You are on page 1of 8

BP Amoco

Directional Survey Handbook BPA-D-004
September 1999 Issue 1 Technical Integrity 6-17
• Check that the Directional Driller`s rigsite database has been
initialised correctly with:
∗ 1he correct suríace co-ordinates
∗ 1he íinal proposed trajectory
∗ 1he sur·ey program ¸where applicable,
∗ 1he correct ·ertical section details
1he íollowing checks apply to the Plan and Section drawing¸s,:
• Make sure that the drawing¸s, co·er the whole planned
section oí the well at a scale large enough íor accurate
manual plotting oí the as-drilled well path
• Check that each drawing is annotated with:
∗ 1he correct well name
∗ 1he proposal identiíier or ·ersion number
∗ 1he sur·ey reíerence direction ¸1rue or Grid, plan
·iews only,
∗ 1he ·alue oí magnetic declination to be used íor the well
¸plan ·iews only, check the ·alue against the Vell Plan
Data Sheet and the latest BGS global geomagnetic model
¸ 3.2,
∗ 1he ·ertical section origin and azimuth ¸·ertical section
projections only, check the ·alues match those on the
directional database,
• Select at least two points írom the proposed trajectory
listing. Scale oíí the corresponding point on the plan and
section drawings and check that the plotted well path passes
through it. ¸Don`t just check the suríace location and target
- these will be correct e·en ií the wrong ·ersion oí the well
plan has been plotted,
BP Amoco
BPA-D-004 Directional Survey Handbook
6-18 Technical Integrity September 1999 Issue 1
• Check that all the driller`s targets are shown on the
drawing¸s,, are labelled as such, and that they match the
target analysis calculations
• Check that any other drilling restrictions ¸eg. due to
geological requirements, which are represented on the
drawing¸s, are clear and correct
• Check that any other iníormation shown on the drawing¸s,
is correct and unambiguous
Correction and 8ign-Off
Problems with the Directional Design lile may range in
se·erity írom a possibly ambiguous label on a drawing to a
gross misinterpretation oí the well's objecti·es. Vhate·er the
nature oí the problem or discrepancy, each must be discussed
with the Vell Planner beíore correcti·e action is taken.
Vhen substantial changes are required to any part oí the
Design, the Vell Planner and Sign-oíí Authority must take care
that all related analyses are re-examined and, ií necessary,
repeated. lor example, any change to the sur·ey program will
ha·e a knock-on eííect on the target analyses, the anti-collision
diagrams and the relieí well criterion.
Vhen checking is complete and all corrections ha·e been
made, the Sign-oíí Authority should sign the Directional
Design lile and Vellsite Drawings to coníirm that:
• 1he well has been planned according to the procedures
speciíied by BP Amoco and the Sign-oíí Authority's
• 1he design meets all the se·en íundamental requirements íor
directional and sur·ey technical integrity
• 1he iníormation in the Directional Design lile, including
the wellsite drawings, is complete and correct
BP Amoco
Directional Survey Handbook BPA-D-004
September 1999 Issue 1 Technical Integrity 6-19
Business Unit Approval
Unless they are íulíilling the role oí the Sign-oíí Authority, BU
drilling engineers are not usually expected to make
comprehensi·e and detailed checks oí the directional design.
