You are on page 1of 32

UNIVERSITY OF LJUBLJANA

Faculty of Natural Sciences and Engineering

Chair of Mine Surveying and Applied Geophysics

Author:iga krjanc

Supervisor: Milivoj Vuli

Ljubljana, 2015
iga KRJANC: Comparison of Directional Survey Calculation Methods on a Real Well Data

[2]
iga KRJANC: Comparison of Directional Survey Calculation Methods on a Real Well Data

Abstract

Povzetek

iri povzetek

Contents

List of Figures

Nomenclature

[3]
iga KRJANC: Comparison of Directional Survey Calculation Methods on a Real Well Data

1 INTRODUCTION

Since the first commercial wells were drilled, directional surveys have taken place in the oil
and gas industry. In the beginning, mostly vertical wells were drilled but after the technology
improvement and increase in knowledge took place, more and more deviated wells were
drilled. During the past two decades not many absolutely vertical wells have been drilled. The
wells have become very complex therefore good directional survey tools and methods are
needed.

At first a magnetic survey instruments were used. Mostly they were used only to make sure
that well is not deviated from vertical trajectory. The instruments development had progressed
and in 1970 the gyroscope appeared. With some technology improvement both instruments
are still in use nowadays. Additionally, in todays oil and gas industry other tools, such as
MWD and telemetry, are used. However, interpretation of received downhole position data
has stayed almost the same. Calculations have been improved during decades but in principle
the methods are still the same. (Directional Drilling book)

Choosing a right method to calculate well trajectory is an important issue concerning


directional drillers, industry and companies itself. Not accurate directional survey method
may result in higher costs, not hitting the pay zone or, in worst case scenario, hit the offset
well due to poor directional survey calculation and hence not accurate anti-collision analysis.
Therefore, the proper method should be used.

There is an extensive literature available about directional survey calculation methods. Wilson
(1968a) reviewed radius of curvature method for which he claimed that is improved procedure
for performing calculations with the survey data obtained. He also found out that the radius of
curvature method can eliminate inherent errors in vertical depth, horizontal departure,
direction coordinates and dogleg severity that occur when tangential method is applied.
Wilson (1968b) also observed that tangential method causes small incremental but
significantly large cumulative errors in calculated vertical depth and horizontal departure.
Consequently, horizontal departure can be longer or shorter than actual departure and
operations performed with the calculated length lead to further error.

Taylor et al. (1972) introduced the minimum curvature method and compared it with
triangular, secant and quadratic method. They concluded that well survey calculations can be
improved by using a three dimensional space curve to represent the wellbore. They

[4]
iga KRJANC: Comparison of Directional Survey Calculation Methods on a Real Well Data

suggested to use a parametric form of the equations of the curve. They found, what they
called excellent agreement between real and synthetic data by use of minimum curvature
method and quadratic method.

Walstrom et al. (1972) published the principle of balanced tangential method for first time. In
this publication they also introduced error analysis and compared five models. They derived
some data which can be used as a guide to provide reasonable limits on average model error
in feet. Their conclusion was that balanced tangential method was found very efficient and
had been in use for more than three years.

Walstrom et al. (1972) did an error analysis between various directional survey methods.
Additionally, they applied all models to several calibration-type wellbores for which bottom
hole coordinates were known precisely from analytical considerations. They concluded that
the terminal angle method should be abandoned because it is grossly susceptible to error.
Furthermore, they claim that most of the error in calculated coordinates is generally due to
random errors in the data readings rather than to errors inherent in the model. Balanced
tangential method was considered the most efficient method in their research. A mathematical
analysis of errors in directional survey calculations were also made by Harvey et al. (1971).

Minimum curvature method or circular arc method was further improved by Zaremba (1973)
and became convenient for use. He stated that this method eliminates the abrupt changes in
direction of the tangent to wellbore. In the mentioned article, he claimed that calculations are
too tedious for a routine hard work and therefore he proposed the necessary code. He
compared method especially in comparison to the tangential projection method and he found
out that most likely the elimination of discontinuities in tangent direction results in a better
approximation to bottomhole location than in the tangential method. Furthermore, the method
was improved by Blythe (1975).

