U.S. patent application number 14/912024 was filed with the patent office on 2016-07-07 for integrated well survey management and planning tool.
The applicant listed for this patent is Halliburton Energy Services, Inc.. Invention is credited to Ronald Johannes Dirksen.
Application Number | 20160194949 14/912024 |
Document ID | / |
Family ID | 49382657 |
Filed Date | 2016-07-07 |
United States Patent
Application |
20160194949 |
Kind Code |
A1 |
Dirksen; Ronald Johannes |
July 7, 2016 |
INTEGRATED WELL SURVEY MANAGEMENT AND PLANNING TOOL
Abstract
In one example, an integrated well survey management and
planning tool is implemented by a computer system. The tool can
receive a trajectory of a proposed well from a surface to a
subterranean geological target to be reached by drilling the well,
and a survey plan indicating the number, position and survey type
of surveys to be performed on the well while drilling the well. The
tool can apply multiple error models based on the survey type for
drilling the well. Each error model defines a respective
uncertainty in reaching the subterranean geological target by
drilling the well along the received trajectory. The tool can
display, in a user interface, the received trajectory of the well
and an uncertainty indicator determined by applying the multiple
error models. The uncertainty indicator represents a combination of
respective uncertainties defined by the multiple error models and
indicates an uncertainty in drilling the well on the received
trajectory.
Inventors: |
Dirksen; Ronald Johannes;
(Spring, TX) |
|
Applicant: |
Name |
City |
State |
Country |
Type |
Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. |
Houston |
TX |
US |
|
|
Family ID: |
49382657 |
Appl. No.: |
14/912024 |
Filed: |
October 8, 2013 |
PCT Filed: |
October 8, 2013 |
PCT NO: |
PCT/US2013/063818 |
371 Date: |
February 12, 2016 |
Current U.S.
Class: |
702/9 |
Current CPC
Class: |
E21B 43/305 20130101;
E21B 47/022 20130101; E21B 44/005 20130101; E21B 44/00
20130101 |
International
Class: |
E21B 47/022 20060101
E21B047/022 |
Claims
1. A computer-implemented well survey method comprising: receiving
a trajectory of a proposed well from a surface to a subterranean
geological target to be reached by drilling the well; receiving a
survey plan indicating the number, position and survey type of
surveys to be performed on the well while drilling the well;
displaying, in a user interface, a plurality of error models
including at least one of an interpolation in-field referencing
(IIFR) model, an in-field referencing (IFR) model, a measurement
while drilling (MWD) model, or a sag correction model; applying the
plurality of error models based on the survey type for drilling the
well, each error model defining a respective uncertainty in
reaching the subterranean geological target by drilling the well
along the received trajectory; and displaying, in the user
interface, the received trajectory of the well and an uncertainty
indicator determined by applying the plurality of error models, the
uncertainty indicator representing a combination of respective
uncertainties defined by the plurality of error models, the
uncertainty indicator indicating an uncertainty in drilling the
well on the received trajectory.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein the uncertainty indicator
includes a plurality of ellipses, each occupying a different area,
each ellipse associated with a respective depth of the well from
the surface to the subterranean geological target, the method
further comprising displaying the plurality of ellipses at a
plurality of respective depths in the user interface.
3. The method of claim 2, further comprising: determining that a
first ellipse does not satisfy an uncertainty threshold at a
respective depth; and displaying the first ellipse in the user
interface in a manner that is visually distinguishable from a
second ellipse that satisfies the uncertainty threshold at a
respective depth.
4. The method of claim 1, further comprising receiving a selection
of a survey tool from among a plurality of survey tools, the survey
tool to be implemented to survey the well to be drilled along the
received trajectory.
5. The method of claim 1, further comprising receiving the
trajectory of the well, receiving the survey plan, and applying the
plurality of error models before drilling the well along the
received trajectory.
6. A computer-implemented well survey comprising: receiving a
trajectory of a proposed well from a surface to a subterranean
geological target to be reached by drilling the well; receiving a
survey plan indicating the number, position and survey type of
surveys to be performed on the well while drilling the well;
applying a plurality of error models based on the survey type for
drilling the well, each error model defining a respective
uncertainty in reaching the subterranean geological target by
drilling the well along the received trajectory; displaying, in a
user interface, the received trajectory of the well and an
uncertainty indicator determined by applying the plurality of error
models, the uncertainty indicator representing a combination of
respective uncertainties defined by the plurality of error models,
the uncertainty indicator indicating an uncertainty in drilling the
well on the received trajectory; and receiving a plurality of
parameters that describe a location and a shape of the well,
wherein the plurality of parameters describing the well that are
displayed in the user interface include a length of a non-magnetic
drill collar (NMDC) to be positioned in the well, a sensor position
in the NMDC at which a survey tool is to be positioned, and casing
information describing at least one of a casing size, distance, or
direction from the sensor position.
