The present disclosure relates generally to equipment utilized and operations performed in conjunction with a subterranean well and, in an embodiment described herein, more particularly provides for mitigating shock produced by well perforating.
Shock absorbers have been used in the past to absorb shock produced by detonation of perforating guns in wells. Unfortunately, prior shock absorbers have had only very limited success. In part, the present inventors have postulated that this is due to the prior shock absorbers being incapable of reacting sufficiently quickly to allow some displacement of one perforating string component relative to another during a shock event.
Therefore, it will be appreciated that improvements are needed in the art of mitigating shock produced by well perforating.
In carrying out the principles of this disclosure, a shock de-coupler is provided which brings improvements to the art of mitigating shock produced by perforating strings. One example is described below in which a shock de-coupler is initially relatively compliant, but becomes more rigid when a certain amount of displacement has been experienced due to a perforating event. Another example is described below in which the shock de-coupler permits displacement in both longitudinal directions, but the de-coupler is “centered” for precise positioning of perforating string components in a well.
In one aspect, a shock de-coupler for use with a perforating string is provided to the art by this disclosure. In one example, the de-coupler can include perforating string connectors at opposite ends of the de-coupler, with a longitudinal axis extending between the connectors. At least one biasing device resists displacement of one connector relative to the other connector in each opposite direction along the longitudinal axis, whereby the first connector is biased toward a predetermined position relative to the second connector.
In another aspect, a perforating string is provided by this disclosure. In one example, the perforating string can include a shock de-coupler interconnected longitudinally between two components of the perforating string. The shock de-coupler variably resists displacement of one component away from a predetermined position relative to the other component in each longitudinal direction, and a compliance of the shock de-coupler substantially decreases in response to displacement of the first component a predetermined distance away from the predetermined position relative to the second component.
These and other features, advantages and benefits will become apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art upon careful consideration of the detailed description of representative embodiments of the disclosure hereinbelow and the accompanying drawings, in which similar elements are indicated in the various figures using the same reference numbers.
Representatively illustrated in
The perforating string 12 is sealed and secured in the casing 16 by a packer 26. The packer 26 seals off an annulus 28 formed radially between the tubular string 12 and the wellbore 14.
A firing head 30 is used to initiate firing or detonation of the perforating guns 20 (e.g., in response to a mechanical, hydraulic, electrical, optical or other type of signal, passage of time, etc.), when it is desired to form the perforations 22. Although the firing head 30 is depicted in
In the example of
One of the shock de-couplers 32 is interconnected between two of the perforating guns 20. In this position, a shock de-coupler can mitigate the transmission of shock between perforating guns, and thereby prevent the accumulation of shock effects along a perforating string.
Another one of the shock de-couplers 32 is interconnected between the packer 26 and the perforating guns 20. In this position, a shock de-coupler can mitigate the transmission of shock from perforating guns to a packer, which could otherwise unset or damage the packer, cause damage to the tubular string between the packer and the perforating guns, etc. This shock de-coupler 32 is depicted in
Yet another of the shock de-couplers 32 is interconnected above the packer 26. In this position, a shock de-coupler can mitigate the transmission of shock from the perforating string 12 to a tubular string 34 (such as a production or injection tubing string, a work string, etc.) above the packer 26.
At this point, it should be noted that the well system 10 of
For example, it is not necessary for the wellbore 14 to be vertical, for there to be two of the perforating guns 20, or for the firing head 30 to be positioned between the perforating guns and the packer 26, etc. Instead, the well system 10 configuration of
The shock de-couplers 32 are referred to as “de-couplers,” since they function to prevent, or at least mitigate, coupling of shock between components connected to opposite ends of the de-couplers. In the example of
To prevent coupling of shock between components, it is desirable to allow the components to displace relative to one another, so that shock is reflected, instead of being coupled to the next perforating string components. However, as in the well system 10, it is also desirable to interconnect the components to each other in a predetermined configuration, so that the components can be conveyed to preselected positions in the wellbore 14 (e.g., so that the perforations 22 are formed where desired, the packer 26 is set where desired, etc.).
In examples of the shock de-couplers 32 described more fully below, the shock de-couplers can mitigate the coupling of shock between components, and also provide for accurate positioning of assembled components in a well. These otherwise competing concerns are resolved, while still permitting bidirectional displacement of the components relative to one another.
