PETROLEUM EXPLORATION AND DEVELOPMENT

Volume 46, Issue 2, April 2019

Online English edition of the Chinese language journal

Cite this article as: PETROL. EXPLOR. DEVELOP., 2019, 46(2): 407–412. RESEARCH PAPER

Borehole trajectory uncertainty and its characterization

LIU Xiushan*
Sinopec Research Institute of Petroleum Engineering, Beijing 100101, China

Abstract: To solve the problem of borehole trajectory uncertainty, some methods such as error ellipsoid posture characterization, sec-
tional error ellipse solution and error elliptic cylinder construction were proposed and an application example was given. According to the
definition of inclination, azimuth and tool-face angle, a characterization method of error ellipsoid posture of borehole trajectory was pre-
sented. By intercepting the error ellipsoid with an arbitrary plane in space, the general concept and algorithm of sectional error ellipse
were established to analyze the borehole trajectory errors in horizontal plane, plumb plane, normal plane, etc. Based on the theory of sur-
face tangency and curve projection, a construction method of error elliptic cylinder of borehole trajectory was put forward to evaluate
the axial enveloping error of borehole trajectory and its variation along well depth. The research shows that the deeper the well, the great-
er the borehole trajectory error will be. In deep and ultra-deep wells measured using conventional measurement while drilling (MWD),
the borehole trajectory position error reaches tens of meters. The research results provide a complete set of analysis methods for borehole
trajectory error, which can evaluate the accuracy and reliability of borehole trajectory monitoring.

Key words: drilling theory; directional drilling; borehole trajectory; measurement-while-drilling; uncertainty analysis; error analysis

Introduction scribe the position uncertainty of borehole trajectory in space,

The basic objective of borehole trajectory design, monitor-
ing and control is to position the spatial location of borehole
trajectory. However, borehole trajectory positioning is impos-
sible to be absolutely accurate because of the errors in meas-
urement and calculation. The accuracy of borehole trajectory
positioning can be improved by means of error correction, but
the error cannot be completely eliminated, so the borehole
trajectory has uncertainty. In the development of oil and gas
fields with dense well pattern and thin oil layers and drilling
operations of offshore platforms and relief wells in particular,
it is more crucial to quantitatively characterize the uncertainty
of borehole trajectory, so as to reduce the risk of drilling op-
erations and improve the effect of oil and gas field develop-
ment[1].
In order to standardize the evaluation method of borehole
trajectory uncertainty, the Society of Petroleum Engineers
(SPE) set up the Industry Steering Committee for Wellbore
Survey Accuracy (ISCWSA), established ISCWSA model of
borehole trajectory error, and updated and maintained the
error source and error model at any time[2–10]. Compared with
Wolff and De Wardt, SESTEM models[10–11], ISCWSA model
is recognized as an international industry standard.
Based on the error model of borehole trajectory, the co-
variance matrix at each survey point can be obtained to de-
but ISCWSA does not provide the characterization method of
error ellipsoid posture of borehole trajectory. Although the
included angle between the principal axes of error ellipsoid
and the coordinate axes of reference system can be used to
characterize the spatial posture of error ellipsoid[12], it is not in
line with industry usage and not convenient to use. In addition,
there are other research results including by using a plane to
intercept the error ellipsoid to analyze the borehole trajectory
error on horizontal plane[13–14].
In order to satisfy various engineering requirements related
to error analysis of borehole trajectory, the methods of posture
characterization of error ellipsoid, sectional error ellipse solu-
tion and error elliptic cylinder construction are presented in
this paper which can be used to analyze the borehole trajec-
tory errors in any plane, the axial enveloping error and its
variation along measured depth, and have clear physical and
engineering significance.
1. Error propagation and integration model
Error source is the basic element of error analysis of bore-
hole trajectory, and ISCWSA has identified more than 80 error
sources[10]. The common error sources include sensor error,
axial and circumferential magnetic interference of BHA (bot-
tom hole assembly), misalignment error caused by BHA sag

Received date: 13 Aug. 2018; Revised date: 04 Dec. 2018.