7. A computer-implemented well survey method comprising: receiving
a trajectory of a proposed well from a surface to a subterranean
geological target to be reached by drilling the well; receiving a
survey plan indicating the number, position and survey type of
surveys to be performed on the well while drilling the well;
applying a plurality of error models based on the survey type for
drilling the well, each error model defining a respective
uncertainty in reaching the subterranean geological target by
drilling the well along the received trajectory; displaying, in a
user interface, the received trajectory of the well and an
uncertainty indicator determined by applying the plurality of error
models, the uncertainty indicator representing a combination of
respective uncertainties defined by the plurality of error models,
the uncertainty indicator indicating an uncertainty in drilling the
well on the received trajectory; receiving an earth's gravitational
field and magnetic field strength at a geographic location at which
the well is to be drilled at a drilling time determined based on a
geodetic model used to determine the earth's gravitational field,
and magnetic dipping; and displaying, in the user interface, an
identifier identifying the geodetic model, the earth's
gravitational field strength and magnetic field strength, and a dip
angle of the magnetic field.
8. The method of claim 7, further comprising receiving magnetics
representing variations in the earth's magnetic field due to solar
effects during the drilling time, the method further comprising
displaying, in the user interface, the magnetics during the
drilling time.
9. The method of claim 8, wherein displaying, in the user
interface, the magnetics during the drilling time comprises:
displaying a plot of the magnetics over time that comprises the
drilling time; comparing the magnetics with a threshold magnetics
for drilling the well; displaying the magnetics that satisfy the
threshold magnetics in a first color and the magnetics that do not
satisfy the threshold magnetics in a second color that is different
from the first color.
10. The method of claim 1, further comprising displaying, in the
user interface, an image of a sag correction for the well.
11. The method of claim 1, further comprising displaying, in the
user interface, axial and cross-axial interference representing a
disturbance in a magnetic field due to low magnetic permeability
components in the well.
12. The method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving a change
to an uncertainty defined by a first error model of the plurality
of error models, the change resulting in a change to an uncertainty
defined by a second error model of the plurality of error models;
in response to receiving the change, automatically and without user
intervention: updating the uncertainty indicator determined by
applying the plurality of error models including the first error
model and the second error model; and displaying the updated
uncertainty indicator in the user interface.
13. A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions
executable by data processing apparatus to perform operations
comprising: receiving a trajectory of a proposed well from a
surface to a subterranean geological target to be reached by
drilling the well; receiving a survey plan indicating the number,
position and survey type of surveys to be performed on the well
while drilling the well; displaying, in a user interface, a
plurality of error models including at least one of an
interpolation in-field referencing (IIFR) model, an in-field
referencing (IFR) model, a measurement while drilling (MWD) model,
or a sag correction model; applying the plurality of error models
based on the survey type for drilling the well, each error model
defining a respective uncertainty in reaching the subterranean
geological target by drilling the well along the received
trajectory; and displaying, in the user interface, the received
trajectory of the well and an uncertainty indicator determined by
applying the plurality of error models, the uncertainty indicator
representing a combination of respective uncertainties defined by
the plurality of error the uncertainty indicator indicating an
uncertainty in drilling the well on the received trajectory.
14. The medium of claim 13, wherein the uncertainty indicator
includes a plurality of ellipses, each occupying a different area,
each ellipse associated with a respective depth of the well from
the surface to the subterranean geological target, the operations
further comprising displaying the plurality of ellipses at a
plurality of respective depths in the user interface.
15. The medium of claim 14, the operations further comprising:
determining that a first ellipse does not satisfy an uncertainty
threshold at a respective depth; and displaying the first ellipse
in the user interface in a color that is different from a color of
a second ellipse that satisfies the uncertainty threshold at a
respective depth.
16. The medium of claim 13, the operations further comprising
receiving the trajectory of the well, receiving the survey plan,
and applying the plurality of error models before drilling the well
along the received trajectory.