The addition of relatively compliant de-couplers to a perforating string can, in some examples, present a trade-off between shock mitigation and precise positioning. However, in many circumstances, it can be possible to accurately predict the deflections of the de-couplers, and thereby account for these deflections when positioning the perforating string in a wellbore, so that perforations are accurately placed.
By permitting relatively high compliance displacement of the components relative to one another, the shock de-couplers 32 mitigate the coupling of shock between the components, due to reflecting (instead of instead of transmitting or coupling) a substantial amount of the shock. The initial, relatively high compliance (e.g., greater than 1×10−5 in/lb (˜1.13×10−6 m/N), and more preferably greater than 1×10−4 in/lb (˜1.13×10−5 m/N) compliance) displacement allows shock in a perforating string component to reflect back into that component. The compliance can be substantially decreased, however, when a predetermined displacement amount has been reached.
Referring additionally now to
In this example, perforating string connectors 36, 38 are provided at opposite ends of the shock de-coupler 32, thereby allowing the shock de-coupler to be conveniently interconnected between various components of the perforating string 12. The perforating string connectors 36, 38 can include threads, elastomer or non-elastomer seals, metal-to-metal seals, and/or any other feature suitable for use in connecting components of a perforating string.
An elongated mandrel 40 extends upwardly (as viewed in
The projections 42 are complementarily received in longitudinally elongated slots 46 formed in a generally tubular housing 48 extending downwardly (as viewed in
The projections 44 are complementarily received in slots 50 formed through the housing 48. The projections 44 can be installed in the slots 50 after the mandrel 40 has been inserted into the housing 48.
The cooperative engagement between the projections 44 and the slots 50 permits some relative displacement between the connectors 36, 38 along a longitudinal axis 54, but prevents any significant relative rotation between the connectors. Thus, torque can be transmitted from one connector to the other, but relative displacement between the connectors 36, 38 is permitted in both opposite longitudinal directions.
Biasing devices 52a,b operate to maintain the connector 36 in a certain position relative to the other connector 38. The biasing device 52a is retained longitudinally between a shoulder 56 formed in the housing 48 below the connector 38 and a shoulder 58 on an upper side of the projections 42, and the biasing devices 52b are retained longitudinally between a shoulder 60 on a lower side of the projections 42 and shoulders 62 formed in the housing 48 above the slots 46.
Although the biasing device 52a is depicted in
Note that the predetermined position could be “centered” as depicted in
Energy absorbers 64 are preferably provided at opposite longitudinal ends of the slots 50. The energy absorbers 64 preferably prevent excessive relative displacement between the connectors 36, 38 by substantially decreasing the effective compliance of the shock de-coupler 32 when the connector 36 has displaced a certain distance relative to the connector 38.
Examples of suitable energy absorbers include resilient materials, such as elastomers, and non-resilient materials, such as readily deformable metals (e.g., brass rings, crushable tubes, etc.), non-elastomers (e.g., plastics, foamed materials, etc.) and other types of materials. Preferably, the energy absorbers 64 efficiently convert kinetic energy to heat and/or mechanical deformation (elastic and plastic strain). However, it should be clearly understood that any type of energy absorber may be used, while remaining within the scope of this disclosure.
In other examples, the energy absorber 64 could be incorporated into the biasing devices 52a,b. For example, a biasing device could initially deform elastically with relatively high compliance and then (e.g., when a certain displacement amount is reached), the biasing device could deform plastically with relatively low compliance.
If the shock de-coupler 32 of
It may also be desirable to provide one or more pressure barriers 68 between the connectors 36, 38. For example, the pressure barriers 68 may operate to isolate the interiors of perforating guns 20 and/or firing head 30 from well fluids and pressures.
In the example of
Note that it is not necessary for a detonation train to extend through a shock de-coupler in keeping with the principles of this disclosure. For example, in the well system 10 as depicted in
Referring additionally now to
One end of the biasing device 52 is retained in a helical recess 76 on the mandrel 40, and an opposite end of the biasing device is retained in a helical recess 78 on the housing 48. The biasing device 52 is placed in tension when the connector 36 displaces in one longitudinal direction relative to the other connector 38, and the biasing device is placed in compression when the connector 36 displaces in an opposite direction relative to the other connector 38. Thus, the biasing device 52 operates to maintain the predetermined position of the connector 36 relative to the other connector 38.
Referring additionally now to
In the
Referring additionally now to
Opposite ends of the biasing device 52 are rigidly attached (e.g., by welding, etc.) to the respective housing 48 and connector 36. When the connector 36 displaces in one longitudinal direction relative to the connector 38, tension is applied across the biasing device 52, and when the connector 36 displaces in an opposite direction relative to the connector 38, compression is applied across the biasing device.