* Corresponding author. E-mail: liuxs.sripe@sinopec.com
Foundation item: Supported by the China National Science and Technology Major Project (2017ZX05005-005).
https://doi.org/10.1016/S1876-3804(19)60021-2
Copyright © 2019, Research Institute of Petroleum Exploration & Development, PetroChina. Publishing Services provided by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of KeAi Com-
munications Co., Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
 LIU Xiushan / Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2019, 46(2): 407–412

r   N , E , H 
T
and radial misalignment of tool subassembly, geomagnetic where
field uncertainty, and measured depth error, etc. The borehole
This is an ellipsoid family with regard to scaling factor k,
trajectory error model mainly takes into account the represen-
an ellipsoid will be obtained at a given value of k. Since the
tative uncertainty factors, and does not include accidental
covariance matrix CNEH is a real symmetric matrix, there is an
events, inclinometer defects and mistake errors such as incor-
orthogonal matrix H to make it diagonalize. The matrix H is
rect data input. The assumptions of ISCWSA model are as
composed of the eigenvectors of CNEH, and can be obtained by
follows[2–10]: (1) Borehole trajectory position uncertainty are
assembling the three eigenvectors in columns:
caused exclusively by measurement errors at survey stations.
 H11 H12 H13 
(2) A survey station is modeled by measured depth, inclination
and azimuth. (3) Errors from different error sources are statis- H   H 21 H 22 H 23  (5)
tically independent. (4) There is a linear relationship between  H 31 H 32 H 33 
the error magnitude of each measurement and the correspond- According to linear algebra theory, H is related to CNEH and
ing change in borehole trajectory position. (5) The combined its eigenvalues as follows:
effect on borehole trajectory position of different measure- 1 
ment errors is equal to the vector sum of their individual effects. H C NEH H = 
T
2 
 (6)
To characterize the influence law of error source on posi-
tion error of borehole trajectory, Brooks and Wilson estab-
 3 
lished the error propagation equation[2–5]: After obtaining the eigenvalue and eigenvector of CNEH, the
dr p standard ellipsoid equation can be obtained in the principal
eh   h (1) axis coordinate system O-UVW of the error ellipsoid:
dp  h
U2 V2 W2
p  L   
T
   k2 (7)
where = , ,  1 2 3
 h   h  h  h 
The size of the error ellipsoid can be characterized by three
 dN dN dN  principal axis radii:
 dL d d 
 Ri =k i (i=1, 2, 3) (8)
dr  dE dE dE  As shown in Fig. 1, according to the definition of inclina-
= 
dp  dL d d  tion, azimuth and tool-face angle, the inclination W and azi-
 dH dH dH  muth W of the principal axis W of the error ellipsoid and the
  rotation angle W around the principal axis W are selected to
 dL d d 
To characterize the error correlation between different sur- represent the posture of error ellipsoid, the equation is as fol-
vey stations, different measurements, different wells and the lows:
whole cumulative effect, ISCWSA divides the error propaga- 
cos   H
tion mode into random error, systematic error, well error and  W 33

global error, and defines the corresponding correlation coeffi-  H 23

cients. Therefore, the cumulative error result at any survey tan W  (9)
 H13
station K can be expressed as:  H
C K   Ch, K   C h, K   C h, K (2) tan W  32
hRand hSyst hWell , Glob   H 31
ISCWSA provided the calculation method of covariance In practice, it is often necessary to find out the correspon-
matrix under different error propagation modes[210], so the dence between the eigenvalues and eigenvectors with the prin-
3×3 covariance matrix CK can be obtained at each survey sta- cipal axes of ellipsoid. In general, the principal axis close
tion, in which the covariance matrix in the O-NEH wellhead
coordinate system can be expressed as:
  N2  NE  NH 
 
C NEH   NE  E2  EH  (3)
 NH  EH  H2 

2. Error ellipsoid and posture characterization
Assuming that the position error of borehole trajectory
complies with the normal distribution, the equiprobability
density surface of the error distribution is as follows[25]:
 r   r   k 2
T 1
C NEH (4) Fig. 1. Error ellipsoid and posture characterization.