17. A system comprising: data processing apparatus; and a
computer-readable medium storing instructions executable by the
data processing apparatus to perform operations comprising:
receiving a trajectory of a proposed well from a surface to a
subterranean geological target to be reached by drilling the well;
receiving a survey plan indicating the number, position and survey
type of surveys to be performed on the well while drilling the
well; displaying, in a user interface, a plurality of error models
including at least one of an interpolation in-field referencing
(IIFR) model, an in-field referencing (IFR) model, a measurement
while drilling (MWD) model, or a sag correction model; applying the
plurality of error models based on the survey type for drilling the
well, each error model defining a respective uncertainty in
reaching the subterranean geological target by drilling the well
along the received trajectory; and displaying, in the user
interface, the received trajectory of the well and an uncertainty
indicator determined by applying the plurality of error models, the
uncertainty indicator representing a combination of respective
uncertainties defined by the plurality of error the uncertainty
indicator indicating an uncertainty in drilling the well on the
received trajectory.
18. A system comprising: data processing apparatus; and a
computer-readable medium storing instructions executable by the
data processing apparatus to perform operations comprising:
receiving a trajectory of a proposed well from a surface to a
subterranean geological target to be reached by drilling the well;
receiving a survey plan indicating the number, position and survey
type of surveys to be performed on the well while drilling the
well; applying a plurality of error models based on the survey type
for drilling the well, each error model defining a respective
uncertainty in reaching the subterranean geological target by
drilling the well along the received trajectory; displaying, in a
user interface, the received trajectory of the well and an
uncertainty indicator determined by applying the plurality of error
models, the uncertainty indicator representing a combination of
respective uncertainties defined by the plurality of error the
uncertainty indicator indicating an uncertainty in drilling the
well on the received trajectory; receiving a geographic location at
which the well is to be drilled, a drilling time, and magnetics
representing variations in the earth's magnetic field due to solar
effects during the drilling time; receiving an earth's
gravitational field and magnetic field strength at the geographic
location at the drilling time determined based on a geodetic model
used to determine the earth's gravitational field, and magnetic
dipping; and displaying, in the user interface, an identifier
identifying the geodetic model, the earth's gravitational field
strength and magnetic field strength, a dip angle of the magnetic
field, and the magnetics during the drilling time.
19. A system comprising: data processing apparatus; and a
computer-readable medium storing instructions executable by the
data processing apparatus to perform operations comprising:
receiving a trajectory of a proposed well from a surface to a
subterranean geological target to be reached by drilling the well;
receiving a survey plan indicating the number, position and survey
type of surveys to be performed on the well while drilling the
well; applying a plurality of error models based on the survey type
for drilling the well, each error model defining a respective
uncertainty in reaching the subterranean geological target by
drilling the well along the received trajectory; displaying, in a
user interface, the received trajectory of the well and an
uncertainty indicator determined by applying the plurality of error
models, the uncertainty indicator representing a combination of
respective uncertainties defined by the plurality of error the
uncertainty indicator indicating an uncertainty in drilling the
well on the received trajectory; and displaying, in the user
interface, a plurality of parameters including a length of a
non-magnetic drill collar (NMDC) to be positioned in the well, a
sensor position in the NMDC at which a survey tool is to be
positioned, and casing information describing at least one of a
casing size, distance, or direction from the sensor position.
Description
TECHNICAL FIELD
[0001] This disclosure relates to well survey management and
planning.
BACKGROUND
[0002] A well plan describes the well trajectory to be followed to
take a well successfully from its surface position to the end of
the well trajectory. Based on factors such as an expected use of a
well (e.g., observation, production, injection, or multi-purpose
well), parameters (e.g., production parameters, completion
requirements, well dimensions, location), an expected life of the
well, and conditions of the geological target (e.g., the
subterranean reservoir) to be reached by the well, and other
factors, the well plan outlines well objectives to be achieved
during well drilling and well use. When drilling commences based on
the well plan, the well can be periodically surveyed to obtain
information describing the well being drilled and the obtained
information interpreted, e.g., to compare a planned position and a
determined position of the well. An operator can respond to
deviations between the planned position and the determined
position, e.g., by adjusting the drilling operations or by
re-defining the well objectives (or both).
DESCRIPTION OF DRAWINGS
[0003] FIG. 1 illustrates an example computer system to implement
an integrated well survey management and planning tool.
[0004] FIG. 2 is a flowchart of an example process to implement the
integrated well survey management and planning tool during a
planning stage.
[0005] FIG. 3 illustrates an example user interface provided by the
example computer system of FIG. 1 in response to implementing the
integrated well survey management and planning tool.
[0006] FIG. 4 is a flowchart of an example process to implement the
integrated well survey management and planning tool during an
execution stage.
[0007] FIG. 5 illustrates an example schematic of the example
computer system of FIG. 1.
