The statements in this section merely provide background information related to the present disclosure and may not constitute prior art.
Embodiments described relate to application cables for disposing in hydrocarbon wells. In particular, embodiments of extended length cables are described for use in deep wells, for example, exceeding about 30,000 feet in depth. Cables as described herein may be employed for communicating with, and positioning tools at, such extreme well depths. This may be achieved effectively and in a manner substantially avoiding cable damage during the application in spite of the extreme well depths involved.
The statements in this section merely provide background information related to the present disclosure and may not constitute prior art.
Exploring, drilling, completing, and operating hydrocarbon and other wells are generally complicated, time consuming, and ultimately very expensive endeavors. Thus, in order to maximize hydrocarbon recovery from underground reservoirs, hydrocarbon wells are becoming of increasingly greater depths and more sophisticated. For example, wells exceeding 25,000 feet in depth which are highly deviated are becoming increasingly common.
Furthermore, in recognition of the expenses involved in completing and operating such hydrocarbon wells, added emphasis has been placed on well access, monitoring and management throughout its productive life. Ready access to well information and intervention may play critical roles in maximizing the life of the well and total hydrocarbon recovery. As a result, downhole tools are frequently deployed within a given hydrocarbon well throughout its life. These tools may include logging tools to acquire data relative to well conditions, intervention tools to address downhole conditions, and even downhole conveyance mechanisms such as downhole tractors to aid in achieving access to downhole portions of the well which may otherwise be potentially inaccessible.
The above noted downhole tools may be delivered to a downhole location by way of a cable. Given the depth of the well, the cable is of a configuration intended to support its own load as well as that of a toolstring of various downhole equipment. Thus, with ever increasing well depths in use, the break strength of today's cables are also increasing. Unfortunately, however, there is a limit to the benefit available from increasing the cable strength. That is, as a practical matter, an increase in the break strength of the cable also increases its overall weight, thereby adding to the load imparted on the cable. Thus, significant increases in break strength may be self-defeating. As a result, cables exceeding about 30,000 feet or so for corresponding well depths are generally impractical.
In addition to physical delivery capabilities, the cable may be configured to provide power and communication between the tool and other equipment at the surface of the oilfield. Generally, this may be achieved over a copper core or other suitable power and telemetry structure as described below. Similar to the load bearing capacity of the cable as noted above, the cable is also configured in light of these telemetry requirements and downhole power needs, especially in light of the potentially extensive length of the cable into the well.
With respect to communication over the cable, a conventional core may display about 1 dB of signal loss per every thousand feet of cable. Nevertheless, telemetry between the equipment at the surface of the oilfield and the downhole tool may remain effective over a conventional cable up until about 30 dB of signal loss has occurred. Unfortunately, this means that telemetry between the surface equipment and the downhole tool is significantly compromised over a conventional cable that exceeds about 30,000 feet. Furthermore, in circumstances where communication involves the return of signal back to the surface equipment, the return signal is even weaker upon return over such an extensive cable. In theory, the effects of such signal loss may be combated by use of a lower gauge core, say less than about 15 gauge copper wire. Unfortunately, this leads to an increase in cable profile and, perhaps more significantly, adds to the overall weight of the cable, thus further compounding load issues as described above.
As indicated, power is often provided to the downhole tool over the cable as well. For example, where a downhole tractor is present, up to 2 kW or more may be provided to the tractor over the cable. In such a circumstance, voltage and current for the power delivery may be directed at the surface. However, the particular properties of the cable may determine the particular power delivery which actually reaches the downhole tractor. For example, the loop resistance over the length of the cable may be cumulative such that power delivery is significantly affected where over about 30,000 feet of cable is employed before a downhole tool such as the tractor is reached.
For a variety of reasons as noted above, the use of downhole cables exceeding 30,000 feet is generally considered impractical for hydrocarbon well applications. Whether a matter of load, telemetry, or power limitations, cables substantially exceeding 30,000 feet or so generally remain unavailable and impractical, thereby limiting the effective monitoring and operating of wells exceeding such depths.
