Comparing & Validating Deviation Surveys

Similar documents
Interactive 3D Wellbore Viewer

Steel Sucker Rod Fatigue Testing Update on Phase I

Complete Stress Analysis of Sucker- Rod Pumping Installations

Runtimes for Deviated Rod Pump Wells in the Fruitland Coal Formation

Sucker Rod Pump Handling and Rig Crew Safety

Horizontal Well Downhole Dynamometer Data Acquisition

Pumping Unit Gear Reducer Failures

System Design & Diagnostic Analysis of Group 2 Systems

Validating Vertical-Hole Diagnostic Models with Measured Sandia Data

The Horizontal Rod Pumped Well s Ultimate Production System

Downhole Dynamometer Card Validation Method

Double String Pumping Systems *Patent Pending Dennis R. Wilson, Advisor, Artificial Lift Engineering ConocoPhillips, Lower 48, San Juan Business Unit

Update on Sandia Downhole Dynamometer Testing

Hollow Sucker Rods: Development and applications in Beam Pumping

Pump Stroke Optimization: A Better Way

Experience Rod Pumping Deviated CBM Wells

Modified Everitt-Jennings (MEJ) Method and the Gibbs Method: Downhole Card Comparison

Improving the Reliability & Maintenance Costs of Hydraulically Actuated Sucker Rod Pumping Systems

Design of Sucker Rod Systems

11 th Annual Sucker Rod Pumping Workshop Renaissance Hotel Oklahoma City, Oklahoma September 15-18, 2015

Recording Dynagraph on Bent / Misaligned Polished rod.

Design Your Rod String to Unseat the Pump But NOT Overload the System

Quick Rod (QROD) String Design Tools

A Case for Developing a Wear Model for Sucker Rod System Design

Ventura Field Rod Well Systems

Rod String Design Software Simulation of Sandia Downhole Load Cell Wells

Sucker Rod System Analyst

Casing Gas Separator: A New Gas Separation Technology

Partial History of the Industry

Enhance Plunger Lift While Reducing CAPEX and OPEX

Development of a High Pressure Gas Gun for H 2 S and CO 2 Service

Understanding Hazardous Locations Concepts

A New Sucker Rod Coupling Material: An Economical Solution for Downhole Wear in Deviated Unconventional Wells

Regulatory Roundup and Automation Scott Jackson Regional Sales Manager Mid Continent OleumTechitle

UNDERSTANDING, ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF & EFFICIENTLY MITIGATING DOWNHOLE FAILURES

Horizontal Well Downhole Dynamometer Data Acquisition: Prototype is ready!

Mitigate slug flow to increase the maximum rod pumping rate and allow earlier transition to rod pumping

Better Design and Control of Deviated and Horizontal Wells: HWDDDA

ATMOX MAXX System THE Complete Moisture Control System for Crawlspaces. User s Guide

ADT Security Website Terms of Use

Model Number Structure

DR Series Appliance Cleaner Best Practices. Technical Whitepaper

Appearance and sensing characteristic Specification (temperature range) Model 10 to 70 C ES1B. 2 mm 20 mm 40 mm 60 mm. 40 dia. 60 dia.

REAL-TIME SOFTWARE TO ESTIMATE FRICTION COEFFICIENT AND DOWNHOLE WEIGHT ON BIT DURING DRILLING OF HORIZONTAL WELLS

INTERNATIONAL STANDARD

Model 5190-F Temperature/Humidity Probe

East-West Exclusion Zones: Why Do We Have Them and How Can We Eliminate Them?

Oxford Fire Department: 2008 Service Analysis. Prepared for the Subcommittee studying the Oxford Division of Fire. April 8, 2009

Carwin COMPRESSOR SELECTION PROGRAM

Title Page. Report Title: Downhole Power Generation and Wireless Communications. for Intelligent Completions Applications

Sensing and Control. Figure 1. SMART Position Sensor, 100 and 180 Arc Configurations

DUVAL 52 CEILING FAN MODELS #50201, Español p. 19 LISTED FOR DAMP LOCATION

The Lowest OPEX Producer Wins the Production Game

AUTOMATION. Operator s Manual RST Series Web Enabled Input Module. Rev. A2, 1/12

However, uncertainty exists on the proper approaches to fastening claddings over exterior insulation.

