Contents

  • Background
  • New misalignment model
  • Comparison to existing models, and example calculations
  • Conclusions
  • Appendix: Mathematical details

Background

  • Definition of tool misalignment α:
    • Angle between borehole axis and survey tool axis (local, at each survey station)
  • Properties:
    • In general: unknown toolface
    • Error propagation: random or systematic between stations
  • Analogous definition for sensor misalignment in tool, and misalignment between sensor axes
  • The importance of tool misalignment:
    • Affects all survey tools, and all survey operations
    • High relative importance in top-hole sections, i.e., typically low-inclination wellbore sections
    • Significant for long survey sections with fixed toolface (sliding tool)

Introducing the new model

  • Analysing misalignment in the D, I, A system (like all other error terms) is tempting, but leads to:
    • One physical error source modelled by several (2-4) «sources»
    • Customized or alternative solutions near vertical
    • The «vertical singularity» problem: δA/δα ~ 1/sin(I)
  • However, the end results are variances and co-variances in the N, E, V system:
    • Can misalignment be analysed directly in N, E, V co-ordinates?
    • And would this solve any of the problems above?

Starting point for new model

  • The position uncertainty due to misalignment α is always perpendicular to the (local) wellbore direction.
  • At each measurement, the misalignment toolface angle τ is assumed uniform on [0° ... 360°] → uncertainty «cone».
    • The toolface statistics is not related to the «random» or «systematic» nature of propagation between measurements.
  • Consequently, the approach should be:
    • 1) Describe the uncertainty in the perpendicular plane (NEV system, and one τ).
    • 2) Average over τ.

....

View the entire Presentation:

A New Look at Tool Misalignment

Jon Bang, Gyrodata Inc.

 

More from Meeting 40