A cable assembly is provided for a hydrocarbon well application. The cable assembly includes an uphole cable portion coupled to a downhole cable portion. The uphole cable portion is of a greater break strength than said downhole cable portion.
A cable assembly is also provided for data transmission in a hydrocarbon well. The cable assembly includes an uphole cable portion and a downhole cable portion. A data transmission sub is also provided that is coupled to both of the cable portions. The sub is configured to amplify a signal between the downhole cable portion and the uphole cable portion.
Embodiments are described with reference to certain downhole applications of extensive or extreme depths which may employ embodiments of extended length cable assemblies. For example, diagnostic applications taking place at well depths exceeding 30,000 feet are described herein. However, hydrocarbon well applications employing embodiments of extended length cable assemblies as described herein may effectively proceed at shallower depths. Furthermore, applications aside from well diagnostics may utilize extended length cable assemblies as detailed herein. Regardless, embodiments described herein generally include cable portions of differing physical character from one another depending on the well depths to be occupied by the different portions. Additionally, the term “depth” is used herein to generally describe the distance from the surface of an oilfield to a downhole location in a well. This may include vertical depth in a conventional sense, as well as distances through non-vertical portions of the well.
Referring now to
The uphole cable portion 125 of the assembly 100 of
As described in greater detail below, the differences in physical character between the cable portions 125, 150 may be achieved through the use of an overall smaller diameter downhole cable portion 150. Additionally, the downhole cable portion 150 may include less interior support structure or lower strength-to-weight ratio interior support structure.
By employing a lighter and/or substantially lower strength-to-weight ratio for the downhole cable portion 150, the load placed on the uphole cable portion 125 during positioning of the assembly 100 in a well 580 is reduced (see
Continuing now with reference to
Continuing with reference to
Referring now to
In addition to physical support, the housing 180 of the sub 175 includes a chamber 350 where the above noted conductive core 200 may be coupled to a conductive core 400 of the downhole cable portion 150. That is, as detailed further below, jackets 275, 475 and other outer portions of the cable portions 125, 150 may be cut back and the conductive cores 200, 400 spliced to one another. As depicted in
In an embodiment, the communicative coupling 300 and/or a core 200, 400 is routed through a conventional impedance matching transformer of the sub 175 so as to compensate for any significant gauge difference between the cores 200, 400. Similarly, the coupling 300 may be achieved through a signal refinement mechanism including conventional filters. Furthermore, separate electronics packaging 380, 385, 387 may be imbedded within the housing 180 and electronically coupled to the cores 200, 400 and/or the coupling 300 through conventional wiring 370.
With added reference to
Other packaging may include a power regulating mechanism 385 to tailor voltage and current supplied from surface equipment at the oilfield 590 to match the power needs of downhole equipment 510, 520 coupled to the assembly 100. For example, in an embodiment, the power regulating mechanism 385 may be employed to step down voltage and current directed from the surface so as to avoid overloading the downhole equipment 510, 520. In this manner, high voltage and current may be supplied from the surface in light of the extreme depths of the assembly 100 without concern over unintentionally overloading the equipment 510, 520, for example, in advance of reaching more extreme depths in the well 580. Additionally, a sensor mechanism 387 may be incorporated into the housing 180 and communicatively coupled to the cores 200, 400 and/or coupling 300 so as to provide information regarding conditions at the connector sub 175. For example, pressure, temperature, and load information may be provided in this manner.
With particular reference to
Additionally, in an embodiment, the windings 425 of the downhole cable portion 150 may constructed with a smaller amount of steel or of a lighter weight material per foot altogether. For example, in an embodiment the windings 425 of this portion 150 are of titanium, a titanium alloy, or aluminum. These particular windings 425 may be coated with a thin layer of polymer during manufacture to avoid galling when incorporated into the downhole cable portion 150. In another embodiment, the windings 425 may include separate strands of steel and titanium, or similar light weight material, wound about one another.
