In exploration and production efforts, of downhole formations, for example, a number of sensors and measurement systems are used to obtain information that may be used to make a variety of decisions. Among the information may be formation dip and azimuth information. Such information may be used for geosteering, to derive bed direction, or as an initial guess in the resolution of parameters such as distance to bed and formation resistivities.
According to an embodiment of the invention, a system to determine a dip angle and an azimuth angle of a formation includes a transmitter disposed in a borehole, the transmitter configured to change a transmitted current to induce a current in an earth formation; a receiver disposed in the borehole, spaced apart from the transmitter and configured to receive transient electromagnetic signals; and a processor configured to extract multi-time focusing (MTF) responses from the transient electromagnetic signals, determine a relative dip angle and a rotation of a tool comprising the transmitter and receiver based on the MTF responses, and estimate the dip angle and the azimuth angle of the formation based on the relative dip angle and the rotation of the tool.
According to another embodiment of the invention, a method of determining a dip angle and an azimuth angle of a formation includes disposing a transmitter in a borehole; the transmitter changing a transmitted current to induce a current in an earth formation; disposing a receiver in the borehole spaced apart from the transmitter; the receiver receiving transient electromagnetic signals; processing the transient electromagnetic signals to extract multi-time focusing (MTF) responses; determining a relative dip angle and a rotation of a tool comprising the transmitter and the receiver based on the multi-time focusing responses; and estimating the dip angle and the azimuth angle of the formation based on the relative dip angle and the rotation of the tool.
Referring now to the drawings wherein like elements are numbered alike in the several Figures:
As noted above, formation dip and azimuth may be among the parameters obtained during exploration and production efforts. Embodiments of the system and method described herein relate to a multi-time focusing technique using transient electromagnetic signals recorded in the formation to estimate the formation dip and azimuth.
V=S
5/2
·t
−5/2
+S
7/2
·t
−7/2
+S
9/2
·t
−9/2
+S
11/2
·t
−11/2+ [EQ. 1]
Voltage measurements {right arrow over (V)} at several late times may be used to calculate expansion coefficients {tilde over ({right arrow over (S)} from the following linear system:
In matrix form, EQ. 2 may be written as:
{right arrow over (V)}={tilde over ({circumflex over (T)}·{tilde over ({right arrow over (S)} [EQ. 3]
where n=7, 9, 11, . . . . The length of {tilde over ({right arrow over (S)} is l=(n−3)/2; m≧l.
To improve the condition number of matrix {tilde over ({circumflex over (T)}, EQ. 3 may be multiplied by the normalization matrix {circumflex over (N)}:
to yield:
{right arrow over (V)}={hacek over ({circumflex over (T)}·{hacek over ({right arrow over (S)}[EQ.5]
If the times grow geometrically (exponentially in the discrete time domain), then {hacek over ({circumflex over (T)} may be obtained:
Using EQ. 6 in EQ. 5, and substituting EQ. 3 yields:
The system of EQ. 5 may be solved by the singular value decomposition (SVD) method, which provides a solution with the minimal norm. As a result, the MTF response may be obtained as:
S
5/2
={tilde over (S)}
1
={hacek over (S)}
1
·t
1
5/2 [EQ. 8]
At block 340 of the method 300 shown in
where Rxxp, Rzzp are principal components, θ is the relative dip angle (between the formation 4 normal and the downhole tool 10 axis), and φ is the rotation angle. Pairs of components Rxy and Ryx, Rxz and Rzx, Ryz and Rzy have the same representation via the principle components. The components Rxy and Ryx coincide by definition, but they may differ in practice. That is, real MTF responses may not coincide due to inaccuracies in the calculation of the responses (lack of late time responses) and the presence of measurement noise. Consequently, to achieve a stable solution to EQ. 9, appropriate measured components must be chosen.
At block 350 of the method 300 shown in
Non-limiting examples illustrating embodiments of the method and system discussed above are detailed below. For example, an exemplary transmitter 110 is spaced 5 meters (m) apart from the exemplary receiver 120. The coil moment when the current impulse is turned off is 1 square meters (m2). The exemplary receiver 120 coil measures the electromagnetic field (emf) and all 9 components (XX, XY, XZ, YX, YY, YZ, ZX, ZY, ZZ) using three transmitter-receiver pairs 110 are obtained. For 16 times between 0.35 milliseconds (ms) to 0.5 ms, with a relative dip (θ) angle of 36 degrees and rotation (φ) angle of 54 degrees, the MTF responses for 2, 3, 4, and 5 terms used in the expansion are as shown in Table 1. The MTF responses are in millivolts-micro seconds.
While Table 1 illustrates some stability in the MTF responses over the different number of terms, the responses cannot be calculated to a predefined accuracy. In addition, the components Rxz and Rzx and the components Ryz and Rzy do not coincide. Thus, the number of terms must be chosen based on numerous test calculations of the dip and rotations for the specified time interval. In this regard, the condition number of the matrix {tilde over ({circumflex over (T)} is shown in Table 2.
As Table 2 indicates, the condition number (change in output based on small change in input parameter) increases as the number of terms increases. It bears noting that the number of times (m, see e.g., EQ. 2) and the time geometric increment also influence condition number. These parameters are chosen to minimize condition number. As Table 2 indicates, condition number is too large for the case of 5 terms, and errors in the field data may considerably effect the result.
Table 3 indicates the terms Sj/2·t−j/2, for j=5, 7, 9, 11, and 13 for Rxx response for different terms in the expansion.
As Table 3 illustrates, after the first MTF response, there is no regularity in the behavior among the terms. Thus, only the first term of the series may be extracted to a predetermined accuracy. While the other terms cannot be determined, they influence MTF response calculation.
The following exemplary tables (Tables 4-6) show results of angle evaluation in cases with different sets of available components. Discretization of 0.5 degrees is used. For each pair of relative dip and rotation angles, {θ,φp}={i/2, j/2}, i,j=1, . . . , 180, the linear system of EQ. 6 is solved by a singular value decomposition (SVD) method. The solution corresponding to the minimal misfit has been chosen, and the case of relative dip (θ)=0 degree was not considered for average absolute error calculation.
Table 4, above, shows estimates of the relative dip and rotation angles (θ, φ) using all 9 components. The average absolute error in the relative dip angle (θ) estimate is 0.4 degrees, and the average absolute error in the rotation angle (φ) estimate is 1.3 degrees.
Table 5, above, shows estimates of the relative dip and rotation angles (θ, φ) using 5 components (XX, YY, ZZ, XZ, ZX). The average absolute error in the relative dip angle (θ) estimate is 0.4 degrees, and the average absolute error in the rotation angle (φ) estimate is 1.1 degrees. As a comparison with Table 4 indicates, the average absolute error values resulting in Table 5 using 5 components are similar to those obtained in Table 4 using 9 components.
Table 6, above, shows estimates of the relative dip and rotation angles (θ, φ) using 4 components (XX, YY, ZZ, XZ). The average absolute error in the relative dip angle (θ) estimate is 1.3 degrees, and the average absolute error in the rotation angle (φ) estimate is 3.6 degrees. A comparison with the average absolute error values associated with Tables 4 and 5 indicates that using the 4 components resulting in the estimates in Table 6 provides the worst estimates among the three exemplary cases.
While one or more embodiments have been shown and described, modifications and substitutions may be made thereto without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention. Accordingly, it is to be understood that the present invention has been described by way of illustrations and not limitation.
Number | Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
PCT/RU2013/001004 | Nov 2013 | RU | national |
This application claims the benefit of priority to PCT Application No. PCT/RU2013/001004 filed Nov. 11, 2013, the disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.