 408 
 LIU Xiushan / Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2019, 46(2): 407–412

to the borehole high-side is used as the U-axis, the principal
axis close to the vertical direction is used as the W-axis, and
the V-axis is determined according to the right hand rule, so
the U-axis, V-axis and W-axis constitute the right-handed co-
ordinate system.
3. Sectional error ellipse
In the process of drilling, it is often necessary to analyze
the errors of borehole trajectory in horizontal plane, vertical
plane, normal plane or even arbitrary plane, to evaluate the
uncertainty of borehole trajectory. Therefore, a sectional error
ellipse can be obtained through intercepting the error ellipsoid
by using the plane crossing the ellipsoid center (Fig. 2).
In order to establish the universal representation and calcu-
lation method of sectional error ellipse, the unit vector m is
used to represent the normal direction of any posture plane,
then the inclination m and azimuth m of the normal line will
define the spatial posture of the plane. As shown in Fig. 2, the
cross-section coordinate system O´-XYZ is established with
the center of the error ellipsoid as the origin, where the Z-axis
points to the normal direction of the plane, the X-axis is the
intersection line between the plane and the Z-axis vertical
plane and points to the high-side direction, and the Y-axis
horizontally points to the right. According to the covariance
matrix CNEH of equation (3) and the rotation transformation
relation between the coordinate systems, the covariance ma-
trix in the cross-section coordinate system O´-XYZ is as fol-
lows:
C XYZ  TC NEH T T (10)
cos  m cos m cos  m sin m  sin  m 
where T    sin m cos m 0 
 sin  m cos m sin  m sin m cos  m 
By dividing CNEH into blocks and retaining the correlation
terms of X and Y, the equation of sectional error ellipse can be
obtained as:
1
T
X    X2  XY  δX 
 δY   k
2
 Y   2 
(11)
   XY Y   
The size and posture of sectional error ellipse can be char-
acterized by radii of 2 principal axes and 1 rotation angle, and
the calculation formulas are as follows:
ri =k i  i  1， 2

 2 XY (12)
 tan 2  2
  X Y
2
where 12   X2 cos 2    XY sin 2   Y2 sin 2 
2 2   X2 sin 2    XY sin 2   Y2 cos 2 
The plane posture usually includes horizontal plane, verti-
cal plane and normal plane, and they intercept the error ellip-
soid to get the error ellipses of horizontal section, vertical
section and normal section, respectively. The following three
cases are the special cases of the above general method, and
the corresponding results can be obtained by selecting the
appropriate inclination and azimuth of the normal line: (1)
Error ellipse of horizontal section. Take m=m=0, the matrix
T is the unit matrix, and the rotation angle  starts from the
north direction. (2) Error ellipse of vertical section. Take
m=90, m is the azimuth of normal direction of the vertical
plane, and the rotation angle  starts from the vertical direc-
tion. (3) Error ellipse of normal section. Take m and m as the
inclination  and azimuth  of borehole trajectory respectively,
and the rotation angle  starts from the direction of the bore-
hole high side.
4. Error elliptical cylinder
The error ellipsoids of borehole trajectory are in series on
the borehole trajectory, and the centers of the error ellipsoids
are at survey stations. If a curved surface is used to envelop
these error ellipsoids, an error elliptical cylinder will be ob-
tained, and the resulting elliptical cylinder can represent the
axial enveloping error of borehole trajectory and its variation
along the measured depth (Fig. 3).
However, the shape of error elliptical cylinder is very com-
plicated. First, the wellbore trajectory (the axis of the elliptical
cylinder) is a three-dimensional twisted curve, rather than a
simple curve such as a straight line or circular arc. Secondly,
the cross section of the elliptical cylinder is elliptic. Since the
error ellipsoid size at each survey station is different, the ra-
dius of the major semi-axis and minor semi-axis of sectional
ellipses vary with the measured depth. Furthermore, since
each error ellipsoid has different posture, the elliptical cylin-
der is a twisted surface along the borehole trajectory. In fact,

Fig. 2. Error ellipsoid and sectional error ellipse. Fig. 3. Error elliptical cylinder and its construction principle.