With particular reference to
Referring now to
With particular reference to
The well 580 itself runs through a formation 595 at the oilfield 590 in an effort to retrieve hydrocarbons therefrom. The well 580 may be of an extended depth, exceeding between about 30,000 and about 50,000 feet. In the embodiment shown, a lateral leg 581 of the well 580 contributes to its overall depth. Regardless, the downhole cable portion 150 is configured in such a manner so as to allow the assembly 100 of
Continuing now with reference to
As shown, the uphole cable portion may be provided to the oilfield 590 by way of a second mobile cable truck 540 with cable reel 545. The uphole cable portion 125 may be pulled from the reel 545 and, as with the downhole cable portion 150, secured to the splicing table 530, in this case at a second clamp 536 thereof. Thus, the connector sub 175 may be positioned at a support 534. As shown, the sub 175 and uphole cable portion 125 are provided in a pre-coupled manner. Additionally, with the sub 175 stabilized at the support 534 more precise coupling and splicing of the downhole cable portion 150 may now also be achieved as described above with reference to
Continuing now with reference to
By way of example, a tractor 510 may be effectively employed to position a diagnostic tool 520 within a lateral leg 581 of a well 580 that may be in excess of 30,000-50,000 feet in depth, if not more. In the particular embodiment shown, the tractor 510 may operate at between about 1.5 to 2 kW with power optimized through the sub 175 in terms of voltage and current. However, alternative power parameters may be employed, not to mention a variety of different equipment tools and applications.
Referring now to
The above telemetry and structural integrity concerns may be addressed by employing an extended length cable assembly having separate cable portions of different configurations. That is, as indicated at 610 and 620, a downhole cable portion may be provided to an oilfield and positioned within the well thereat. This downhole cable portion, of comparatively lighter construction, may then be coupled to an uphole cable portion to complete the assembly as indicated at 650. The steps 610, 630, and 650 may be repeated as required (i.e., when there are more than two cable portions and/or more than one connector sub) to complete the assembly, as will be appreciated by those skilled in the art. As detailed above, the uphole cable portion of the assembly may be of comparatively greater weight and break strength. This, in combination with the lighter character of the downhole cable portion may help to alleviate structural integrity concerns with regard to the load on the assembly. Additionally, the uphole and downhole cable portions may be coupled to one another through a connector sub which incorporates a signal amplification mechanism therein so as to maintain effective telemetry throughout the assembly.
Continuing with reference to
Embodiments of extended length cable assemblies detailed hereinabove include assemblies configured to support their own load and maintain structural integrity while disposed in wells to depths exceeding 30,000 feet. Indeed, such assemblies may maintain structural integrity while disposed to depths of over 50,000 feet while accommodating a host of downhole tools at the downhole end thereof. Additionally, telemetry concerns through such an assembly, for example between the surface and downhole equipment may be alleviated through the use of an intervening connector sub with a built-in signal amplification mechanism. Thus, conventional signal loss in dB/foot of cable assembly may be overcome. Furthermore, embodiments detailed herein may even avoid significant power control concerns over extensive cable lengths by the incorporation of a power regulating mechanism in the sub.
The preceding description has been presented with reference to presently preferred embodiments. Persons skilled in the art and technology to which these embodiments pertain will appreciate that alterations and changes in the described structures and methods of operation may be practiced without meaningfully departing from the principle, and scope of these embodiments. For example, alternative techniques may be utilized in positioning a completed extended length cable assembly in a well of extended depth. Such techniques may include use of a dual or split drum spooling system as opposed to separate mobile cable trucks as detailed above. Regardless, the foregoing description should not be read as pertaining only to the precise structures described and shown in the accompanying drawings, but rather should be read as consistent with and as support for the following claims, which are to have their fullest and fairest scope.
