Sleeve Control Mode

Right now there are two methods of controlling how the non-rotating sleeve deflects.
These two methods are the bang-bang method, and the proportional method. The bang-
bang method is the default, and the recommended method for running the tool. The
proportional method is one that is currently being developed to allow the tool to hold
almost perfect deflection and toolface. So, whats the difference?

Bang-Bang
The bang-bang method of sleeve control involves the
tool firing half of the pistons in order to deflect.
Inside the non-rotating sleeve, there are 12 pistons
that cover the circumference of the sleeve. When the
tool wants to deflect the drive shaft with the bang-
bang method, half of the pistons (6) will deflect. In
the example to the right, all the pistons in the box will
inflate pushing the driveshaft downward. With the
driveshaft in the downward position, a tilting force is
placed on the back of the pivot stabilizer pointing the
bit upward, thus building. The question is, if this is
how the tool works now, what is the problem?

Bang-Bang Control
Knowing how the tool works, it is time
to talk about the problem with this
method. The main problem with the
bang-bang control method is the
oscillation. When a demand is
requested, the tool starts to deflect. In
this example, the tool starts to deflect
trying to achieve the requested 70%
deflection. Based on the graph to the right, the tool has not attained the desired
deflection. Because the tool hasnt
reached its target deflection it continues
to energize 6 of the pistons in order to
reach the demand. In the graph to the
left, the tool has reached the requested
deflection. Now that the tool has
reached the target, the tool turns off and
does not energize any pistons. It is now
 at the demand deflection and the tool is
no longer energized. The only
problem is that because the tool
reached the demand deflection so
quickly, the tool continues to
overshoot the demand because of the
momentum. This momentum will
eventually be lost, but the final
deflection is greater than what was
originally requested. The extra momentum slows. This entire time that the tool is above
the demand the pistons are not energized. Once this extra momentum is lost, the tool
begins to loose deflection. Because
the tool is still above the demand, the
pistons do not energize while the
deflection starts to drop. Attaining
deflection is always harder than
loosing deflection, so the rate at which
the tool looses deflection is faster than
when it was building angle. When the
tool drops below the demand
deflection, the solenoid begins to fire aiming for the target deflection. Unfortunately, the
tool has a negative momentum, so it takes a little bit to break the negative trend. Once
the trend has been broken, the tool
keeps building angle until the
desired deflection is once again
reached. Because the tool is
working in an on/off manner, there
is an oscillation that takes place
that cant be controlled, that is,
until the proportional method is
used.

Proportional
The bang-bang method of sleeve control involves the tool firing half of the pistons in
order to deflect. This is similar to the proportional method, but the proportional method
involves a bit of thinking. Instead of working in a yes/no manner, the proportional sleeve
control method asks questions like how far are we from the requested deflection, and
how fast are we approaching the target deflection.
 Proportional Control
Knowing some theory on how this
works, lets look at some graphs
showing how it works.

First, the tool starts to deflect towards

the demand setting. As it is deflecting it
is using all six pistons (half of the
twelve) in order to move the sleeve. As
the sleeve moves, the controller
measures how fast the sleeve is deflecting. For demonstration purposes, a dotted line has
been drawn on the graph displaying the calculation used to calculate how fast the line is
moving. Once the program has
calculated how fast the line is moving, it
realizes that soon the tool will be at the
demand setting. Not wanting to over
shoot the demand, the tool reduces the
number of pistons that are firing, and the
rate at which the sleeve is approaching
the demand is slowed. The sleeves
position relative to the demand is
continuously measured, as well as the rate at
which the sleeve is approaching the demand is
also measured. The sleeve continues to
increase or decrease the number of pistons
that are energized in order to achieve a
smooth approach to the line. Once the tool
reaches the demand, the pistons shut off.
Again the momentum carries through and the
tool deflects more than requested. Because the tool was slowly deflecting, the amount
the tool overshoots is minimal. When the tool begins to loose deflection it realizes that
the tool will drop past the demand. Realizing this, the tool will fire prior to reaching the
demand in an attempt to slow the rate that the tool drops deflection. The result of this
smart thinking is a relatively smooth deflection setting. The tools deflection and tool
face will oscillate, but not nearly as bad as the bang-bang method of control.
If the Proportional Sleeve Control Method is so good, why is it not used
as the default?
The problem with the proportional method of sleeve control is the control of the tool face.
When the deflection is set, the tool cruises around the demand setting. A little above, a
little below, but averages the demand. When this method is used to control the tool face,
the tool aims for the demand setting. Once it reaches the demand it slows down. Unlike
deflection, the toolface usually errors on the right because of the sleeve slippage. The
tool face is now on the right side of the demand. The tool measures that the sleeve
slippage is not that quick, so the tool tries to slowly nudge the tool towards the demand.
Since the sleeve continues to slip, the tool never really reaches the demand. Therefore, it
could be said that the tool always errors on the right side, and never reaches the desired
deflection.