Callas (1976) presented algorithms for computing directional surveys with a helical method.
He also compared helical method with circular arc method. The algorithm he developed is
based on assumptions that measurement stations are closely approximated by right helical
arcs that exactly fir the directional data. Additionally, he claimed that helical method can be
considered a three point integration method.

The 3D method to handle the calculation of well paths that have both changes of azimuth and
changes of inclination was published by William (1981). He derived the method which is

[5]
iga KRJANC: Comparison of Directional Survey Calculation Methods on a Real Well Data

based on general radius of curvature equations. The proposed method can be applied to slant-
well or S-well configuration.

An improved angle averaging method for directional survey calculation was proposed by
Ruqiang (1982). The method was theoretically proved to be more accurate than angle
averaging model or other models such as balanced tangential method. He claimed that this
method can be used in the field with a programmable calculator.

Martinez (1992) developed a computerized system in order to provide the drilling engineer
with an advisory tool which recommends changes in the Bottom Hole Assemblies (BHA).
Apart from database about BHAs the computerized applications developed to calculate and
plot the path of the borehole was achieved.

Sawaryn and Thorogood (2003) proposed a compendium of directional calculations based on


the minimum curvature method. They concluded that vector methods are a useful tool for 3D
directional calculations and often result in simpler expressions compared with other means,
thus their use is recommended.

Liu et al. (2008, pp.2) wrote: The engineering standards in the industry (Liu et al., 2003)
routinely use the radius of curvature method (or cylinder helix method) and minimum
curvature method for simulating and calculating a drilled wellbore trajectory. The radius of
curvature method is more suitable for describing a wellbore trajectory drilled in the rotary
mode, and the minimum curvature method is more suitable for describing the sections drilled
in the slide drilling mode (Han, 1989). The results of various calculations show that there is a
considerable deviation among the different methods of calculation for a directional or
horizontal well. Consequently, it is important to improve the precision and reliability of
survey calculations. Although, the most precise method of calculating a wellbore generally
requires more calculations than other, less-accurate methods, the wider use of computers in oil
fields now eliminates this concern as an obstacle (Li and Shi, 2001).

Many authors researched reliability problem related to directional survey data or to magnetic
directional survey data (Ekseth et al., 2006 and Nyrnes et al., 2005).

Stromhaug (2014) presented a software model, the calculation model and the functions. He
also researched different directional survey methods and found out that the minimum
curvature method is the main method that is used during drilling operations, therefore is well
suited to calculate the drilled well path as this method is easy to use and gives acceptable

[6]
iga KRJANC: Comparison of Directional Survey Calculation Methods on a Real Well Data

results. Constant turn rate method presented by Planeix and Fox. (Michele Y. Planeix, 1979)
was also used. For this method the author claims that the method gives accurate results and
shows little error but has other limitations which were described in the thesis.

However, one of the motivations for writing this thesis is that there is lack of proper
comparison of the most used method on different sequence of survey stations. This thesis will
summarise most used methods in the industry and compare them on a real well data.
Comparison will be made by using different increments along the wellbore. Well trajectories
will also be visualized so that direct comparison of the methods will be observed.
Furthermore, results are going to be discussed and proper conclusions made.

[7]
iga KRJANC: Comparison of Directional Survey Calculation Methods on a Real Well Data

2 METHODOLOGY

2.1 FUNDAMENTALS AND TERMINOLOGY

Before the methods are described it is necessary to look at some fundamentals and
terminology which will appear later in the paper.