The biasing device 52 in the
Additional differences in the
The biasing device 52 can be formed, so that a compliance of the biasing device substantially decreases in response to displacement of the first connector 36 a predetermined distance away from the predetermined position relative to the other connector 38. This feature can be used to prevent excessive relative displacement between the connectors 36, 38.
The biasing device 52 can also be formed, so that it has a desired compliance and/or a desired compliance curve.
This feature can be used to “tune” the compliance of the overall perforating string 12, so that shock effects on the perforating string are optimally mitigated. Suitable methods of accomplishing this result are described in International Application serial nos. PCT/US10/61104 (filed 17 Dec. 2010), PCT/US11/34690 (filed 30 Apr. 2011), and PCT/US11/46955 (filed 8 Aug. 2011). The entire disclosures of these prior applications are incorporated herein by this reference.
The examples of the shock de-coupler 32 described above demonstrate that a wide variety of different configurations are possible, while remaining within the scope of this disclosure. Accordingly, the principles of this disclosure are not limited in any manner to the details of the shock de-coupler 32 examples described above or depicted in the drawings.
It may now be fully appreciated that this disclosure provides several advancements to the art of mitigating shock effects in subterranean wells. Various examples of shock de-couplers 32 described above can effectively prevent or at least reduce coupling of shock between components of a perforating string 12.
In one aspect, the above disclosure provides to the art a shock de-coupler 32 for use with a perforating string 12. In an example, the de-coupler 32 can include first and second perforating string connectors 36, 38 at opposite ends of the de-coupler 32, a longitudinal axis 54 extending between the first and second connectors 36, 38, and at least one biasing device 52 which resists displacement of the first connector 36 relative to the second connector 38 in both of first and second opposite directions along the longitudinal axis 54, whereby the first connector 36 is biased toward a predetermined position relative to the second connector 38.
Torque can be transmitted between the first and second connectors 36, 38.
A pressure barrier 68 may be used between the first and second connectors 36, 38. A detonation train 66 can extend across the pressure barrier 68.
The shock de-coupler 32 may include at least one energy absorber 64 which, in response to displacement of the first connector 36 a predetermined distance, substantially increases force resisting displacement of the first connector 36 away from the predetermined position. The shock de-coupler 32 may include multiple energy absorbers which substantially increase respective forces biasing the first connector 36 toward the predetermined position in response to displacement of the first connector 36 a predetermined distance in each of the first and second opposite directions.
The shock de-coupler 32 may include a projection 44 engaged in a slot 50, whereby such engagement between the projection 44 and the slot 50 permits longitudinal displacement of the first connector 36 relative to the second connector 38, but prevents rotational displacement of the first connector 36 relative to the second connector 38.
The biasing device may comprise first and second biasing devices 52a,b. The first biasing device 52a may be compressed in response to displacement of the first connector 36 in the first direction relative to the second connector 38, and the second biasing device 52b may be compressed in response to displacement of the first connector 36 in the second direction relative to the second connector 38.
The biasing device 52 may be placed in compression in response to displacement of the first connector 36 in the first direction relative to the second connector 38, and the biasing device 52 may be placed in tension in response to displacement of the first connector 36 in the second direction relative to the second connector 38.
A compliance of the biasing device 52 may substantially decrease in response to displacement of the first connector 36 a predetermined distance away from the predetermined position relative to the second connector 38. The biasing device 52 may have a compliance of greater than about 1×10−5 in/lb. The biasing device 52 may have a compliance of greater than about 1×10−4 in/lb.
A perforating string 12 is also described by the above disclosure. In one example, the perforating string 12 can include a shock de-coupler 32 interconnected longitudinally between first and second components of the perforating string 12. The shock de-coupler 32 variably resists displacement of the first component away from a predetermined position relative to the second component in each of first and second longitudinal directions. A compliance of the shock de-coupler 32 substantially decreases in response to displacement of the first component a predetermined distance away from the predetermined position relative to the second component.
Examples of perforating string 12 components described above include the perforating guns 20, the firing head 30 and the packer 26. The first and second components may each comprise a perforating gun 20. The first component may comprise a perforating gun 20, and the second component may comprise a packer 26. The first component may comprise a packer 26, and the second component may comprise a firing head 30. The first component may comprise a perforating gun 20, and the second component may comprise a firing head 30. Other components may be used, if desired.
