1. Field of the Invention
Embodiments of the present invention relate to a pressure balancing device, such as for a transducer.
2. Description of the Prior Art
Downhole logging tools are frequently designed to be pressure balanced. This is where a measurement sensor is located within the body of the tool and is protected from well fluid by appropriate sealed housings, but where some form of pressure transmission device is used to compress a fluid within the tool to approximately the same pressure as the well fluid outside. In this manner, the sensor is exposed to the well pressure, without suffering the consequences of being immersed directly in the well fluid. The compensating mechanism must also allow for the internal fluid to expand at low pressure but high temperature.
Pressure compensating mechanisms regularly used downhole include pistons, rubber bladders and flexible metal bellows. Each mechanism has advantages and disadvantages in terms of the resulting pressure difference between the inside and outside of the tool, such as maintainability, cost, durability and resistance to attack from the chemicals in the well. Of these methods, compensating pistons are often used, due to their simple design and rugged construction. However, inherent in the design of a piston compensating system is the need for dynamic sliding seals, which experience high hydrostatic pressures and therefore suffer from high friction, and resist the motion of the piston. This resistance to motion results in a differential pressure across the piston, which corresponds to a minimum force required to move the piston against its seals. The higher the seal friction, the larger the differential pressure will be between the inside and the outside of the tool. In cases where the sensor inside the tool needs to be at the same pressure as the well fluid for accurate measurement, this differential pressure results in measurement error and is undesirable. In a similar manner both the bladder and the flexible metal bellows have stiffness in their structures, which resist motion and hence, generate a differential pressure.
A typical example of a downhole pressure sensitive device is a cable head load measuring tool. This tool is placed at the top of a logging tool string and is designed to report to the user the force being exerted on the tool string by the wireline or tractoring tool. Essentially, the tool must measure differential axial loading in the string, but not the axial load produced solely by the well pressure surrounding the string. Using a pressure balanced load measuring sensor is one solution, which inherently requires a good pressure compensating device.
In accordance with an embodiment of the present invention, a pressure balancing device for a transducer is provided. The pressure balancing device comprises: a pressure transmission device having a cross-sectional area and arranged, in use, to be exposed to a fluid; and a fluid chamber having a hollow shaft, the fluid chamber being arranged to be acted on by the pressure transmission device; wherein the cross-sectional area of the hollow shaft is less than the cross-sectional area of the pressure transmission device.
In accordance with an alternate embodiment of the present invention, a downhole tool comprising a pressure balancing device is provided. The pressure balancing device comprises: a pressure transmission device having a cross-sectional area and arranged, in use, to be exposed to a fluid; and a fluid chamber having a hollow shaft, the fluid chamber being arranged to be acted on by the pressure transmission device; wherein the cross-sectional area of the hollow shaft is less than the cross-sectional area of the pressure transmission device.
In accordance with an alternate embodiment of the present invention, a downhole load measuring tool comprising a pressure balancing device is provided. The pressure balancing device comprises: a pressure transmission device having a cross-sectional area and arranged, in use, to be exposed to a fluid; and a fluid chamber having a hollow shaft, the fluid chamber being arranged to be acted on by the pressure transmission device; wherein the cross-sectional area of the hollow shaft is less than the cross-sectional area of the pressure transmission device.
Embodiments of the present invention will now be described, by way of example only, with reference to the accompanying drawings, in which:
The embodiments of the present invention provide an improved downhole tool pressure balancing method for transducers, which is sensitive to differential pressure between an oil well for example and the tool interior. Using established pressure balancing mechanisms such as pistons, flexible bellows and rubber bladders, the area ratio of the compensation device and a shaft passing through a mandrel is carefully controlled so as to reduce the impact of differential pressure created by compensator friction or stiffness on the induced transducer error. The hollow shaft may be a load transmission shaft which may be connected to a load sensor.
The area ratio of the piston and the mandrel around the shaft have a ratio smaller than 1, such as less than 0.8 or less then 0.7, for example rather than equal to 1. This reduces the effect of the compensator/pressure transmission device friction/stiffness on the measured variable.
The improved pressure balancing configuration allows pressure sensitive transducers to suffer less measurement error than a conventional pressure balancing system. In the case of the cable head load measuring tool, the configuration results in increased accuracy and reduced hysteresis due to pressure changes over a system using a conventional pressure compensator.