As a minimum howe·er, they should check ¸and the directional
company should insist that they check, the íollowing details:
• 1hat the suríace, target and bottom hole co-ordinates oí the
proposed trajectory are correct. 1his data is all on the Vell
Plan Data Sheet
• 1hat the proposed trajectory is realistic and does not
compromise any planned operation, such as wireline logging
or running the completion
• 1hat the sur·ey program is consistent with the
drilling,casing program and that any operational risks
associated with sur·eying ¸such as periods when the drill
pipe must be stationary, are minimised
Violation oí the Drilling and Vell Operations Policy requires
the express permission oí Business Unit Management and
Drilling Management. 1his should rarely be required íor
directional and sur·ey issues. lowe·er, occasions may arise
where the ·iolation oí standards or recommended practices
gi·en in this landbook or in BU-speciíic documents are
justiíied. Vhate·er the local di·ision oí responsibilities, there
should be an established process íor such dispensations, and it
should meet the íollowing criteria:
• 1he details, justiíication and authorisation oí the
dispensation should be recorded on a íorm designed íor the
purpose. 1he iníormation on the íorm should include
∗ Rig name, Vell name
∗ Procedure , Standards Document. 1his is the document
which contains the procedure or standard írom which
dispensation is sought. lor example:
Appendix C
contains an example
dispensation form
BP Amoco
BPA-D-004 Directional Survey Handbook
6-20 Technical Integrity September 1999 Issue 1
∗ Speciíic Procedure , Standard. 1he policy, procedure,
tolerance, minimum standard etc. írom which
dispensation is sought. Numerical ·alues should be gi·en
where appropriate
∗ Details oí Dispensation Requested. 1he procedure to be
missed out, the extent oí ·iolation oí the tolerance or
standard etc
∗ Justiíication. A brieí argument co·ering why normal
practice is inappropriate or impractical and the nature oí
the additional risks incurred by not íollowing it
∗ Attachments. Calculation sheets, completion diagrams etc
• Lach request íor dispensation should be re·iewed
independently by a qualiíied directional specialist
• Subject to the specialist re·iew, the dispensation should be
authorised by a senior member oí the BU Vells team
6.5 Executing the Design
Careíul design oí a íit-íor-purpose directional program is
pointless unless the program is íollowed at the wellsite. 1his
will only happen consistently ií the execution oí the program is
acti·ely monitored. 1his monitoring must not only ensure that
the elements oí the design are íollowed, but that the
assumptions within the design, such as sur·ey tool
períormance, are tested íor ·alidity.
BP Amoco
Directional Survey Handbook BPA-D-004
September 1999 Issue 1 Technical Integrity 6-21
1he scope enjoyed by the rig team íor altering the design based
on circumstance should be clearly understood.
Certain rules (such as not crossing anti-collision tolerance
lines and following JORPs) are inflexible.
Some instructions, such as sur·ey station inter·al, and the
shape oí the íinal build proíile, may ¸or may not, be open to
modiíication. Instructions sent to the wellsite must
diííerentiate between what it mandatory and what is at the
discretion oí the rig team.
1horough analysis and ·alidation oí sur·ey data may take
se·eral days, particularly ií the tools must be returned to base.
It is clearly impractical to wait this long beíore drilling ahead or
setting casing. 1hus wellsite sur·ey QA, including comparison
with sur·eys pre·iously acquired, must be suííicient to enable
decisions on tool change-out or re-sur·ey to be made. Since
re-sur·ey at a later time may be impractical, the deíault
decision should be:
When in doubt, re-survey.
Any non-coníormance with the Directional Design, or íailure
oí any assumption implicit in it, must be assumed to jeopardise
the well`s positioning objecti·es. Non-coníormance may take
se·eral íorms:
• lailure to íollow sur·ey program
• lailure to íollow standard sur·ey procedures
• Sur·ey tool íailure or operating out-oí-spec
• Violation oí a directional constraint, eg. crossed tolerance
line or exceedence oí maximum dog-leg se·erity
BP Amoco
BPA-D-004 Directional Survey Handbook
6-22 Technical Integrity September 1999 Issue 1
In all these cases, the process by which coníidence in the
design is reinstated is the same:
1. Non-coníormance is reported by rig or oííice team.
2. In potentially serious cases, the incident should be
in·estigated and a written summary oí the e·ents made.
3. A design re·iew to assess the impact on the well`s
positioning objecti·es should be made.