The de-coupler 32 may include at least first and second perforating string connectors 36, 38 at opposite ends of the de-coupler 32, and at least one biasing device 52 which resists displacement of the first connector 36 relative to the second connector 38 in each of the longitudinal directions, whereby the first component is biased toward the predetermined position relative to the second component.
The shock de-coupler 32 may have a compliance of greater than about 1×10−5 in/lb. The shock de-coupler 32 may have a compliance of greater than about 1×10−4 in/lb.
It is to be understood that the various embodiments of this disclosure described herein may be utilized in various orientations, such as inclined, inverted, horizontal, vertical, etc., and in various configurations, without departing from the principles of this disclosure. The embodiments are described merely as examples of useful applications of the principles of the disclosure, which is not limited to any specific details of these embodiments.
In the above description of the representative examples, directional terms (such as “above,” “below,” “upper,” “lower,” etc.) are used for convenience in referring to the accompanying drawings. However, it should be clearly understood that the scope of this disclosure is not limited to any particular directions described herein.
Of course, a person skilled in the art would, upon a careful consideration of the above description of representative embodiments of the disclosure, readily appreciate that many modifications, additions, substitutions, deletions, and other changes may be made to the specific embodiments, and such changes are contemplated by the principles of this disclosure. Accordingly, the foregoing detailed description is to be clearly understood as being given by way of illustration and example only, the spirit and scope of the invention being limited solely by the appended claims and their equivalents.
Number | Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
PCT/US2010/061104 | Dec 2010 | WO | international |
PCT/US2011/034690 | Apr 2011 | WO | international |
PCT/US2011/046955 | Aug 2011 | WO | international |
PCT/US2011/050395 | Sep 2011 | WO | international |
This application is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 13/325,866 filed on 14 Dec. 2011, which claims the benefit under 35 USC §119 of the filing date of International Application Serial No. PCT/US11/50395 filed 2 Sep. 2011, International Application Serial No. PCT/US11/46955 filed 8 Aug. 2011, International Patent Application Serial No. PCT/US11/34690 filed 29 Apr. 2011, and International Patent Application Serial No. PCT/US10/61104 filed 17 Dec. 2010. The entire disclosures of these prior applications are incorporated herein by this reference.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
2833213 | Udry | May 1958 | A |
2980017 | Castel | Apr 1961 | A |
3057296 | Silverman | Oct 1962 | A |
3128825 | Blagg | Apr 1964 | A |
3143321 | McGehee et al. | Aug 1964 | A |
3208378 | Boop | Sep 1965 | A |
3216751 | Der Mott | Nov 1965 | A |
3394612 | Bogosoff et al. | Jul 1968 | A |
3414071 | Alberts | Dec 1968 | A |
3653468 | Marshall | Apr 1972 | A |
3687074 | Andrews et al. | Aug 1972 | A |
3779591 | Rands | Dec 1973 | A |
3923105 | Lands, Jr. | Dec 1975 | A |
3923106 | Bosse-Platiere | Dec 1975 | A |
3923107 | Dillard | Dec 1975 | A |
3971926 | Gau et al. | Jul 1976 | A |
4269063 | Escaron et al. | May 1981 | A |
4319526 | DerMott | Mar 1982 | A |
4346795 | Herbert | Aug 1982 | A |
4409824 | Salama et al. | Oct 1983 | A |
4410051 | Daniel et al. | Oct 1983 | A |
4419933 | Kirby et al. | Dec 1983 | A |
4480690 | Vann | Nov 1984 | A |
4575026 | Brittain et al. | Mar 1986 | A |
4598776 | Stout | Jul 1986 | A |
4612992 | Vann et al. | Sep 1986 | A |
4619333 | George | Oct 1986 | A |
4637478 | George | Jan 1987 | A |
4679669 | Kalb et al. | Jul 1987 | A |
4693317 | Edwards et al. | Sep 1987 | A |
4694878 | Gambertoglio | Sep 1987 | A |
4764231 | Slawinski et al. | Aug 1988 | A |
4817710 | Edwards et al. | Apr 1989 | A |
4830120 | Stout | May 1989 | A |
4842059 | Tomek | Jun 1989 | A |
4901802 | George et al. | Feb 1990 | A |
4913053 | McPhee | Apr 1990 | A |
4971153 | Rowe et al. | Nov 1990 | A |
5027708 | Gonzalez et al. | Jul 1991 | A |
5044437 | Wittrisch | Sep 1991 | A |
5078210 | George | Jan 1992 | A |
5088557 | Ricles et al. | Feb 1992 | A |
5092167 | Finley et al. | Mar 1992 | A |
5103912 | Flint | Apr 1992 | A |
5107927 | Whiteley et al. | Apr 1992 | A |
5109355 | Yuno | Apr 1992 | A |
5117911 | Navarette et al. | Jun 1992 | A |
5131470 | Miszewski et al. | Jul 1992 | A |
5133419 | Barrington | Jul 1992 | A |
5161616 | Colla | Nov 1992 | A |
5188191 | Tomek | Feb 1993 | A |
5216197 | Huber et al. | Jun 1993 | A |