Figure 1: Measurement paramaters of a directional well. (Farah, 2013)

Directional drilling is the methodology for directing a wellbore along a predetermined


trajectory to a target as shown on Figure 1. Vertical wells are usually defined as wells with an
inclination within 5. Wells with an inclination greater than 60are referred to as highly
deviated wells. Wells with a section having an inclination greater than 85for a significant
distance (can be much longer than true vertical depth) are called horizontal wells. The basic
terminology used in the thesis is as follows (Farah, 2013):

Azimuth: The angle () between the north direction and the plane containing the
vertical line through the wellhead and the vertical line through the target.
Build-up rate: The build-up rate (/30m) is the rate at which the angle is built.

[8]
iga KRJANC: Comparison of Directional Survey Calculation Methods on a Real Well Data

Drop-off point: The depth where the wellbore angle begins to drop off (i.e. tending to
vertical).
Displacement: The horizontal distance (m) between the vertical lines passing through
the target and the wellhead.
Inclination or drift angle: Angle () which measures deviation of trajectory from the
vertical line.
Kick-off point (KOP): The depth at which the well is deviated from the vertical.
Measured depth (MD): Depth (length) of the well path.
Tangent section: Section of a well where the well path is maintained at a certain
inclination, with the intent of advancing in both TVS and vertical section.
True vertical depth (TVD): Vertical distance between kelly bushing or rotary table and
survey point.
Well path: The trajectory of a directionally drilled well in three dimensions.

2.2 DOGLEG SEVERITY

One of the important parameters is also so called dogleg severity. Because it can be
sometimes unclear what it actually means it will be briefly explained in next paragraphs.
Basically, dogleg severity describes the overall angle change of the curve in 100 ft of a
wellpath. Therefore, it is given in degrees per 100 feet or in degrees per 30 m. It can be
calculated by following equation:

= 100
(1)

Where an overall angle change and L is is the length of a wellpath. The parameter itself has
great importance in the industry since it has a direct effect to the bending forces and other
limitations such as stuck pipe problem, drill pipe failure, casing wear or even wellbore
stability. Because wellbore must be stable at any time it can often happen that wellpath will be
chosen in a way that dogleg severity is as small as possible. (Stromhaug, 2014)

Because dogleg severity is not only an inclination change but it changes when azimuth
changes the proper equation was developed by Lubinski (1987):

[9]
iga KRJANC: Comparison of Directional Survey Calculation Methods on a Real Well Data

2 100
= sin sin + sin sin sin
(2)

2 2

Where is the increment between two survey stations and , and , are
inclination and azimuth at lower and upper survey stations, respectively. With this equation
dogleg severity can be determined at any point of interest.

2.3 METHODS

On the next pages, all the methods will be briefly described as well as equations will be given.

2.3.1 Tangential Method

The simplest and quite common method which was used for years is the tangential method.
The method assumes that wellbore course of the segment has constant inclination and azimuth
as they are at the lower survey station. Inclination and azimuth from upper survey are not
considered. (Buorgoyne et al., 1986)

[10]
iga KRJANC: Comparison of Directional Survey Calculation Methods on a Real Well Data

Figure 2: Schematic of tangential method principle (Modified after Farah, 2013).

It is clear that this method may be the least accurate so far. This will be investigated and
discussed in the next chapter.

If the section length is considered as = then equations can be written as


follows (Buorgoyne et al., 1986):

= sin (3)
= cos (4)
!"# = cos (5)
%&' = sin (6)

[11]
iga KRJANC: Comparison of Directional Survey Calculation Methods on a Real Well Data

Figure 3: Tangential method schematic in 2D.

2.3.2 Average Angle Method

The average angle method was widely used in USA, China and Soviet Union and it was
developed as an alternative for tangential method. Its main advantage is simplicity and
reasonably accurate compared with other models. (Ruqiang, 1982)

This method simply averages the angles of inclination and azimuth at the two survey stations.
This is then assumed well path, with a length equal to the actual course length between two
stations. (Directional Drilling Book)

+ +
!"# = ')* +"'
2 2
(7)

+ +
%&' = ')* ')*
2 2
(8)

+
= +"'
2
(9)

+
)',-&+./.* = ')* =
2
(10)

In some literature is also described as course deviation.

