The field of this invention relates to well cleanup tools that collect debris and more particularly tools that collect cuttings from milling using an eductor to draw them into the tool body.
When milling out a tool or pipe in the well cuttings are generated that need to be removed from the milling site and collected. The bottom hole assembly that includes the mill also has what is sometimes referred to as a junk basket. These tools operate on different principles and have the common objective of separation of circulating fluid from the cuttings. This is generally done by directing the flow laden with cuttings into the tool having a catch chamber. The fluid is directed through a screen, leaving the cuttings behind. At some point the cuttings fall down into the collection volume below and outside the screen.
The operation of one type of such tool is illustrated in
This is how this tool is supposed to work when everything is going right. However, things don't always go right downhole and the operator at the surface using this tool in a milling operation had no information that things downhole may not be going according to plan. The main two things that can cause problems with this type of tool or any other junk basket tool is that the screen 34 can clog with debris. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that flow downhole in annulus 24 goes all the way down to the mill and enters openings in the mill to reach lower inlet 20 of the tool 12. If the screen clogs the downhole component of the flow indicated by arrow 16 stops. As a result, there is a diminished or a total lack of flow into the mill ports to remove the cuttings and take away the heat of milling. The mill can overheat or get stuck in cuttings or both. If the mill sticks and turning force is still applied from the surface, the connections to the mill can fail. Sometimes, without clogging screen 34, the mill can create cutting shapes that simply just ball up around the mill. Here again, if the balling up occurs, flow trying to go downhole in annulus 28 will be cut off. The inlet openings for the cuttings in the mill may become blocked limiting or cutting off flow into lower inlet 20.
What the operator needs and currently doesn't have is a way to know that a condition has developed downhole at the mill or at the screen 34 that needs to be immediately addressed to avoid downhole equipment failure. While some operator with enough experience cleaning up a hole may be able to do this by gut feel in certain situations like removing sand, using gut feel is not reliable and in milling as opposed to simple debris cleanout, rules of thumb about how fast the bottom hole assembly moves into sand when removing it from the wellbore are simply useless.
What is needed and provided by the present invention is a real time way to know if anything has gone wrong downhole in time to deal with the issue before the equipment is damaged. The tool of the present invention is able to sense flow changes through it and communicate that fact in real time to the surface. Those and other aspects of the present invention will become apparent to those skilled in the art from a review of the description of the preferred embodiment, the drawings and the claims which outline the full scope of the invention.
A flow sensor is incorporated into a junk basket to sense a flow stoppage due to a plugged screen or plugged cuttings ports in a mill. The sensor triggers a signal to the surface to warn personnel that a problem exists before the equipment is damaged. The sensor signal to the surface can take a variety of forms including mud pulses, a detectable pressure buildup at the surface, electromagnetic energy, electrical signal on hard wire or radio signals in a wifi system to name a few options. Surface personnel can interrupt the signal to take corrective action that generally involves pulling out of the hole or reverse circulating to try to clear the screen or mill cuttings inlets. Other variables can be measured such as the volume or weight or rate of change of either and a signal can be sent to the surface corresponding to one of those variables to allow them to be detected at the surface in near real time.
The operation of one type of such tool is illustrated in
With sleeve 54′ on ports 50, closing of the ports 50 responsive to a sensed low flow will result in a reverse flow measured at sensor 40. An electronic pulse generator mounted above eductor 14 can then be signaled by sensor 40, now measuring a reverse flow, to send pulses to the surface to be interpreted there as an indication of reverse flow. A reverse flow signal indicates to surface personnel that the screen 34 has been cleared in a reverse direction and therefore should be operated again in the normal direction by opening valve 54′ using a surface signal or the processor associated with motor 46. The operator can pick up and cut the pump off to reset the system and then kick the pump back on and set down weight to see if a positive direction flow is established.