5287924 | Burleson et al. | Feb 1994 | A |
5343963 | Bouldin et al. | Sep 1994 | A |
5351791 | Rosenzweig | Oct 1994 | A |
5366013 | Edwards et al. | Nov 1994 | A |
5421780 | Vukovic | Jun 1995 | A |
5529127 | Burleson et al. | Jun 1996 | A |
5547148 | Del Monte et al. | Aug 1996 | A |
5598894 | Burleson et al. | Feb 1997 | A |
5603379 | Henke et al. | Feb 1997 | A |
5662166 | Shammai | Sep 1997 | A |
5667023 | Harrell et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5774420 | Heysse et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5813480 | Zaleski, Jr. et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5823266 | Burleson et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5826654 | Adnan et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5957209 | Burleson et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5964294 | Edwards et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5992523 | Burleson et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6012015 | Tubal | Jan 2000 | A |
6021377 | Dubinsky et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6068394 | Dublin, Jr. | May 2000 | A |
6078867 | Plumb et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6098716 | Hromas et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6135252 | Knotts | Oct 2000 | A |
6173779 | Smith | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6216533 | Woloson et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6230101 | Wallis | May 2001 | B1 |
6283214 | Guinot et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6308809 | Reid et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6371541 | Pedersen | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6394241 | Desjardins et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6397752 | Yang et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6408953 | Goldman et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6412415 | Kothari et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6412614 | Lagrange et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6450022 | Brewer | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6454012 | Reid | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6457570 | Reid et al. | Oct 2002 | B2 |
6484801 | Brewer et al. | Nov 2002 | B2 |
6543538 | Tolman et al. | Apr 2003 | B2 |
6550322 | Sweetland et al. | Apr 2003 | B2 |
6595290 | George et al. | Jul 2003 | B2 |
6672405 | Tolman et al. | Jan 2004 | B2 |
6674432 | Kennon et al. | Jan 2004 | B2 |
6679323 | Vargervik et al. | Jan 2004 | B2 |
6679327 | Sloan et al. | Jan 2004 | B2 |
6684949 | Gabler et al. | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6684954 | George | Feb 2004 | B2 |
6708761 | George et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6810370 | Watts, III | Oct 2004 | B1 |
6826483 | Anderson | Nov 2004 | B1 |
6832159 | Smits et al. | Dec 2004 | B2 |
6842725 | Sarda | Jan 2005 | B1 |
6868920 | Hoteit et al. | Mar 2005 | B2 |
7000699 | Yang et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
7006959 | Huh et al. | Feb 2006 | B1 |
7044219 | Mason et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7114564 | Parrott et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7121340 | Grove et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7139689 | Huang | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7147088 | Reid et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7165612 | McLaughlin | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7178608 | Mayes et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7195066 | Sukup et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7234517 | Streich et al. | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7246659 | Fripp et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7260508 | Lim et al. | Aug 2007 | B2 |
7278480 | Longfield et al. | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7387160 | O'Shaughnessy et al. | Jun 2008 | B2 |
7387162 | Mooney, Jr. et al. | Jun 2008 | B2 |
7503403 | Jogi et al. | Mar 2009 | B2 |
7509245 | Siebrits et al. | Mar 2009 | B2 |
7533722 | George et al. | May 2009 | B2 |
7600568 | Ross et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
7603264 | Zamora et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
7640986 | Behrmann et al. | Jan 2010 | B2 |
7721650 | Barton et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
7721820 | Hill et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
7762331 | Goodman et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 |
7770662 | Harvey et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
8126646 | Grove et al. | Feb 2012 | B2 |
8136608 | Goodman | Mar 2012 | B2 |