PlateScrape Plate Pre-Scrapper Test Report

4. Deflection Tools and Technique

Advanced Digital Signal Processing Part 4: DFT and FFT

Model 5190-E Temperature/Humidity Probe

ES2-HB. Ordering Information. Dimensions. Specifications. Humidity Sensor Temperature/Humidity Sensor

ELSTON 52 CEILING FAN

INSTRUCTION MANUAL TS21. 2 Heating and 1 Cooling

Falcon-II Next Generation, Air Quality Monitor CO2 & Temperature

ISO INTERNATIONAL STANDARD. Coating powders Part 13: Particle size analysis by laser diffraction

SUTTON 52 CEILING FAN

Analysis of Eccentric Wear of Sucker Rod and Design of Multi-Stage Flexibility Stabilizer

Samsung SDS BMS Ver.2.0. Technical Specification

Reported Fires in High-Rise Structures in Selected Occupancies with and without Automatic Extinguishing Systems by Extent of Smoke Damage

BRIDGING THE SAFE AUTOMATION GAP PART 1

ISO INTERNATIONAL STANDARD. Graphical symbols Safety colours and safety signs Part 2: Design principles for product safety labels

Embedded Linux with VAR-SOM-MX6 Course

SPRINGHILL 44 CEILING FAN

Documentation on NORTHSTAR. Jeremy Ma PhD Candidate California Institute of Technology May 17th, 2006

E2K-L. Liquid Level Sensor That Is Unaffected by the Color of the Pipe or Liquid. Liquid Level Sensor. Ordering Information

Stage 1 Audio Upgrade (BMW Speakers) Installation Instructions for BMW 5 Series, E60 Sedan Logic 7

Ekin PATROL The First and Only Smart Patrol of the World

AMCA Publication

installation, operation & Maintenance manual acb ceiling-mounted cassette models

Installation Instructions for the Honeywell Force Sensors FSA Series Compensated/Amplified

Link loss measurement uncertainties: OTDR vs. light source power meter By EXFO s Systems Engineering and Research Team

A vehicle powered by the spring device of a mousetrap A mousetrap is a simple machine because it uses mechanical advantage to

SN5446A, 47A, 48, SN54LS47, LS48, LS49 SN7446A, 47A, 48, SN74LS47, LS48, LS49 BCD-TO-SEVEN-SEGMENT DECODERS/DRIVERS

Application Note Honeywell Zephyr Analog and Digital Airflow Sensors: HAF Series-High Accuracy, ±50 SCCM to ±750 SCCM

TOUCHDOWN 48 CEILING FAN

ISO Acceptance tests for Nd:YAG laser beam welding machines Machines with optical fibre delivery Laser assembly

Netbiter Tank Sensor

ST. KITTS CEILING FAN

Hair Dryer - CSi Tutorials 7. Concepts Tutorials: 7 Hair Dryer

This document is a preview generated by EVS

PowerReach Service: Hybrid Coiled Tubing & Jointed Pipe Technology. Fraser McNeil

Users Manual. LAURUS Systems, Inc. - Ph: Fax:

CARMEL 48 CEILING FAN

E Programmble Smoke Detector Controller. Figure 1. Programmable Smoke Detector Kit

Adjusting Winding and Stacking Machines

ORIGA-SENSOFLEX Displacement Measuring System for Cylinder Series OSP-P

Stability of Inclined Strip Anchors in Purely Cohesive Soil

Solar Powered Wireless Photobeam Sensors

INSTALLATION and OPERATING INSTRUCTIONS

Saying Mahalo to Solar Savings: A Billing Analysis of Solar Water Heaters in Hawaii

NEMA Standards Publication ICS (R 2007) Adjustable Speed Electrical Power Drive Systems

Transcription:

12 th Annual Sucker Rod Pumping Workshop Renaissance Hotel Oklahoma City, Oklahoma September 27 30, 2016 Comparing & Validating Deviation Surveys Walter Phillips Consultant http://3dwellbore.com