[12]
iga KRJANC: Comparison of Directional Survey Calculation Methods on a Real Well Data

Figure 4: Average angle method calculation principle (Modified after Farah, 2013).

2.3.3 Radius of Curvature Method

The radius of curvature method was introduced in late 60s. The method is employed to
compute vertical depth, horizontal departure and direction coordinates from measured values
of well depth, inclination angle and direction angle (azimuth). In this method, the wellbore is
assumed to be smooth curve in either or both vertical and horizontal projections. Each
segment of measured depth is defined by data obtained at both ends of the segment. (Wilson
1968a).

The purpose of the figure below is to help to visualize the problem. Simple derivation can be
made as follows.

[13]
iga KRJANC: Comparison of Directional Survey Calculation Methods on a Real Well Data

Figure 5: The radius of curvature method schematic in both projections. (Modified after Stromhaug,
2014)

First, well path can be described as a circular arc in both the horizontal and vertical plane,
with radius Rh and Rv, respectively. Both arcs are illustrated on the figure above. Second, the
circular arc is tangential to the inclination and azimuth in both stations and forms a circular
arc between the two stations. Therefore, the well path can be described as a circular arc in
vertical plain which is wrapped around a right cylinder. (Stromhaug, 2014)

[14]
iga KRJANC: Comparison of Directional Survey Calculation Methods on a Real Well Data

Figure 6: Assumption of the radius of curvature method - wellpath fitted onto a cyclinder. (Farah, 2013)

The radius in the vertical plane can be calculated using the following equation (Stromhaug,
2014):


=
360 2234
(11)

180
34 =
2
(12)

The vertical difference of depth can be described as:

= 34 (sin sin ) (13)

By substituting 34

sin sin 180


8 =8
2
(14)

34 (cos cos ) 180


The radius in the horizontal plane can be similarly described as the one in the vertical plane:

3: =
360 2
(15)

8!"# = 3: (sin sin )


By substituting 3: and 34 the north departure is as follows:
(16)

cos cos 180 sin sin 180


8!"# = 8
2 2
(17)

[15]
iga KRJANC: Comparison of Directional Survey Calculation Methods on a Real Well Data

cos cos 180 cos cos 180


The same procedure is done for east departure which yields:

8%&' = 8
2 2
(18)

Figure 7: Vertical depth and horizontal departure by radius of curvature method. (Modified after Wilson
1968)

;<
=
It is unclear why factor is not considered in the argument of the trigonometrical functions.

Therefore it is more transparent if the angles are written in radians. The equations transform
in a simpler form (Vuli, 2014):

sin sin
8 =8

(19)

cos cos sin sin


8!"# = 8

(20)

cos cos cos cos


8%&' = 8

(21)

Considering that displacement can be written like:

[16]
iga KRJANC: Comparison of Directional Survey Calculation Methods on a Real Well Data

cos cos
=8

(22)

Then the equations take form:

sin sin
8 =8

(23)

sin sin
8!"# =

(24)

cos cos
8%&' =

(25)

It is clearly visible that equations are not defined when = and = . Because of that
the equations can be written as:

+
sin sin cos sin
8 =8 = 28 2 2 =
(26)


2
2

+ sin 2
=8 cos
2
2
+
sin sin cos 2 sin 2
8 =8 = 28 =
(27)


2
2

+ sin 2
=8 cos
2
2
+
cos cos sin sin
=8 = 28 2 2 =
(28)


2 2

+ sin
=8 sin 2
2
2
And if for above equations limits are solved:


+ sin +
lim 8 =8 cos lim 2 =8 cos =8 cos
(29)

@A @C 2 @A @C 2
2

+ sin 2 +
lim =8 sin lim =8 sin =8 sin
(30)

@A @C 2 @A @C 2
2

[17]
iga KRJANC: Comparison of Directional Survey Calculation Methods on a Real Well Data

To omit if function the known function (a=b) is included:

(& = D) = E= 0 &D
=1 &=D
(31)

Thus,


+ sin
8 =8 cos G 2 +( = )H
(32)

2
+( = )
2

+ sin 2
=8 sin G +( = )H
(33)

2
( = )
2 +
The same procedure is done for = , hence:

sin sin
8!"# = =

(34)


+ sin 2
= cos G +( = )H
2
+( = )
2
cos cos
8%&' = =

(35)


+ sin
= sin G 2 +( = )H
2
+( = )
2
If a few terms are simplified as

+
=
I
2

=
2
+
=
I
2

=
2
Then final equations are as follows:

sin
8 =8 cos IJ +( = 0)K
+ ( = 0)
(36)

[18]
iga KRJANC: Comparison of Directional Survey Calculation Methods on a Real Well Data

sin
=8 sin IJ +( = 0)K
+ ( = 0)
(37)

sin
8!"# = cos J +( = 0)K
I
+( = 0)
(38)

sin
8%&' = sin J +( = 0)K
I
+( = 0)
(39)

Furthermore, if function sn is defined as sn+ = + (+ = 0), then equations result in


LMNO
OI(OP<)

forms:

8 =8 sn cos I (40)
=8 sn sin I (41)
8!"# = sn cos I (42)
8%&' = sn sin I (43)

2.3.4 Balanced Tangential Method

Balanced tangential method is modified tangential method by taking the direction of the upper
station for the first half of the course length, then that of the lower station for the second half
can substantially reduce the errors in that method. Because of this modification the method is
known as balanced tangential method. The method is very simple and therefore has been
widely used in the fields. (Mitchell, 2006)

Balanced tangential method can be summarized by following three computational steps


(Walstrom et al., 1972):

Step 1: The terminal angle tangential method should be used and bottomhole coordinates X,
Y and Z developed. This procedure assumes that the angles of inclination and azimuth
measured at the bottom of a station interval hold throughout that interval.

Step 2: The process should be repeated but this time the upper inclination and azimuth angles
should be used which yields a new set of coordinates X, Y and Z.

Step 3: Final solution for bottomhole coordinates can be computed as follows:

Q + Q
Q RR =
2
(44)

T + T
T RR =
2
(45)

[19]
iga KRJANC: Comparison of Directional Survey Calculation Methods on a Real Well Data

U + U
U RR =
2
(46)

or, more explicitly:


Z
1
Q = V W Xsin sin
RR
+ sin sin Y
2
(47)

P
Z
1
T = V W Xsin cos
RR
+ sin cos Y
2
(48)

P
Z
1
U RR = V W Xcos + cos Y
2
(49)

The bottomhole coordinates are thus the means of the bottomhole coordinate derived from
two strictly linear segment models.

Further, this model can be reinterpreted as a single strictly linear segment model with n+1
linear segments in which the individual elements defined by triads *, *,W *, are constituted
as follows:

=
) = 0, 1, 2, 3, * ]
=

1
W = W (W + W I ) ) = 0, 1, 2, 3, * 1
2

1
WZ = WZ
2

so that
Z

Q = V W sin
RR
sin
(50)

P<
Z

T = V W sin
RR
cos
(51)

P<
Z

U = V W cos
RR

(52)

P<

[20]
iga KRJANC: Comparison of Directional Survey Calculation Methods on a Real Well Data

It is apparent that the balanced tangential method is a vector averaging method because the
contribution to the calculated well coordinates from upper and lower survey stations is made
up of the average of two vectors, one derived from readings at the top survey and the other
from readings at the bottom survey station.

If substitution with nomenclature is made the final equations yield (Mitchell. 2006):

1
= (cos + cos )
2
(53)

1
!"# = (sin cos + sin cos )
2
(54)

1
%&' = (sin sin + sin sin )
2
(55)

Figure 8: Schematic of balanced tangetial method principlele (Modified after Farah, 2013).