20020121134 | Sweetland et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20030062169 | Marshall | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030089497 | George et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030150646 | Brooks et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20040045351 | Skinner | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040104029 | Martin | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040140090 | Mason et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20060070734 | Zillinger et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060118297 | Finci et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060243453 | McKee | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20070101808 | Irani et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070162235 | Zhan et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070193740 | Quint | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070214990 | Barkley et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20080041597 | Fisher et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080149338 | Goodman et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080202325 | Bertoja et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080216554 | McKee | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080245255 | Barton et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080262810 | Moran et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080314582 | Belani et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20090013775 | Bogath et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090071645 | Kenison et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090084535 | Bertoja et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090151589 | Henderson et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090159284 | Goodman | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090182541 | Crick et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090223400 | Hill et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090241658 | Irani et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090272529 | Crawford | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090276156 | Kragas et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090294122 | Hansen et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100000789 | Barton et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100037793 | Lee et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100085210 | Bonavides et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100132939 | Rodgers | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100133004 | Burleson et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100147519 | Goodman | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20120085539 | Tonnessen et al. | Apr 2012 | A1 |
20120152519 | Rodgers et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120152542 | Le | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120152614 | Rodgers et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120152615 | Rodgers et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120152616 | Rodgers et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120158388 | Rodgers et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120241169 | Hales et al. | Sep 2012 | A1 |
20120241170 | Hales et al. | Sep 2012 | A1 |
20120247769 | Schacherer et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2065557 | Jun 2009 | EP |
2004099564 | Nov 2004 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Halliburton; “AutoLatch Release Gun Connector”, Special Applications 6-7, received Jan. 19, 2011, 1 page. |
Halliburton; “Body Lock Ring”, Mechanical Downhole: Technology Transfer, dated Oct. 10, 2001, 4 pages. |
Starboard Innovations, LLC; “Downhole Mechanical Shock Absorber”, patent and prior art search results, Preliminary Report, dated Jul. 8, 2010, 22 pages. |
Carlos Baumann, Harvey Williams, and Schlumberger; “Perforating Wellbore Dynamics and Gunshock in Deepwater TCP Operations”, Product informational presentation, IPS-10-018, received May 11, 2011, 28 pages. |
Schlumberger; “SXVA Explosively Initiated Vertical Shock Absorber”, product paper 06-WT-066, dated 2007, 1 page. |
International Search Report with Written Opinion issued Dec. 27, 2011 for PCT Patent Application No. PCT/US11/046955, 8 pages. |
International Search Report with Written Opinion issued Jul. 28, 2011 for International Application No. PCT/US10/61104, 8 pages. |
International Search Report with Written Opinion issued Nov. 22, 2011 for International Application No. PCT/US11/029412, 9 pages. |
International Search Report with Written Opinion issued Jul. 28, 2011 for International Application No. PCT/US10/061107, 9 pages. |
International Search Report with Written Opinion issued Oct. 27, 2011 for International Application No. PCT/US11/034690, 9 pages. |