Increased accuracy makes the use of the device in a downhole tool such as a downhole load measuring tool significantly more attractive to users as they can more confidently measure the load being exerted on the toolstring and predict when the cable head will reach breaking point. Balancing the load between the wireline and tractor during deviated well operations, can also be controlled more successfully.
As shown in
D1 is the diameter of the piston.
D2 is the diameter of the hollow load transmission shaft.
Pw is the external pressure, for example the pressure in a well.
Pt is the internal tool pressure.
F is the resistance force to motion/deformation of the compensator.
Depending on the exact configuration of the mechanism, the piston diameter D1 will have a cross-sectional area A1 associated with it. Similarly, the load transmission shaft will have a cross sectional area A2 associated with diameter D2. If the error induced in the sensor due to differential pressure between the inside and the outside of the tool is e and the ratio of areas is R, then:
Differential Pressure
ΔP=Pw−Pt
Differential Pressure to Drive Piston
Measurement Error
e=ΔPA2
Therefore:
And if
Then
e=RF
Therefore, for the error e to be smaller than the resistance force F, R<1.
This implies that to reduce the effect of the piston/compensator 10 on the measured force, the compensator area should be large, while the load transmission shaft area should be small. Taken to the extreme case, with an infinitely large compensator or an infinitely small shaft, the error will be zero. In practice, this ideal case is impossible to achieve and generally, with the limitations on diameter which are experienced in downhole tool design, the area of the shaft 23 is preferably at least a minimum amount to provide sufficient strength and robustness for the intended use, such as in a downhole tool. The areas of the pressure transmission device A1 and the shaft A2 are preferably within an order of magnitude of each other. Therefore, embodiments of this invention consider the case when R is smaller than 1, which produces overall error reduction.
Some experiments were performed on a pressure balancing device 1 as shown in our
The results are also presented graphically in
We have found that whilst reducing the area ratio (A2/A1) reduces the error, reducing the cross-sectional area of the hollow shaft too far may compromise the mechanical strength and robustness of the pressure balancing device. In practice, it has been found to be preferable to maintain the area ratio (A2/A1) at 0.1 or greater.
Whilst the examples provided in Table 1 above are for a pressure balancing device 1 with the pressure transmission device 10 having a cross-sectional area of 725 mm2, clearly the examples of the embodiments of the present invention could be used with a pressure balancing device 1 having a pressure transmission device 10 of any appropriate cross-sectional area A1. In practice, the pressure transmission device 10 may have as large a cross-sectional area A1 as can be practically or conveniently provided. However, the cross-sectional area A1 of the pressure transmission device 10 would, in practice, probably be limited by the particular application in which it is being used and the available space for the pressure balancing device 1. For example, if used in a downhole tool then the cross-sectional area will be limited by the available space in the tool and is likely to be a few 1000 mm2 or less.
Many variations may be made to the examples described above while still falling within the scope of the embodiments of the present invention. For example, whilst the pressure balancing devices of
Number | Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
1007811.1 | May 2010 | GB | national |
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
1396844 | Huffman | Nov 1921 | A |
1661995 | Brown | Mar 1928 | A |
3213414 | Moser | Oct 1965 | A |
3633414 | Field et al. | Jan 1972 | A |
3744307 | Harper et al. | Jul 1973 | A |
3810387 | Stancliff | May 1974 | A |
3851717 | Berryman | Dec 1974 | A |
4227410 | Ruben et al. | Oct 1980 | A |
4252015 | Harbon et al. | Feb 1981 | A |
4266606 | Stone | May 1981 | A |
4358956 | Ruben et al. | Nov 1982 | A |
4359899 | Claycomb | Nov 1982 | A |
4805448 | Armell | Feb 1989 | A |
4865125 | De Cuir | Sep 1989 | A |
5024098 | Petitjean et al. | Jun 1991 | A |
5983716 | Felder et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6481495 | Evans | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6988551 | Evans | Jan 2006 | B2 |
7290604 | Evans | Nov 2007 | B2 |
7311149 | Evans | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7559361 | Obrejanu | Jul 2009 | B2 |
20050092484 | Evans | May 2005 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20110277545 A1 | Nov 2011 | US |