordingly, a particular uncertainty may impact display of event probability information, control, sensing, alarms, etc., differently with respect to depth.
In the example of
As to the event type selection graphic control 570, this may allow a user to select one or more types of events. For example, the events may include kicks, fluid losses, drill-pipe or borehole washouts, sticking pipe, lost circulation, low ROP, abrasive sands, or other types of events.
Referring to the GUI 248-2, a drilling operator may interact with the GUI 248-2, for example, responsive to display of event probability, uncertainty, or both event probability and uncertainty for a particular event. As shown in the example of
In the example of
As an example, the station 710 may be a remote operations support center and that provides for communication of information for displays, alarms, etc. at a rig site. For example, the mobile station 730 may be equipment associated with a rig. In such an arrangement, the station 710 may include modeling capabilities (e.g., via PETREL® framework, etc.) where one or more domain experts perform tasks (e.g., workflow or other tasks) that control communication of relevant information for display at the rig equipment (e.g., or mobile phones, tablets, etc., at a drilling site) for consumption by personnel performing drilling or other activities related to drilling a new well (e.g., using the rig equipment).
The method 800 may, for example, provide for automated data processing from offset wells for an event such as fluid influx (kick) detection. In such an example, recorded and stored signals from the offset data can be compared to a number of possible signals for computation of probability of occurrence of a particular problem as a function of depth (position) in the offset well. These problems may then be combined (e.g., for multiple measurements) to generate a probability log for occurrence of the type of event being analyzed. As an example, the log may be stored and analyzed in the context of an earth model to identify events that correlate with subsurface properties. As an example, these properties may be already derived from seismic or other previously recorded measurements, and enable identification of subsurface structures and lithology information. Such a method may be repeated for all offset wells in an area that has been drilled in similar lithology sequences to provide a reference model for a new proposed well.
As an example, the method 800 may automatically capture uncertainty, or bounds, for probability of occurrence logs. For example, if relatively few offset wells are used for a log, or a log is derived from a poor measurement(s), then such information can be stored with the log (e.g., as an uncertainty indicator).
As an example, in addition to event probabilities, other valuable information can be gained from one or more offset wells. Examples can include estimates of pore and fracture pressure, models of rock hardness, susceptibility to swelling and estimates of parameters of models such as the bit-rock interaction. What makes these logs different to event probability logs is that they are estimates of physical properties and can thereby provide probabilities of problematic events, for example, when combined with real time parameters such as drilling fluid properties, bit type, etc. By separating the probability of occurrence of an event from drilling parameters used in an offset well, as an example, a method can create a new probability log for use drilling a new well (e.g., using new drilling parameters). Such a method can assist during planning phases of a new well.
As an example, the method 800 may provide for outputting a lost circulation probability. As mentioned, excessive mud weight can cause lost circulation by propagating, and then filling, fractures in rock. Various data may be provided related to lost circulation factors along with possible signal vectors for the data to allow one or more probabilistic comparators (see, e.g., 815, 825 and 835) to output one or more probabilities that may provide an overall probability for a lost circulation issue. In the foregoing example for lost circulation, as in the example for fluid influx (“kick”), uncertainty or uncertainties may be provided at the data level (e.g., block 812, 822 and 832), at the possible signal vector level (e.g., blocks 813, 823 and 833), at the comparator level (e.g., blocks 815, 825 and 835) or at one or more other levels. As mentioned, as to an event (e.g., lost circulation, fluid influx, etc.), one or more graphics may be presented in terms of probability with respect to depth for a proposed new well or a new well being drilled along with indicia of uncertainty as to the probability. As mentioned, where uncertainty is deemed high for probability (e.g., according to one or more criteria), a graphical presentation may forego display of that probability (e.g., with respect to depth). Thus, a graphic generation or rendering process may include a decision block that decides whether a graphic for a probability should be generated or whether a graphic for a probability should be rendered (e.g., to a display).