2.3.5 Minimum Curvature Method

The minimum curvature method uses the angles at upper and lower survey stations and
assumes a curved wellbore over the course length (Buorgoyne et al., 1986). The method
basically fits a spherical arc between two points by calculating the dog-leg (DL) curvature

[21]
iga KRJANC: Comparison of Directional Survey Calculation Methods on a Real Well Data

from the 3D vectors and scaling by a ratio factor (RF). The method is actually similar to
balanced tangential with the addition of a ratio factor. (Gerlitz, 2004)

With the application of minimum curvature method, interpolation, intersection with a target
plane, toolface, minimum and maximum true vertical depth in a horizontal section, point
closes to a circular arc, survey station to a target position with and without the direction
defined, nudges, and steering runs can be determined. (Sawaryn, 2005)

Calculations used for the method are as follows (Buorgoyne et al., 1986).

The overall angle can be written as:

= cos ^ = cos X( ) ')* ')* (1 cos( ))Y (56)

Figure 9: Schematic of minimum curvature ratio factor, FR or FC. (Applied Drilling Engineering)

[22]
iga KRJANC: Comparison of Directional Survey Calculation Methods on a Real Well Data

_+_
`+`
As depicted in the figure above, the straight line segments adjoin the curve
segments at points and . It follows that:

^
`=a
2

^
` =a
2

^
_=a tan ( )
2

^
_ =a tan ( )
2

And that

^
_ tan 2 2 ^
= = tan
` ^ ^ 2
2

And

^
_ tan 2 ^
2
= = tan
` ^ ^ 2
2

[23]
iga KRJANC: Comparison of Directional Survey Calculation Methods on a Real Well Data

Figure 10: Representation of the minimum curvature method (Modified after Farah, 2013).

Therefore, factor of the straight line sections versus the curved section ratios is defined as RF
or FC, where:

2 ^
de = tan
^ 2
(57)

Or, if the is defined as (Vuli, 2014):

1
= &#+ &* f g
1

Then FC can be written as follows:


2
de = tan
+( = 0) 2
(58)

If the equations above are taken into the account, then it yields (Applied Drilling):

[24]
iga KRJANC: Comparison of Directional Survey Calculation Methods on a Real Well Data


= de (+"' + +"' )
2
(59)


!"# = de (sin +"' + sin +"' )
2
(60)


%&' = de (sin ')* + sin ')* )
2
(61)

2.3.6 Helical Arc Method

The helical arc method assumes that the actual borehole segments are closely approximated
by right helical arcs that exactly fit the end points of segments. To fit a helical arc connecting
the k and (k+1) points of a borehole, directional data at three successive points must be taken,
starting with (k-1). As a result, the axial direction and the radius of the defining cylinder upon
which kth helical arc lies are determined. Therefore, the helical arc method can be considered
as a three point integration method. (Callas, 1976)

ijk , h
ijk and h
ijkI . Additionally, lkI is known assuming that the
To start with the derivation, first direction vectors need to be defined. The method, as said
above, uses three vectors h
point lk , the three directions mentioned above and the length kth segment, k (or ), of
the borehole. (Callas, 1976)

points lkI , lk and lk


A rigid-motion transformation, T, is postulated here that rotates the helical spanning the three
into a canonical position such that the axis of the helix is parallel to
the z axis. That is,

iiij o = (0,0,1)
mn (62)

iiij is the unit vector determined from the three directions h


Where the axial vector n ijk , h
ijk and
ijkI as the solution of the following three linear equations:
h

iiij , h
mn ij o = , ) = p 1, p, p + 1 (63)

Where the constant A is positive and less than one. Furthermore, the constant A is the value
+"'q, where q represents the inclination that any tangent vector to the helix makes with the
iiij . Because of the need for at least three consecutive directions along the borehole to
vector n
iiij , the first step in this process will require use of a look-ahead
compute the vector n
ij , h
computation using the vectors h ij and h
ijr . But before that, the derivation of the axial
iiij is presented.
vector n