This Patent Document claims priority under 35 U.S.C. §119(e) to U.S. Provisional Application Ser. No. 61/063,231, entitled Multiple Cables Connected in Series by Means of a Connecting Sub, filed on Feb. 1, 2008, which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety. This Patent Document is also a Continuation-In-Part claiming priority under 35 U.S.C. §120 to U.S. application Ser. No. 11/813,755 entitled Enhanced Electrical Cables, filed on Mar. 13, 2008, now U.S. Pat. No. 7,586,042, which was the PCT Natonal Stage application of International Patent Application No. PCT/IB2006/050119, which claims priority to application Ser. No. 11/033,698 entitled “Enhanced Electrical Cables” filed Jan. 12, 2005, Now U.S. Pat. No. 7,170,007, also incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
1948439 | Budscheid | Feb 1934 | A |
2576227 | Hutchins, Jr. | Nov 1951 | A |
2604509 | Blanchard | Jul 1952 | A |
3115542 | Palandri et al. | Dec 1963 | A |
3127083 | Guyer | Mar 1964 | A |
3217083 | Gore | Nov 1965 | A |
3313346 | Cross | Apr 1967 | A |
3328140 | Warren | Jun 1967 | A |
3346045 | Knapp et al. | Oct 1967 | A |
3482034 | Rhoades et al. | Dec 1969 | A |
3490125 | Frieling, Jr. | Jan 1970 | A |
3634607 | Coleman | Jan 1972 | A |
3679812 | Owens | Jul 1972 | A |
3681514 | Rhoades et al. | Aug 1972 | A |
3710859 | Hanes et al. | Jan 1973 | A |
3758704 | Naud | Sep 1973 | A |
3766307 | Andrews, Jr. | Oct 1973 | A |
3921061 | Miller | Nov 1975 | A |
4016942 | Wallis et al. | Apr 1977 | A |
4059951 | Roe | Nov 1977 | A |
4077022 | Pitts, Jr. | Feb 1978 | A |
4131757 | Felkel | Dec 1978 | A |
4131758 | Felkel | Dec 1978 | A |
4197423 | Fusen | Apr 1980 | A |
4250351 | Bridges | Feb 1981 | A |
4281716 | Hall | Aug 1981 | A |
4292588 | Smith | Sep 1981 | A |
4409431 | Neuroth | Oct 1983 | A |
4486252 | Lloyd | Dec 1984 | A |
4522464 | Thompson et al. | Jun 1985 | A |
4523804 | Thompson | Jun 1985 | A |
4525813 | Burrage | Jun 1985 | A |
4577693 | Graser | Mar 1986 | A |
4606604 | Soodak | Aug 1986 | A |
4644094 | Hoffman | Feb 1987 | A |
4645298 | Gartside, III | Feb 1987 | A |
4675474 | Neuroth | Jun 1987 | A |
4679041 | Fetter et al. | Jul 1987 | A |
4722589 | Priaroggia | Feb 1988 | A |
4743711 | Hoffman | May 1988 | A |
4762180 | Wybro et al. | Aug 1988 | A |
4768984 | de Oliveira et al. | Sep 1988 | A |
4825953 | Wong et al. | May 1989 | A |
4830113 | Geyer | May 1989 | A |
4899823 | Cobb et al. | Feb 1990 | A |
4952012 | Stamnitz | Aug 1990 | A |
4979795 | Mascarenhas | Dec 1990 | A |
4986360 | Laky et al. | Jan 1991 | A |
4993492 | Cressey et al. | Feb 1991 | A |
5002130 | Laky | Mar 1991 | A |
5088559 | Taliaferro | Feb 1992 | A |
5125061 | Marlier et al. | Jun 1992 | A |
5125062 | Marlier et al. | Jun 1992 | A |
5150443 | Wijnberg | Sep 1992 | A |
5329605 | Wargotz | Jul 1994 | A |
5431759 | Neuroth | Jul 1995 | A |
5495547 | Rafie et al. | Feb 1996 | A |
5778981 | Head | Jul 1998 | A |
5787217 | Traut et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5857523 | Edwards | Jan 1999 | A |
5894104 | Hedberg | Apr 1999 | A |
6015013 | Edwards et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6030255 | Konishi et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6053252 | Edwards | Apr 2000 | A |
6060662 | Rafie et al. | May 2000 | A |
6116345 | Fontana et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6161619 | Head | Dec 2000 | A |
6182765 | Kilgore | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6195487 | Anderson et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6211467 | Berelsman et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6276456 | Head | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6386290 | Headworth | May 2002 | B1 |
6403889 | Mehan et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6442304 | Crawley et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6484806 | Childers et al. | Nov 2002 | B2 |
6488093 | Moss | Dec 2002 | B2 |
6555752 | Dalrymple et al. | Apr 2003 | B2 |
6559383 | Martin | May 2003 | B1 |
6559385 | Johnson et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