[0008] Like reference symbols in the various drawings indicate like
elements.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION
[0009] This disclosure describes an integrated well survey
management and planning tool. The tool can be implemented as a
comprehensive, interactive survey management computer software
application that can enable better planning and evaluation of
survey strategy. The tool can bring different aspects of survey
management, e.g., outputs determined by different survey tools that
need to be considered during planning and executing a well into a
single interactive environment. By implementing the tool, results
of some analysis and actual interference effects can be viewed
during the planning stage and the execution stage,
respectively.
[0010] As described below, the tool can display multiple elements
that affect well planning and surveying in a single interactive
user interface on a display device. The interactive user interface
can display the effect of a change in one parameter on other
parameters, as applicable. Based on the outputs displayed in the
user interface, an operator can adjust the choice of survey tools
resulting in a well survey that achieves the well objectives, e.g.,
drill a well that reaches the intended geological target. In this
manner, the tool can be implemented as an all-in-one interactive
tool that can illustrate and optimize a survey for a well,
platform, pad or field. For example, the tool can enable
implementing as few surveys as necessary with survey tools that are
as inexpensive as practicable. The tool can be implemented before
or after commencing drilling operations (or both). Implementing the
tool can enable operators to match the survey program with well
objectives. The tool can be used to perform what-if analysis to
determine the optimum length of non-magnetic material required in
the BHA and to monitor the effects of variations in the earth
magnetic field, due to solar storms for instance, on survey
accuracy and allow for early determination if re-surveying is
needed. Also the tool allows for the instantaneous verification
that the correct earth magnetic model is being used and that the
input variables are correct, the same applies for the declination
correction being applied. FIG. 1 illustrates an example computer
system 100 to implement the integrated well survey management and
planning tool. In some implementations, the tool can be implemented
as a computer software application including computer instructions
stored on a computer-readable medium 102 and executable by data
processing apparatus 104 (e.g., one or more computer processors).
The computer system 100 can be connected to a display device 106
and to one or more input devices 108 (e.g., a mouse, a keyboard, a
touchscreen, a stylus, an audio input device, or other input
devices). In some implementations, the computer system 100 can be a
desktop computer, a laptop computer, a tablet computer, a
smartphone, a personal digital assistant, a client computer of a
server-client computer system, or other computer system.
[0011] The computer system 100 can be connected to one or more well
survey and planning computer systems (e.g., a first computer system
110a, a second computer system 110b, a third computer system 110c)
over one or more wired or wireless networks 112 (e.g., a local area
network, a wide area network, the Internet). Each well survey and
planning computer system can execute a respective well survey and
planning computer software application that receives survey
information obtained from survey tools connected to each well
survey and planning computer system. The computer system 100 can
receive the survey information from the well survey and planning
computer software applications over the one or more wired or
wireless networks 112. In some implementations, the one or more
well survey and planning computer systems can be implemented as
entities that are separate from the computer system 100 that
implements the integrated well survey management and planning tool.
Alternatively, the computer system 100 can implement the computer
software applications implemented by each of the one or more well
survey and planning computer systems.
[0012] FIG. 2 is a flowchart of a process 200 to implement the
integrated well survey management and planning tool during a
planning stage, i.e., before drilling commences. In some
implementations, the computer system 100 can implement the process
200. At 202, the computer system 100 can receive multiple
parameters. For example, the parameters can describe a location and
a shape of a well and can be received, e.g., from a well operator.
At 206, the computer system 100 can receive a survey plan
indicating the number, position and survey type of surveys to be
performed on the well while drilling the well.
[0013] At 204, the computer system 100 can receive a trajectory of
the well from a surface to a subterranean geological target to be
reached by drilling the well. For example, an operator can provide
the trajectory as an input to the computer system 100.
Alternatively, another computer system, which stores the
trajectory, can provide the trajectory as an input to the computer
system 100. At 208, the computer system 100 can receive a selection
of a survey tool from among multiple survey tools. A survey tool
can be a physical type of surveying tool that can be carried into
the well. For example, the tool can be carried into the well on a
wire (e.g., a wireline, e-line, or other tool) or tubing. The
survey tool can measure the location in three-dimensional space of
the well. For example, either the computer system 100 or one or
more of the well survey and planning computer systems (or both) can
be connected to the survey tool that surveys the well to be drilled
along the received trajectory. In some implementations, the
computer system 100 can also receive the number, position and
survey type of surveys to be performed on the well while drilling
the well.