In the example of
The method 900 is shown in
As shown in the example of
The method 1000 is shown in
As another example, a method may pertain to a drillstring sticking issue. In such an example, an issue block may issue an alarm for a drillstring sticking issue for a drillstring being used or to be used for drilling a well. Such an alarm may be issued based on an analysis of geological data associated with at least one other well. For example, if an analysis of geological data for another well indicates that a layer (see, e.g., layer “L1” in
As an example, so-called differential sticking may occur such that a drillstring cannot readily be moved (e.g., rotated or reciprocated) along an axis of a wellbore. Differential sticking can occur when high-contact forces caused by low reservoir pressures, high wellbore pressures, or both, are exerted over a sufficiently large area of a drillstring. Differential sticking can result in delays and financial costs. Sticking force may be determined as a product of a differential pressure between a wellbore and a reservoir and an area that the differential pressure is acting upon (e.g., a relatively low differential pressure applied over a large working area can be just as effective in sticking pipe as can a high differential pressure applied over a small area). As another example, so-called mechanical sticking involves limiting or prevention of motion of a drillstring by anything other than differential pressure sticking. Mechanical sticking can be caused by debris in a hole, wellbore geometry anomalies, cement, keyseats or a buildup of cuttings in the annulus. As an example, mechanical sticking may be caused by packing-off (e.g., cuttings settling back into a wellbore, especially when circulation is diminished or stopped). As another example, mechanical sticking may be caused by adhesion (e.g., after a lack of movement for some amount of time).
In the example of
As to Loop B, it corresponds to a reactive control feedback loop where the reactive control block 1164 effectuates reactive control by adjusting one or more parameters of the operating parameters block 1172, which, in turn, acts to provide an indication of such adjusting to the probability of occurrence block 1152, which, in turn, acts to adjust the alarm block 1130, which may also receive input from the real time data anomaly detection block 1124. In such a manner, the alarm block 1130 may issue an alarm based on probability of occurrence of an event, based on detection of an anomaly in real time data or a combination of both.
As to Loop C, such a loop may be optional depending on the configuration of the alarm block 1130 with respect to the preventive control block 1162. Loop C operates in a manner similar to Loop A but with inclusion of the alarm block 1130; which may receive information via the real time data anomaly detection block 1124.
As an example, when a probability model for a particular type of event has been produced for a new proposed well, this forms a reference model that can be used to anticipate drilling problems during the well planning stage. When the well is actually drilled, the reference model may be used to provide advanced warnings before one or more problem zones are reached. A reference model may optionally be implemented in a manner to adjust sensitivity of one or more semi-automated or automated detection systems to give greater sensitivity to a problem being detected in a zone(s) that has been previously estimated to have a high probability of occurrence of a particular problem. As an example, detector sensitivity may be reduced where is there is a small probability of occurrence of a problem zone to reduce a false alarm rate of the detector. Such an approach may be implemented by adjusting a “prior probability” of the model being tested against the data. As an example, one or more logs may be used to drive a semi-automated or an automated system, for example, where uncertainty of the logs (e.g., as to underlying data) is incorporated into a decision making process (e.g., using one or more utility functions where the “cost” of the problematic event occurring is weighted by the probability of occurrence).
As an example, a method or a system may provide for efficient end-to-end well planning using offset well information to allow improved early detection and avoidance of problems in a new well to be drilled or actually being drilled.
In an example embodiment, components may be distributed, such as in the network system 1210. The network system 1210 includes components 1222-1, 1222-2, 1222-3, . . . 1222-N. For example, the components 1222-1 may include the processor(s) 1202 while the component(s) 1222-3 may include memory accessible by the processor(s) 1202. Further, the component(s) 1222-2 may include an I/O device for display and optionally interaction with a method. The network may be or include the Internet, an intranet, a cellular network, a satellite network, etc.
Although a few example embodiments have been described in detail above, those skilled in the art will readily appreciate that many modifications are possible in the example embodiments without materially departing from the embodiments of the present disclosure. Accordingly, such modifications are intended to be included within the scope of this disclosure as defined in the following claims. In the claims, means-plus-function clauses are intended to cover the structures described herein as performing the recited function and not just structural equivalents, but also equivalent structures. Thus, although a nail and a screw may not be structural equivalents in that a nail employs a cylindrical surface to secure wooden parts together, whereas a screw employs a helical surface, in the environment of fastening wooden parts, a nail and a screw may be equivalent structures. It is the express intention of the applicant not to invoke 35 U.S.C. §112, paragraph 6 for any limitations of any of the claims herein, except for those in which the claim expressly uses the words “means for” together with an associated function.