IES, Scott A. Ager; “IES Housing and High Shock Considerations”, informational presentation, received Sep. 1, 2010, 18 pages. |
Specification and Drawings for U.S. Appl. No. 13/493,327, filed Jun. 11, 2012, 30 pages. |
“2010 International Perforating Symposium”, Agenda, dated May 6-7, 2010, 2 pages. |
A. Blakeborough et al.; “Novel Load Cell for Measuring Axial Forca, Shear Force, and Bending Movement in large-scale Structural Experiments”, Informational paper, dated Mar. 23-Aug. 30, 2001, 8 pages. |
Weibing Li et al.; “The Effect of Annular Multi-Point Initiation on the Formation and Penetration of an Explosively Formed Penetrator”, Article in the International Journal of Impact Engineering, dated Aug. 27, 2009, 11 pages. |
Sergio Murilo et al.; “Optimization and Automation of Modeling of Flow Perforated Oil Wells”, Presentation for the Product Development Conference, dated 2004, 31 pages. |
Frederic Bruyere et al.; “New Practices to Enhance Perforating Results”, Oilfield Review, dated Autumn 2006, 18 pages. |
John F. Schatz; “Perf Breakdown, Fracturing, and Cleanup in PulsFrac”, informational brochure, dated May 2, 2007, 6 pages. |
M. A. Proett et al.; “Productivity Optimization of Oil Wells Using a New 3D Finite-Element Wellbore Inflow Model and Artificial Neutral Network”, conference paper, dated 2004, 17 pages. |
John F. Schatz; “PulsFrac Summary Technical Description”, informational brochure, dated 2003, 8 pages. |
IES, Scott A. Ager; “IES Recorder Buildup”, Company presentation, received Sep. 1, 2010, 59 pages. |
IES, Scott A. Ager; “IES Sensor Discussion”, received Sep. 1, 2010, 38 pages. |
IES; “Series 300: High Shock, High Speed Pressure Gauge”, product brochure, dated Feb. 1, 2012, 2 pages. |
IES, Scott A. Ager; Analog Recorder Test Example, informational letter, dated Sep. 1, 2010, 1 page. |
IES, Scott A. Ager; “Series 300 Gauge”, product information, dated Sep. 1, 2010, 1 page. |
IES, Scott A. Ager; “IES Introduction”, Company introduction presentation, received Sep. 1, 2010, 23 pages. |
Petroleum Experts; “IPM: Engineering Software Development”, product brochure, dated 2008, 27 pages. |
International Search Report with Written Opinion issued Oct. 27, 2011 for PCT Patent Application No. PCT/US11/034690, 9 pages. |
KAPPA Engineering; “Petroleum Exploration and Product Software, Training and Consulting”, product informational paper on v4.12B, dated Jan. 2010, 48 pages. |
Qiankun Jin, Zheng Shigui, Gary Ding, Yianjun, Cui Binggui, Beijing Engeneering Software Technology Co. LTD.; “3D Numerical Simulations of Penetration of Oil-Well Perforator into Concrete Targets”, Paper for the 7th International LS-DYNA Users Conference, received Jan. 28, 2010, 6 pages. |
Mario Dobrilovic, Zvonimir Ester, Trpimir Kujundzic; “Measurements of Shock Wave Force in Shock Tube with Indirect Methods”, Original scientific paper vol. 17, str. 55-60, dated 2005, 6 pages. |
Offshore Technology Conference; “Predicting Pressure Behavior and Dynamic Shock Loads on Completion Hardware During Perforating”, OTC 21059, dated May 3-6, 2010, 11 pages. |
IES; “Series 200: High Shock, High Speed Pressure and Acceleration Gauge”, product brochure, received Feb. 11, 2010, 2 pages. |
Terje Rudshaug, et al.; “A toolbox for improved Reservoir Management”, NETool, Force AWTC Seminar, Apr. 21-22, 2004, 29 pages. |
Halliburton; “ShockPro Schockload Evaluation Service”, Perforating Solutions pp. 5-125 to 5-126, dated 2007, 2 pages. |
Halliburton; “ShockPro Schockload Evaluation Service”, H03888, dated Jul. 2007, 2 pages. |
Strain Gages; “Positioning Strain Gages to Monitor Bending, Axial, Shear, and Torsional Loads”, p. E-5 to E-6, dated 2012, 2 pages. |
B. Grove, et al.; “Explosion-Induced Damage to Oilwell Perforating Gun Carriers”, Structures Under Shock and Impact IX, vol. 87, ISSN 1743-3509, SU060171, dated 2006, 12 pages. |
WEM; “Well Evaluation Model”, product brochure, received Mar. 2, 2010, 2 pages. |
Endevco; “Problems in High-Shock Measurement”, MEGGITT brochure TP308, dated Jul. 2007, 9 pages. |
Kenji Furui; “A Comprehensive Skin Factor Model for Well Completions Based on Finite Element Simulations”, informational paper, dated May 2004, 182 pages. |
Scott A. Ager; “IES Fast Speed Gauges”, informational presentation, dated Mar. 2, 2009, 38 pages. |
IES; “Battery Packing for High Shock”, article AN102, received Sep. 1, 2010, 4 pages. |
IES; “Accelerometer Wire Termination”, article AN106, received Sep. 1, 2010, 4 pages. |
John F. Schatz; “PulsFrac Validation: Owen/HTH Surface Block Test”, product information, dated 2004, 4 pages. |
John F. Schatz; “Casing Differential in PulsFrac Calculations”, product information, dated 2004, 2 pages. |
John F. Schatz; “The Role of Compressibility in PulsFrac Software”, informational paper, dated Aug. 22, 2007, 2 pages. |