When a low flow is sensed at flow sensor 40 the motor 46 runs and the sleeve 54 is driven over the ports 48 as shown in
Apart from a pressure surge that can be seen at the surface from sleeve movement covering ports 48, the sleeve 54 can be cycled over and then away from ports 48 to create a pattern of pressure pulses in the string going to the surface. A sensor can be placed on the string near the surface and the pulses can be converted into a visual and/audible signal that there is a flow problem downhole using currently available mud pulse technology.
Referring to
Signals of low flow can be communicated to the surface by wire in a variety of known techniques one of which is drill pipe telemetry 55 offered by IntelliServe a joint venture corporation of Grant Prideco and Novatek and shown schematically in
Other indicators of potential problems can be the volume of cuttings being accumulated in the catch annular space 38 or their weight or the rate of change of either variable. A sensor 60 to detect the cuttings level or rate of change per unit time can be mounted near the screen 34 or in the space 38 to sense the level and trigger the same signal mechanism to alert surface personnel to pull out of the hole. Similarly, the annular space 38 can have a receptacle mounted on a weight sensor so that the accumulated weight or its rate of change can be detected. Signals can be sent if the weight increases to a predetermined amount or fails to change a predetermined amount over a predetermined time period. In either case the operator may know that the expected amount of debris has been collected or for some reason no debris is being collected. Signals such as mud pulses can differ depending on the condition sensed. The level or weight indication can be used alone or together with the flow sensing. If both are used one can back up the other because a high collected debris condition can also lead to flow reduction through the tool. In that sense, the reading of one can validate the other. Alternatively the reading of one can be a backup to the other if there is a failure in one of the systems.
The above description is illustrative of the preferred embodiment and many modifications may be made by those skilled in the art without departing from the invention whose scope is to be determined from the literal and equivalent scope of the claims below.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3123157 | Graham | Mar 1964 | A |
3198256 | Kirby, II | Aug 1965 | A |
3589020 | Sullivan et al. | Jun 1971 | A |
4190113 | Harrison | Feb 1980 | A |
4276931 | Murray | Jul 1981 | A |
4515212 | Krugh | May 1985 | A |
4711299 | Caldwell et al. | Dec 1987 | A |
4928758 | Siegfried, II | May 1990 | A |
5147149 | Craig et al. | Sep 1992 | A |
5402850 | Lalande et al. | Apr 1995 | A |
6021377 | Dubinsky et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6065535 | Ross | May 2000 | A |
6158512 | Unsgaard | Dec 2000 | A |
6176311 | Ryan | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6189617 | Sorhus et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6276452 | Davis et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6310559 | Laborde et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6343651 | Bixenman | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6446736 | Kruspe et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6450257 | Douglas | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6604582 | Flowers et al. | Aug 2003 | B2 |
6607031 | Lynde et al. | Aug 2003 | B2 |
6629564 | Ramakrishnan et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
6637524 | Kruspe et al. | Oct 2003 | B2 |
6684950 | Patel | Feb 2004 | B2 |
6695058 | French | Feb 2004 | B1 |
7000698 | Mayeu et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
7000700 | Cairns et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
7188674 | McGavern et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
20010037883 | Veneruso et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20020020524 | Gano | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020053428 | Maples | May 2002 | A1 |
20030056951 | Kaszuba | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030127223 | Branstetter et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030196950 | Kraft | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20040251027 | Sonnier et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050045344 | Fraser et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050056415 | Zillinger | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050126777 | Rolovic et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050217897 | Gudac | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050263279 | Vachon | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050279496 | Fontenot et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050284625 | Rodney et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060011344 | Lynde et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060169463 | Howlett | Aug 2006 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2170837 | Aug 1986 | GB |
2206508 | Jan 1989 | GB |
2323871 | Oct 1998 | GB |
2331536 | May 1999 | GB |
2392688 | Mar 2004 | GB |
0058602 | Oct 2000 | WO |
0173262 | Oct 2001 | WO |
03083253 | Oct 2003 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20070272404 A1 | Nov 2007 | US |