[25]
iga KRJANC: Comparison of Directional Survey Calculation Methods on a Real Well Data

Figure 11: The helical arc method schematic. (Modified after Callas, 1976)

iiij is as follows:
Derivation of the axial vector n

iiij are denoted as n , n , nr and the components of the


If the components of the vector n
ijk as h ,k , h
vector h ,k and hr,k then the equation above becomes:

nh ,k +n h ,k + nr hr,k = (64)
nh ,k +n h ,k + nr hr,k = (65)
nh ,kI +n h ,kI + nr hr,kI = (66)

Defining s, = hs, hs, , for t = 1, 2, 3 and ) = p, p + 1, then equations above become


the homogeneous linear equations:

n ,k +n ,k + nr r,k =0 (67)
n ,kI +n ,kI + nr r,kI =0 (68)

[26]
iga KRJANC: Comparison of Directional Survey Calculation Methods on a Real Well Data

Care must be taken with the significance of the digits in the above difference expressions s, .
Hence, since wellbores almost always process in a downward direction it may be assumes that
iiij is positive or in other words, it is not equal to zero.
the z component of nr of the vector n
Thus, the pair of equations become:

v ,k +w ,k = r,k (69)
v ,kI +w ,kI = r,kI (70)
xC xA
Where v = and w = .
xy xy

If the determinant ,k ,kI ,kI ,k is not equal to zero, then the values of u and v
C
z 4
exist, and n = {, n = { and nr = {, where = (1 + v + w )A .

If #:k is the radius of the cylinder upon which the helical arc lies, then

k |sin q|
#:k =
(71)
}

Where } is the angle (in radians) between the two vectors }jk and }jkI and where:

}j = h iiij +"'q , ) = p, p + 1
ij n (72)
iiij .
The vector }j is perpendicular to the axial direction of n

The parametric equations of a right helical arc are given by following equations:

Q( ) = # +"'
T( ) = # ')*
(73)

U( ) = # |cot q|
(74)
(75)

The desired iteration equation for computing successive helical departures is then:

lkI = lk + Wm ~, , o , p = 1,2, , * 1 (76)

S is the inverse transformation of T and the departure components of D are as follows:

: (< + )
=
~

(77)

[27]
iga KRJANC: Comparison of Directional Survey Calculation Methods on a Real Well Data

: (<+ )
=
(78)


~ = k < (79)

Where the vectors

ijk o = (< , < , < )


mh (80)

ijkI o = ( , , )
mh (81)

And the values:

= ((< + ) + (< + ) )
(82)

|< < |
} = sin J K
1 <
(83)

}
= 2#:k sin
:
2
(84)

Application of helical arc method on a real data

After above derivation, terms and equations cam be simplified and therefore more convenient
to use in calculations. The following equations were used in excel file (see attachments).
Firstly, some terms can be substituted which yields (Vuli, 2014):

= cos (85)
= sin sin (86)
= sin cos (87)
Trivially, difference between the coordinates is as follows:

= (88)
= (89)
= (90)
The squared length of the vector can be defined as = + + and hence angle
can be evaluated from this equation:

2
cos =
2
(91)

[28]
iga KRJANC: Comparison of Directional Survey Calculation Methods on a Real Well Data


If - = then R can be defined as 3 = and if = then it yields:

=3 (92)

To take into account all of three survey stations, in this case i, i-1 and i-2, the AP difference is
derived which gives:

l = + (93)
l = + (94)
l~ = + (95)

Likewise, the length of this vector can be described l = l , where l = l +

l~ + l . Furthermore, dimensionless ratio p can be calculated:

l
, =
(96)
l
l
, =
(97)
l
l~
,~ =
(98)
l

Finally, end coordinates can be computed:

= , (99)
%&' = , (100)
!"# = ,~ (101)

3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

It follows

[29]
iga KRJANC: Comparison of Directional Survey Calculation Methods on a Real Well Data

[30]
iga KRJANC: Comparison of Directional Survey Calculation Methods on a Real Well Data

4 REFERENCES

Blythe, E. J. Computing Accurate Directional Surveys. World Oil, 1975.