Essca Group; “Erin Dynamic Flow Analysis Platform”, online article, dated 2009, 1 page. |
Halliburton; “Fast Gauge Recorder”, article 5-110, received Nov. 16, 2010, 2 pages. |
Halliburton; “Simulation Software for EquiFlow ICD Completions”, H07010, dated Sep. 2009, 2 pages. |
Office Action issued Sep. 8, 2009, for U.S. Appl. No. 11/957,541, 10 pages. |
Office Action issued Feb. 2, 2010, for U.S. Appl. No. 11/957,541, 8 pages. |
Office Action issued Jul. 15, 2010, for U.S. Appl. No. 11/957,541, 6 pages. |
Office Action issued Nov. 22, 2010, for U.S. Appl. No. 11/957,541, 6 pages. |
Office Action issued May 4, 2011, for U.S. Appl. No. 11/957,541, 9 pages. |
Office Action issued Apr. 21, 2011, for U.S. Appl. No. 13/008,075, 9 pages. |
J.A. Regalbuto et al; “Computer Codes for Oilwell-Perforator Design”, SPE 30182, dated Sep. 1997, 8 pages. |
J.F. Schatz et al; “High-Speed Downhole Memory Recorder and Software Used to Design and Confirm Perforating/Propellant Behavior and Formation Fracturing”, SPE 56434, dated Oct. 3-6, 1999, 9 pages. |
Joseph Ansah et al; “Advances in Well Completion Design: A New 3D Finite-Element Wellbore Inflow Model for Optimizing Performance of Perforated Completions”, SPE 73760, Feb. 20-21, 2002, 11 pages. |
D.A. Cuthill et al; “A New Technique for Rapid Estimation of Fracture Closure Stress When Using Propellants”, SPE 78171, dated Oct. 20-23, 2002, 6 pages. |
J.F. Schatz et al; “High-Speed Pressure and Accelerometer Measurements Characterize Dynamic Behavior During Perforating Events in Deepwater Gulf of Mexico”, SPE 90042, dated Sep. 26-29, 2004, 15 pages. |
Liang-Biao Ouyang et al; “Case Studies for Improving Completion Design Through Comprehensive Well-Performance Modeling”, SPE 104078, dated Dec. 5-7, 2006, 11 pages. |
Liang-Biao Ouyang et al; “Uncertainty Assessment on Well-Performance Prediction for an Oil Producer Equipped With Selected Completions”, SPE 106966, dated Mar. 31-Apr. 3, 2007, 9 pages. |
B. Grove et al; “new Effective Stress Law for Predicting Perforation Depth at Downhole Conditions”, SPE 111778, dated Feb. 13-15, 2008, 10 pages. |
Specification and drawing for U.S. Appl. No. 13/377,148, filed Dec. 8, 2011, 47 pages. |
Specification and drawing for U.S. Appl. No. 13/594,776, filed Aug. 25, 2012, 45 pages. |
Specification and drawing for U.S. Appl. No. 13/533,600, filed Jun. 26, 2012, 30 pages. |
Office Action issued Jun. 13, 2012 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/377,148, 38 pages. |
Office Action issued Jul. 12, 2012 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/413,588, 42 pages. |
Office Action issued Aug. 2, 2012 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/210,303, 35 pages. |
Office Action issued Jul. 26, 2012 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/325,726, 52 pages. |
Australian Examination Report issued Sep. 21, 2012 for AU Patent Application No. 2010365400, 3 pages. |
Office Action issued Oct. 1, 2012 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/325,726, 20 pages. |
Office Action issued Oct. 23, 2012 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/325,866, 35 pages. |
Office Action issued Nov. 19, 2012 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/325,909, 43 pages. |
Office Action issued Dec. 12, 2012 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/493,327, 75 pages. |
Office Action issued Dec. 18, 2012 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/533,600, 48 pages. |
Office Action issued Jan. 27, 2012 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/210,303, 32 pages. |
International Search Report with Written Opinion issued Feb. 9, 2012 for PCT Patent Application No. PCT/US2011/050401, 8 pages. |
Office Action issued Feb. 24, 2012 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/304,075, 15 pages. |
Office Action issued Apr. 10, 2012 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/325,726, 26 pages. |
Office Action issued Jun. 6, 2012 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/325,909, 35 pages. |
Office Action issued Jun. 7, 2012 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/430,550, 21 pages. |
International Search Report with Written Opinion issued Nov. 3, 2011 for PCT Patent Application No. PCT/US2011/036686, 10 pages. |
Australian Examination Report issued Jan. 3, 2013 for Australian Patent Application No. 2010365400, 3 pages. |
Office Action issued Jan. 28, 2013 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/413,588, 44 pages. |
Office Action issued Jan. 29, 2013 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/430,550, 55 pages. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20120255722 A1 | Oct 2012 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 13325866 | Dec 2011 | US |
Child | 13495035 | US |