What is a deviation survey? A series of local vectors outlining the wellbore path In other words, a series of directions and distances Azimuth, Inclination and Measured Depth Converted to X/Y/Z coordinates for intuitive 3D display The wellbore is fixed, but Surveys are subject to drift Every survey has some degree of measurement or rounding error Some methods have far less than others (gyros, for example) One well had ~6.5ft relative drift over 8500ft How do we bound this drift? Sept. 27-30, 2016 2016 Sucker Rod Pumping Workshop 2

Deviation Surveys Measured Depth Straightforward distance ( ) Inclination Degrees from vertical 0 = Vertical 90 = Horizontal Azimuth Compass heading 2016 Sucker Rod Pumping Workshop 3

Minimum Curvature Fancy math lots of trigonometry Assumes giant circles Inclination & Azimuth define tangents of the circle at those points Formulas derive the change in X, Y, & Z between points Only calculated on adjacent points MD helps define circle radius 2016 Sucker Rod Pumping Workshop 4

Validating Deviation Surveys Azimuth values greater than 360? May indicate a transcription type-o Missing sections Large MD spacing? Did the driller cover-up an issue? Drastic changes in AZI or INC Relative to change in MD May be a serious wellbore deviation May be a type-o or measurement anomaly Partial surveys? MD Inc ( ) Azi ( ) 6,932 0.92 167.95 7,027 0.97 1652.59 7,122 0.98 173.29 9,684 0.77 223.45 9,779 0.95 2333.3 9,874 0.88 239.97 10,697 13.61 354.11 10,729 17.58 365.59 10,761 21.52 358.11 If it doesn t start at XYZ = 0,0,0, initial section is undefined 2016 Sucker Rod Pumping Workshop 5

Case Study 8600 well Courtesy of Mark Turland Is enough anchor tension being pulled? Through tubing surveys 1ft resolution gyro surveys Run at current tension (18k LBS) Run again at higher tension (33k LBS) Roughly 32 pulled between surveys 2-⅞ tubing, 5.5 casing, ~1¼ clearance Can we see tubing slack? 2016 Sucker Rod Pumping Workshop 6

Compare DLS Subtract corresponding DLS values from survey A & B Simple and bounded DLS only considers adjacent points Looks pretty noisy The bottom section does not look significantly noisier than the top 2016 Sucker Rod Pumping Workshop 7

What is wrong with DLS? Dog Leg Severity expressed in degrees per 100 But the gyro survey gives us one foot intervals Effectively multiplies the raw dogleg angle by 100 At survey intervals spaced less than 100, DLS is not an appropriate portrayal of wellbore deviation Analogy: Speedometer Instant rate or average velocity? DLS is supposed to be an average, but not when MD < 100 How many miles traveled in 60 minutes? How about in 1 minute? What if you can only look at the speedometer once 2016 Sucker Rod Pumping Workshop 8

Inclination & Azimuth vs. Depth bgfhg 2016 Sucker Rod Pumping Workshop 9

Azimuth & Inclination Differences Also bounded Variations in the differences increase near the bottom Azimuth & Inclination are independent variables What else can we compare? 2016 Sucker Rod Pumping Workshop 10

Comparing Surveys Simple overlay Hard to see fine detail Unbounded drift Zooming in doesn t help We have clearance, Clarence! 2-⅞ tubing, 5.5 casing ~1¼ clearance Casing Tubing About 1¼ is our Clearance, Clarence! 2016 Sucker Rod Pumping Workshop 11

What s our Vector, Victor? Compare XYZ s from both surveys Yields a distance and a direction i.e. a vector in 3D space Survey #1 (Same Well) Depth Inc AzG N/-S E/-W TVD 0 0 0 0 0 0 8644 0.14 96.26-95.04-24.85 8642.5 Bottom of well Survey #2 (Same Well) Depth Inc AzG N/-S E/-W TVD 0 0 0 0 0 0 8644 0.14 93.52-99.05-19.89 8641.95-95.04 - (-99.05) = 4.01 4 South, 5 East, ½ Up -24.85 - (-19.89) = -4.96 That s our vector, Victor! 2016 Sucker Rod Pumping Workshop 8642.5 8641.95 = 0.55 ~6.4ft difference Why? 12