[0014] At 210, the computer system 100 can apply multiple error
models to the survey tool. An error model can be implemented as a
computer software application as computer instructions stored on
the computer-readable medium 102 and executable by the data
processing apparatus 104. Each error model can define a respective
uncertainty in reaching the subterranean geological target by
drilling the well along the received trajectory. Some error models
can determine the respective uncertainty by accounting for
influences of different error sources. In some implementations, the
computer system 100 can receive the error models, e.g., as inputs
from an operator or from another computer system (or both). At 212,
the computer system 100 can display, in a user interface 114 (e.g.,
displayed in the display device 106), the multiple parameters, the
received trajectory of the well, an identifier identifying the
survey tool and an uncertainty indicator determined by applying the
one or more error models. The uncertainty indicator indicates an
uncertainty in drilling the well on the received trajectory.
[0015] The uncertainty indicator represents a combination of
respective uncertainties defined by the multiple error models. In
other words, the uncertainty indicator is an uncertainty of the
well that represents a combination of uncertainties of each survey
and spacing between the surveys. For example, each of multiple
survey tools that are (or can be) implemented during a well survey
is associated with a respective uncertainty. The uncertainty
indicator described in this disclosure represents a combination of
the multiple uncertainties associated with the multiple survey
tools. The computer system 100 can determine the uncertainty
indicator based, in part, on the locations of the survey tools. The
uncertainty represented by the uncertainty indicator is more than
the uncertainty in the accuracy of the tool itself. The uncertainty
in the accuracy of the tool is determined by errors in the tool's
ability to make measurements. In addition to the uncertainty of the
tool, the uncertainty for the well represented by the uncertainty
indicator represents an uncertainty in drilling the well along the
target trajectory without being able to see the three-dimensional
drilling space, i.e., without survey points and using measurements
made by the survey tools during the previous survey. The
uncertainty represented by the uncertainty indicator can increase
as a time between successive surveys increases because the possible
error builds. In some implementations, the uncertainty indicator
can be determined based on the intended well trajectory and the
survey tools that will be used (and the locations of the survey
tools). The operator can then plan more or fewer survey points,
different survey points, different survey tools (or combinations of
them) based on a confidence (provided by the uncertainty indicator)
that the well will hit the geological target.
[0016] In this manner, the computer system 100 can provide the user
interface 114 as a comprehensive, interactive survey management
module. The operator can use the user interface 114 to evaluate an
effect of different numbers, positions and survey types of surveys
that affect the uncertainty indicator. The operator can also use
the user interface 114 to evaluate an effect of different error
models and combinations of error models, measurement corrections
(e.g., sag correction), drill string configuration (e.g., the
NMDC), well configurations and factors including well location and
drilling time of the year. For example, the computer system 100 can
provide each of the factors that affect the uncertainty indicator
as a selectable option in the user interface 114. The operator can
create combinations of selectable options (e.g., a combination of a
first error model, a first correction, a first drill string
configuration, a first location, a first drilling time, another
combination of first and second error models, no correction, a
second drill string configuration, the first location, a second
drilling time, or other combinations) to determine the uncertainty
indicator. In this manner, the operator can select/unselect
available options and determine an effect on the uncertainty
indicator. The operator can use the tool implemented by the
computer system 100 to determine a survey program (i.e., the
number, position and survey types) that will enable the operator to
drill a well that will reach the geological target.
[0017] In the planning stage, the computer system 100 can receive
the multiple parameters, receive the trajectory of the well,
receive the selection of the survey tool, apply the one or more
error models and display the multiple well survey parameters before
the well is drilled along the received trajectory. In an execution
stage, the computer system 100 can additionally receive actual
drilling data and show the trajectory based on actual drilling
data, as described below.
[0018] FIG. 3 is an example of the user interface 114 provided by
the computer system 100 in response to executing the integrated
well survey management and planning tool. The user interface 114
includes multiple regions. In each region, the computer system 100
displays either an input to or an output of the integrated well
survey management and planning tool implemented by the computer
system 100. In some implementations, the user interface 114
includes a region 304 in which the computer system 100 displays
multiple parameters, e.g., a length of a non-magnetic drill collar
(NMDC) to be positioned in the well, a sensor position in the NMDC
at which a survey tool is to be positioned, and casing information
describing at least one of a casing size, distance, or direction
from the sensor position. The computer system 100 can receive the
multiple parameters, which can also include a location and a shape
of the well, either from an operator of the computer system 100 or
from one of the well survey and planning computer systems.