6600108 | Mydur et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6631095 | Bryant et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
6659180 | Moss | Dec 2003 | B2 |
6675888 | Schempf et al. | Jan 2004 | B2 |
6691775 | Headworth | Feb 2004 | B2 |
6745840 | Headworth | Jun 2004 | B2 |
6747213 | Bonicel | Jun 2004 | B2 |
6763889 | Rytlewski et al. | Jul 2004 | B2 |
6776195 | Blasko et al. | Aug 2004 | B2 |
6807988 | Powell et al. | Oct 2004 | B2 |
6834724 | Headworth | Dec 2004 | B2 |
6843321 | Carlsen | Jan 2005 | B2 |
6919512 | Guven et al. | Jul 2005 | B2 |
7000903 | Piecyk et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
7116283 | Benson et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7139218 | Hall et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7170007 | Varkey et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7188406 | Varkey et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7282644 | Alvey | Oct 2007 | B1 |
7402753 | Varkey et al. | Jul 2008 | B2 |
7523804 | Tanaka et al. | Apr 2009 | B2 |
7586042 | Varkey et al. | Sep 2009 | B2 |
7700880 | Varkey et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
7719283 | Ishikawa et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
7798234 | Ju et al. | Sep 2010 | B2 |
8227697 | Varkey et al. | Jul 2012 | B2 |
20030011489 | Viswanathan | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030169179 | James, II | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20040163822 | Zhang et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040262027 | Kaczmarski | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050217844 | Edwards et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050219063 | Viswanathan et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20060187084 | Hernandez-Marti et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060221768 | Hall et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20070003780 | Varkey et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070158095 | Sridhar et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20080083533 | Malone et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20090145610 | Varkey et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
PI0900142 | Sep 2009 | BR |
0003104 | Jul 1979 | EP |
0471600 | Feb 1992 | EP |
1216342 | Jun 2002 | EP |
2039878 | Mar 2009 | EP |
2767861 | Mar 1999 | FR |
2234722 | Feb 1991 | GB |
54007186 | Jan 1979 | JP |
02216710 | Aug 1990 | JP |
20090471 | Aug 2009 | NO |
2087929 | Aug 1997 | RU |
2105326 | Feb 1998 | RU |
2138613 | Sep 1999 | RU |
2138834 | Sep 1999 | RU |
2209450 | Jul 2003 | RU |
781981 | Nov 1980 | SU |
9948111 | Sep 1999 | WO |
02071178 | Sep 2002 | WO |
2006003362 | Jan 2006 | WO |
2006027553 | Mar 2006 | WO |
2007034242 | Mar 2007 | WO |
2006088372 | Aug 2008 | WO |
Entry |
---|
English Translation of RU 2087929. Korzhenevskiy A.G., et al., Geophysical Cable for Studying Inclined and Horizontal Boreholes and Methods of Using It, Aug. 1997. |
Machine (English) Translation of RU2209450 (C1): Khorzhenevskaya T A et al.; Load-Carrying Logging Cable (Variants) and Process of Investigation of Inclined and Horizontal Wells; Jul. 27, 2003. |
SM Lebedev, Os Gefle, Yu P Pokholkov and Vi Chichikin, “The Breakdown Strength of Two-Layer Dielectrics”, High Voltage Engineering Symposium, Aug. 22-27, 1999, Tomsk Polytechnic University, Tomsk, Russia #4.304.P2. |
MMA Salama, R Hackman, Fellow and AY Chikhani, Sr., “Instructional Design of Multi-Layer Insulation of Power Cables”, Transaction on Power Systems, vol. 7, No. 1, Feb. 1992, pp. 377-382. |
Russian Office Action for Russian Patent Application No. 2009103151 dated Sep. 11, 2012. |
Decision on Grant Patent for Invention for Russian Application No. 200910315 dated Nov. 29, 2013. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20090194296 A1 | Aug 2009 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61063231 | Feb 2008 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 11813755 | Mar 2008 | US |
Child | 12356599 | US |