4. Remedial actions oí two types should be taken:
a, A new design, program change or instruction should be
de·eloped, to saíeguard the well`s objecti·es.
b, Speciíic measures, such as training or new process
checks should be instigated to pre·ent re-occurrence.
6.6 8urvey Data Management
The Well 8urvey File
1he deíiniti·e sur·ey íor a well ne·er tells the whole story.
Data írom other tools run in the well, quality checks, sur·ey
comparisons, reports and incidental notes may each be
in·aluable to the sur·ey expert should the position oí the well
need to be reappraised. Such reappraisals are rare, but are
usually critically important when they occur - collision
situations, equity disputes and reser·oir remodelling are
1his supporting data should be kept in a single location - the
Vell Sur·ey lile, and retained íor the liíe oí the íield. 1ypical
contents would be:
• 1he sur·ey program ¸planned and actual,
• All sur·ey tool data, including íield results and íinal reports
Appendix C
contains a
Report form suitable
for this
BP Amoco
Directional Survey Handbook BPA-D-004
September 1999 Issue 1 Technical Integrity 6-23
• Quality measures, including well site QA sheets and sur·ey
data comparisons
• 1he deíiniti·e sur·ey
8urvey Reporting
It is important that all sur·ey data acquired in the well is
properly reported, both electronically and on hard copy. 1his
includes multishots, MVD sur·eys and other data, such as
írom dipmeters, that is to be used íor well positioning. 1he
main íunction oí the hard copy report is as a permanent record
oí the deíiniti·e data, associated quality measures, and any
other iníormation which may be oí íuture use.
An important secondary íunction oí the report is to place
accountability íor data quality íirmly with the sur·ey ·endor.
1his is particularly important íor MVD sur·eys, which
are írequently reported not by the MVD company, but
second-hand by the Directional Driller. All MVD companies
should prepare a íinal well sur·ey report listing the all the
sur·eys taken in the well.
1he contents oí a íinal sur·ey report should include:
• 1he deíiniti·e data
• A statement, signed by the indi·idual¸s, responsible íor the
data quality, that it was acquired and checked according to
standard procedures and has passed all applicable quality
• lor magnetic tools, details oí the BlA and the magnetic
spacing oí sur·ey sensors
• Details oí all the corrections applied to the data, including
the ·alues used íor magnetic declination and grid
con·ergence, ií applicable
• Any associated quality measures including, where
appropriate, a completed Vellsite Sur·ey QA Sheet
Survey data
comparisons are
discussed in
Section 4.10
BP Amoco
BPA-D-004 Directional Survey Handbook
6-24 Technical Integrity September 1999 Issue 1
• Discussion oí any serious problems encountered during the
data acquisition, especially any which could impact data
8urvey Validation
Acquiring data o·er the planned depth inter·als is not
suííicient to íulíil the requirements oí the sur·ey program.
1he data írom each tool must also pass certain checks which
indicate it has períormed with its expected accuracy, so that it
can be assigned an appropriate appro·ed error model. 1his is
called ·alidation`.
lailure to pass these checks in·alidates the sur·ey program, so
should be careíully in·estigated by sur·ey experts immediately.
1he deíault response to such íailures is tool change-out and a
repeat sur·ey. Any other response must be justiíied by a
thorough re·iew oí the consequences oí the íailure on the
well`s sur·ey objecti·es.
1here is a general rule that
unvalidated survey data should never be loaded on the
definitive directional database
since the data will later ine·itably be assumed to coníorm to
it`s assigned error model. 1his rule should ne·er be ·iolated
íor operational wells. lor historical wells, where the sur·ey
data is írequently without any indication oí quality,
practicalities may íorce it to be broken. In such cases, the data
should be assigned a highly conser·ati·e error model.
1he two main methods oí ·alidation are sur·ey data
comparison ¸ 4.10, and internal tool quality checks, discussed
with the indi·idual tools. lor se·eral tools these internal
checks are summarised on a wellsite sur·ey QA sheet.

Related Interests