[0019] The user interface 114 includes a region 308 in which the
computer system 100 displays the trajectory of the well from the
surface to the subterranean geological target based, in part, on
the parameters. In the region 308, the computer system 100 can also
display the uncertainty indicator described above. In some
implementations, the computer system 100 can display the
uncertainty indicator as including multiple ellipses, each
occupying a different area. As described above, each ellipse
represents a combination of uncertainties associated with different
multiple survey tools. A change in an uncertainty associated with
information obtained by one of the survey tools affects an
uncertainty associated with information obtained by another of the
survey tools. Each ellipse of the multiple ellipses accounts for
the different uncertainties associated with the different survey
tools. For example, an area occupied by each ellipse is a measure
of uncertainty in drilling on the target trajectory at a respective
depth that cannot be visualized by relying on survey points
obtained from the survey tools during a previous survey. In
addition, each ellipse is associated with a respective depth of the
well from the surface to the subterranean geological target. The
computer system 100 can display the multiple ellipses at multiple
respective depths along the trajectory in the region 308 of the
user interface 114.
[0020] In some implementations, the computer system 100 can
determine a confidence level for each ellipse that represents a
confidence that an actual trajectory of the drilled well will match
the predicted trajectory. The computer system 100 can determine the
confidence level for each ellipse based, in part, on uncertainties
associated with the information obtained by the survey tools, as
described above. The computer system 100 can additionally determine
an uncertainty threshold at a respective depth that represents an
acceptable deviation between the actual and predicted trajectories.
The uncertainty threshold is a potential uncertainty that is so
great that the target trajectory could possibly miss the geological
target. The computer system 100 can also determine whether the
possible actual trajectory will reach the geological target. The
computer system 100 can determine that a first ellipse at a first
depth does not satisfy an uncertainty threshold at that depth. In
response, the computer system 100 can display the first ellipse in
the region 308 in a manner that is visually distinguishable from a
second ellipse that satisfies the uncertainty threshold at a second
depth. For example, the computer system 100 can display ellipses
that satisfy respective uncertainty thresholds in a color (e.g.,
green) and ellipses that do not satisfy the respective uncertainty
thresholds in another color (e.g., red).
[0021] In some implementations, multiple survey tools can be
available and can be connected to (e.g., operated by) the well
survey and planning computer systems. The operator of the computer
system 100 can select one or more survey tools, which can include,
e.g., a single shock magnetic survey tool, a MWD magnetic survey
tool with multi-shock type survey, or other survey tools. If the
inaccuracies determined for the survey tools are higher than
acceptable thresholds, then additional corrections can be applied.
The corrections can include, e.g., SAG corrections to correct
errors in the alignment of the survey tool, corrections to correct
errors associated with the presence of magnetic components in the
drill string, corrections due to earth's magnetic field based on
geographic location (e.g., closer to the north or south poles), and
other corrections.
[0022] As described above, the computer system 100 can receive a
selection of one or more survey tools, e.g., from a user of the
computer system 100 or from one or more of the well survey and
planning computer systems. In addition, the computer system 100 can
receive one or more error models to be applied to the selected
survey tool through the user interface 114. For example, the user
interface 114 can include a region 302 in which the computer system
100 displays multiple error models including, e.g., at least one of
an interpolation in-field referencing (IIFR) model, an in-field
referencing (IFR) model, and a measurement while drilling (MWD)
model. In this region, the user interface 114 can also include a
correction applied to the readings, e.g., a sag correction. A user
of the computer system 100 can select one or more of the error
models through the user interface 114. The computer system 100 can
apply the selected one or more error models to the selected survey
tool. In some implementations, the computer system 100 can include
an "Accuracy" field that specifies an acceptable deviation (e.g.,
1-sigma, 2-sigma, 3-sigma) in the region 302. The computer system
100 can apply the selected one or more error models to the selected
survey tool to determine that the errors fall within the deviation
specified in the "Accuracy" field.
[0023] In some implementations, the multiple parameters can include
a geographic location at which the well is to be drilled and a
drilling time, i.e., a time of the year when drilling operations
are to be performed. A well survey and planning computer system can
implement a geodetic model that can determine the earth's
gravitational field and magnetic field strength at the location and
at the drilling time. The user interface 114 can include a region
306 in which the computer system 100 displays an identifier
identifying the geodetic model. The user interface 114 can also
include a region 312 in which the computer system 100 can display
the earth's gravitational field strength and magnetic field
strength, and a dip angle of the magnetic field.
[0024] In some implementations, the multiple parameters can include
magnetics representing variations in the earth's magnetic field due
to solar effects during the drilling time. The user interface 114
can include a region 314 in which the computer system 100 displays
the magnetics during the drilling time. For example, one of the
well survey and planning computer systems can determine and provide
the magnetics to the computer system 100 for display in the region
314. The computer system 100 can display a plot of the magnetics
over a time that includes the drilling time in the region 314.