How can we bound the drift for comparison? Compare smaller sections limit accumulated drift Distinct ~25 sections instead of the whole wellbore Think treasure map with landmarks Reset your position at each landmark 10 paces north 10 paces east 20 paces north 20 paces east X 10 paces north to palm tree 10 paces east to the rock 20 paces north to anchor 20 paces east X 2016 Sucker Rod Pumping Workshop 13

Bounding errors when comparing surveys Calculations yield XYZ difference between points Sum the X, Y, and Z to get the wellbore path Only compare differences ( XYZ) between surveys Need to have consistent (equal) survey measurements Can compare arbitrary ranges from 2 surveys Just start from the same XYZ (and same measured depth) Deviation surveys calculated over 25 sections (repeated every foot). Orange indicates direction and exaggerated magnitude of the difference over each 25 interval. Roughly ¼ - ½ drift over 25 2016 Sucker Rod Pumping Workshop Tubing Slack? 14

A closer view Vector difference arrows over 25 intervals ~4000 ft Bottom ~1200 ft Note: These are not azimuth arrows! 2016 Sucker Rod Pumping Workshop 15

What s wrong with this approach? Initial vectors (Inclination & Azimuth) are not necessarily in alignment At surface they are (true vertical) At arbitrary depths, they may diverge Remember the treasure map analogy At each landmark, we might not be facing the same direction We corrected for position, but not direction How can we fix that? Vary the window size 25 or less seems optimal Same approach in reverse average the two resulting vectors 2016 Sucker Rod Pumping Workshop 16

Conclusions Deviation surveys are great! Don t blindly trust them Especially drilling surveys, they can have errors Errors accumulate with depth Calculations only consider immediately adjacent points Local changes are less impacted by error accumulation Gyros are far more accurate Some software cannot handle 1ft increments Spring for higher resolution, you can down-sample later http://3dwellbore.com 2016 Sucker Rod Pumping Workshop 17

Questions? 2016 Sucker Rod Pumping Workshop 18

Copyright Rights to this presentation are owned by the company(ies) and/or author(s) listed on the title page. By submitting this presentation to the Sucker Rod Pumping Workshop, they grant to the Workshop, the Artificial Lift Research and Development Council (ALRDC), and the Southwestern Petroleum Short Course (SWPSC), rights to: Display the presentation at the Workshop. Place it on the www.alrdc.com web site, with access to the site to be as directed by the Workshop Steering Committee. Place it on a CD for distribution and/or sale as directed by the Workshop Steering Committee. Other use of this presentation is prohibited without the expressed written permission of the author(s). The owner company(ies) and/or author(s) may publish this material in other journals or magazines if they refer to the Sucker Rod Pumping Workshop where it was first presented. Sept. 27-30, 2016 2016 Sucker Rod Pumping Workshop 19

Disclaimer The following disclaimer shall be included as the last page of a Technical Presentation or Continuing Education Course. A similar disclaimer is included on the front page of the Sucker Rod Pumping Web Site. The Artificial Lift Research and Development Council and its officers and trustees, and the Sucker Rod Pumping Workshop Steering Committee members, and their supporting organizations and companies (here-in-after referred to as the Sponsoring Organizations), and the author(s) of this Technical Presentation or Continuing Education Training Course and their company(ies), provide this presentation and/or training material at the Sucker Rod Pumping Workshop "as is" without any warranty of any kind, express or implied, as to the accuracy of the information or the products or services referred to by any presenter (in so far as such warranties may be excluded under any relevant law) and these members and their companies will not be liable for unlawful actions and any losses or damage that may result from use of any presentation as a consequence of any inaccuracies in, or any omission from, the information which therein may be contained. The views, opinions, and conclusions expressed in these presentations and/or training materials are those of the author and not necessarily those of the Sponsoring Organizations. The author is solely responsible for the content of the materials. The Sponsoring Organizations cannot and do not warrant the accuracy of these documents beyond the source documents, although we do make every attempt to work from authoritative sources. The Sponsoring Organizations provide these presentations and/or training materials as a service. The Sponsoring Organizations make no representations or warranties, express or implied, with respect to the presentations and/or training materials, or any part thereof, including any warrantees of title, non-infringement of copyright or patent rights of others, merchantability, or fitness or suitability for any purpose. Sept. 27-30, 2016 2016 Sucker Rod Pumping Workshop 20