Buorgoyne Jr., A. T., Millheim, K. K., Chenevert, M. E., Young Jr., S. F. Applied Drilling
Engineering. First Printing. Texas: Society of Petroleum Engineers, 1986, ISBN 1-55563-
001-4.

Callas, N. P. Computing Directional Surveys with a Helical Method. SPE 5957, 1976.

Ekseth, R., Kovalenko, K., Weston, J. L. The Reliability Problem Related to Directional
Survey Data. Society of Petroleum Engineers, 2006.

Farah, O. F. Directional Well Design, Trajectory and Survey Calculations with a Case Study
in Fiale, Asal Rift, Djibouti: report. Djibouti: Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources, nr.
27, 2013.

Gerlitz, K. Implementing the Minimum Curvature Method for Deviated Well Geometry
Surveys in GE7. Online, Access (on 22.10.2015):
http://www.cgg.com/data//1/rec_docs/2269_MinimumCurvatureWellPaths.pdf

Gfrerrer, A., Glasser, G. P. A New Approach for Most Realistic Wellpath Computation. SPE
62726, 2000.

Harvey, R. P., Walstrom, J. E., Eddy, H. D. A Mathematical Analysis of Errors in Directional


Survey Calculations, Society of Petroleum Engineers, 1971.

Liu, X., Samuel, R. Actual 3D Shape of Wellbore Trajectory: An Objective Description for
Complex Steered Wells. Society of Petroleum Engineers, 2008.

Lubinski, A. Developments in Petroleum Engineering. Gulf Publisihing Co. Vol. 1, 1987.

Martinez. E. Directional Drilling Expert System. Society of Petroleum Engineering, 1992.

Mitchell, R. F. Petroleum Engineering Handbook vol. II. Texas: Society of Petroleum


Engineers, 2006, ISBN 978-1-55563-114-7

Nyrnes, E., Torkildsen, T. Analyses of the Accuracy and Reliability of Magnetic Directional
Surveys. Society of Petroleum Engineers, 2005.

Prassl, W. F. Drilling Engineering. Curtin University of Technology.

[31]
iga KRJANC: Comparison of Directional Survey Calculation Methods on a Real Well Data

Ruqiang, Z. An Improved Angle Averaging Method for Directional Survey Calculation.


Beijing: Society of Petroleum Engineers, 1982.

Sawaryn, S.J., Thorogood, J. L. A Compendium of Directional Calculations Based on the


Minimum Curvature Method. Colorado: Society of Petroleum Engineers, 2003.

Scott, A. C, MacDonald, B. E. Determining Downhole Magnetic Interference on Directional


Surveys. Society of Petroleum Engineers, 1979.

Stromhaug, A. H. Directional Drilling Advanced Trajectory Modelling: Masters thesis.


Trondheim, 2014. pg. 133

Taylor, L. H., Mason, M. C., A Systematic Approach to Well Surveying Calculations. Society
of Petroleum Engineers, vol. 12, 1972.

Vuli, M. Directional Drilling: Positioning. University of Ljubljana, Chair for Mine


Surveying and Applied Geophysics, internal script, 2014.

Walstrom, J. .T., Harvey, R. P., and Eddy, H. D. A Comparison of Various Directional


Models and an Approach to Model Error Analysis. J. Pet. Tech, 1972, 935-943.

William, H. M. Planning the Directional Well A Calculation Mehod. Society of Petroleum


Engineers, 1981.

Wilson, G. J. An Improved Method for Computing Directional Surveys. J. Pet. Tech, 1968b,
vol. 20.

Wilson, G. J. Radius of Curvature Method for Computing Directional Surveys. Society of


Petroleum Engineers, 1968a.

Zaremba, W. A. Directional Surveys by the Circular Arc Method. SPE, 1973, vol. 255.

[32]

You might also like