Either the computer system 100 or a well survey and planning
computer system can compare the magnetics with a threshold
magnetics for drilling the well. In some implementations, the
computer system 100 can display the magnetics at a particular time
that satisfy the threshold magnetics to be visually distinguishable
from magnetics at a different time that does not satisfy the
threshold magnetics. For example, the computer system 100 can
display the magnetics that satisfy the threshold magnetics in a
first color (e.g., green) and the magnetics that do not satisfy the
threshold magnetics in a second, different color (e.g., red).
Moreover, some of the survey tools measure orientation relative to
the earth's magnetic field. The computer system 100 can account for
the effect of the magnetics on the readings of the magnetic survey
tools.
[0025] Additional survey and planning information that the computer
system 100 can display in the user interface 114 can include an
image of a SAG correction for the well (e.g., in a region 318), an
axial and cross-axial interference (e.g., in a region 310)
representing a disturbance in a magnetic field due to low magnetic
permeability components in the well, and an output of the IFR/IIFR
error models (e.g., in a region 316). As described above, the user
interface 114 is interactive. For example, when the computer system
100 receives a change to an uncertainty defined by an error model
(or any input to the integrated well survey management and planning
tool) that results in a change to an uncertainty defined by another
error model, the computer system 100 can automatically and without
user intervention update the uncertainty indicator (or any other
aspect of the well plan or survey displayed in the user interface
114). The computer system 100 can display the updated uncertainty
indicator in the user interface 114. An operator of the computer
system 100 can make changes and see, e.g., in real time or near
real time, an effect of the changes on the ellipse. In this manner,
the operator can create different scenarios while designing the
well survey plan.
[0026] The techniques described above related to implementing the
integrated well survey management and planning tool during the
planning stage of well. After drilling has commenced, one or more
survey tools can be implemented to monitor the drilling operation
as described below with reference to FIG. 4. The computer system
100 can implement the integrated well survey management and
planning tool to receive information determined by the one or more
survey tools, and, in real time, update appropriate regions in the
user interface 114. By doing so, the operator can compare the
actual drilling information with the predicted drilling
information, and make adjustments as necessary, e.g., to the
drilling conditions, the survey tools, the error models (or
combinations of them). In addition, the operator can visualize an
effect of the actual drilled well on the ellipses. For example, if
the as-drilled well lands at a center of a predicted ellipse, the
subsequent ellipses over undrilled portions will not be as large as
predicted.
[0027] FIG. 4 is a flowchart of an example process to implement the
integrated well survey management and planning tool during an
execution stage. In some implementations, the computer system 100
can implement the process 400. At 402, the computer system 100 can
receive survey data describing a well being drilled. For example,
after the well drilling has commenced, a survey tool positioned at
a location between the surface and the geological target to be
reached by drilling the well can be implemented to obtain survey
data that includes a trajectory of the well being drilled. The
survey tool can be moved to different locations in the well. For
example, after drilling for a certain period, drilling can be
stopped and the survey tool, which can be near the drill bit, can
be operated to take a survey. As described above, the computer
system 100 can receive a target trajectory along the well to be
drilled to the geological target. At 404, the computer system 100
can determine an uncertainty indicator indicating an uncertainty in
drilling the well on a target trajectory. For example, the computer
system 100 can determine the uncertainty indicator based at least
in part on the survey data and the target trajectory. The
uncertainty indicator can indicate an uncertainty (e.g., a
confidence measure) in reaching the geological target by drilling
the well along the target trajectory.
[0028] At 406, the computer system 100 can display the uncertainty
indicator in a user interface, e.g., in the user interface 114. As
described above, in certain (but not all) instances, the computer
system 100 can have previously determined an uncertainty indicator
for the well during a planning stage, i.e., before drilling
commences. By implementing process 400, the computer system 100 can
determine a revised uncertainty indicator for the well based, in
part, on survey data that describe the well being drilled. The
revised uncertainty indicator measured during the drilling stage,
therefore, is an update to the uncertainty indicator determined
during the planning stage. In some implementations, the computer
system 100 can receive at least a portion of a measured trajectory
(i.e., the actual trajectory) of the well being drilled and compare
the portion of the measured trajectory with the target trajectory
determined during the planning stage. The computer system 100 can
determine the revised uncertainty indicator based on the
comparison. For example, upon determining that the as-drilled well
lands at or near a center of an ellipse, then the computer system
100 can determine that the uncertainty that the well will land in a
subsequent ellipse in an undrilled portion is low. Consequently,
the computer system 100 can determine the revised ellipse to be
smaller than a current ellipse. Alternatively, upon determining
that the as-drilled well lands at or near a periphery of the
ellipse, the computer system 100 can determine the revised ellipse
to be larger than or at least the same size as the current
ellipse.
[0029] The uncertainty indicator determined during the drilling
stage, like the uncertainty indicator determined during the
planning stage, can include multiple ellipses, each occupying a
different area. Each ellipse is associated with a respective depth
of the well from the surface to the subterranean geological target.
One or more of the ellipses represents an uncertainty associated
with a portion of the well that has not yet been drilled. The
computer system 100 can display the multiple ellipses at multiple
respective depths of the well in the user interface. In some
implementations, the computer system 100 can replace an ellipse at
a depth determined during the planning stage with another ellipse
at the depth determined during the drilling stage. In this manner,
the computer system 100 can replace one or more ellipses at
respective one or more depths based on the survey data and the
target trajectory. In some situations, the computer system 100 can
determine that an ellipse determined during the planning stage
matches (e.g., occupies the same area as) an ellipse determined
during the drilling stage. In such situations, the computer system
100 may not replace the ellipse determined during the planning
stage.
[0030] In response to viewing ellipses associated with the revised
uncertainty indicator, an operator may change aspects of a survey
plan, e.g., to adjust the target trajectory from the as-drilled
well and the plan such that the newly updated ellipses land at the
geological target. At 408, the computer system 100 can receive a
change to the survey plan that indicates the number, position and
survey type of surveys to be performed on the well while drilling
the well. As described above, the change can be responsive to the
uncertainty indicated by the revised uncertainty indicator. For
example, upon viewing the revised uncertainty indicator, an
operator can determine to change the number, position, survey type,
error models (or a combination) that was previously defined in the
survey plan. The operator can, e.g., select a survey tool that the
operator had not selected during the planning stage before drilling
commenced. In some implementations, the computer system 100 can
display, in the user interface, multiple survey tools from among
which the operator can make one or more selections.
[0031] At 410, the computer system 100 can apply multiple error
models based on the received change to the survey plan. Each error
model defines a respective uncertainty in reaching the subterranean
geological target by drilling the well. The uncertainty is based on
a survey performed while the well is being drilled as well as the
remaining target trajectory. The revised uncertainty indicator
represents a combination of the respective uncertainties defined by
the multiple error models. A change to an uncertainty defined by
one of the error models can affect an uncertainty defined by
another of the error models and the revised uncertainty indicator
itself. At 412, the computer system 100 can determine such a change
to the uncertainty indicator, and, at 414 display the revised
uncertainty indicator in the user interface 114.
[0032] After the operator has adjusted the survey plan, well
drilling can continue. The computer system 100 can continue to
receive the survey data and determine the uncertainty indicator.
For example, the computer system 100 can receive the data in real
time (or near real time) or concurrently with the well drilling (or
both). Based on a change or changes to the uncertainty indicator
(e.g., if the uncertainty indicator fails to satisfy an uncertainty
threshold), the operator can provide changes to the survey plan
resulting in the computer system 100 revising the uncertainty
indicator. In this manner, during the drilling stage, the computer
system 100 can be implemented as a tool that the operator can use
to monitor and adjust drilling operations to reach the geological
target by implementing as few and as inexpensive survey tools as
practicable.
[0033] FIG. 5 illustrates a schematic of the example computer
system 100 of FIG. 1. The example computer system 100 can be
located at or near one or more wells and/or at a remote location.
The example computer system 100 includes a data processing
apparatus 104 (e.g., one or more processors), a computer-readable
medium 102 (e.g., a memory), and input/output controllers 170
communicably coupled by a bus 165. The computer-readable medium can
include, for example, a random access memory (RAM), a storage
device (e.g., a writable read-only memory (ROM) and/or others), a
hard disk, and/or another type of storage medium. The computer
system 100 can be preprogrammed and/or it can be programmed (and
reprogrammed) by loading a program from another source (e.g., from
a CD-ROM, from another computer device through a data network,
and/or in another manner). The input/output controller 170 is
coupled to input/output devices (e.g., the display device 106,
input devices 108, and/or other input/output devices) and to a
network 112. The input/output devices receive and transmit data in
analog or digital form over communication links such as a serial
link, wireless link (e.g., infrared, radio frequency, and/or
others), parallel link, and/or another type of link.
[0034] The network 112 can include any type of data communication
network. For example, the network 112 can include a wireless and/or
a wired network, a Local Area Network (LAN), a Wide Area Network
(WAN), a private network, a public network (such as the Internet),
a WiFi network, a network that includes a satellite link, and/or
another type of data communication network.
[0035] A number of implementations have been described.
Nevertheless, it will be understood that various modifications may
be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the
disclosure.
* * * * *