 409 
 LIU Xiushan / Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2019, 46(2): 407–412

the error elliptical cylinder surface is an undevelopable sur- 3

Bi1 Bi 3 3
Bi 2 Bi 3
face, not an envelope surface in the strict sense. i 1 Ri2

i 1 Ri2
C1  C2 
In order to understand the constitutive principle of error el- 2 2
3
 Bi 3  3
 Bi 3 
liptical cylinder, assuming that the formation is ice and the  
i 1  Ri 
  
i 1  Ri 

error ellipsoid has high temperature. When the error ellipsoid
moves along the borehole trajectory, the ice body touched by If the inverse matrix of the matrix F is represented by the
the error ellipsoid will be melted. In this way, the wellbore matrix G, the radius of principal axes and the rotation angle of
formed in the formation is the error elliptical cylinder, and the the cross section ellipse of the error elliptical cylinder are:
wellbore wall is the surface of error elliptical cylinder. 
 r 2  G cos 2   G sin 2  G sin 2 
As shown in Fig. 3, the surface of error elliptical cylinder is  1 11 12 22

tangent to the error ellipsoid, and its tangent points form a 2 r 2

 G11 sin 2
  G12 sin 2  G22 cos 
2
(16)
closed curve. In the borehole coordinate system O-xyz, the  2G12
 tan 2 
closed curve is projected onto the xy plane to obtain a closed  G11  G22
projection curve. This projection curve is the boundary curve
The ellipses of cross section at all survey stations are con-
of the projection region of error ellipsoid on the xy plane, and
nected in series along the borehole trajectory to form the error
also the boundary curve of the cross section of the error ellip-
elliptical cylinder, which can be used to evaluate the axial
tical cylinder at survey station. Obviously, the boundary curve
envelope error of borehole trajectory and its variation along
of the error elliptical cylinder's cross section is an ellipse. If
the measured depth.
the sectional ellipses of the error elliptical cylinder at every
survey station can be obtained, the whole error elliptical cyl- 5. Case analysis
inder can be determined. A horizontal well was surveyed and calculated according to
Firstly, based on the rotation transformation relation of the the industry norms, and the calculation results with the true
coordinate system, the error ellipsoid equation in the borehole north as the reference direction are shown in Table 1. The well
coordinate system O-xyz can be obtained. If three vectors Bi had a geomagnetic field intensity of 56 356.51 nT, magnetic
(i=1, 2, 3) are used to represent the transformation matrix B declination of 10.60, magnetic dip of 64.72, meridian
between coordinate system O-UVW and coordinate system convergence of 0.876, and the scaling factor of error ellip-
O´-xyz, and the vector r is used to represent the position error soid of 2.0. The basic MWD error model with non-axial cor-
coordinate of the borehole trajectory(x, y, z), then the error rection and BHA sag was used. According to the characteriza-
ellipsoid equation is: tion and calculation methods of borehole trajectory error in
2
 Bi r 
3 this paper, the evaluation results were shown in Tables 2 and 3
 
i 1  Ri 
 1 (13) (due to space limitation, only part of the data is listed in Ta-
bles 1-3).
where Bi   Bi1 , Bi 2 , Bi 3 
r   x, y , z  B  H T AT Table 1. The calculation results of borehole trajectory.
Measured Inclination Azimuth North coor- East coor- Vertical
cos  cos  cos  sin   sin  
depth/m angle/(°) angle/(°) dinate/m dinate/m depth/m
A    sin  cos  0 
0 0 0 0 0
 sin  cos  sin  sin  cos   900.00 0 0 0 900.00
The tangent condition of error elliptical cylinder surface 1 800.00 0 0 0 1 800.00
and error ellipsoid is: 2 700.00 0 0 0 2 700.00
3 600.00 0 0 0 3 600.00
B 3

 R B r  0
i 1
i3
2 i (14) 4 500.00 0 0 0 4 500.00
i 5 400.00 0 0 0 5 400.00
By eliminating the parameter z in the vector r, the projec- 6 300.00 0 0 0 6 300.00
tion curve equation of the tangent curve between elliptical 7 200.00 0 0 0 7 200.00
cylinder surface and ellipsoid on xy plane can be obtained: 7 660.00 0 29.71 0 0 7 660.00
T 7 831.77 45.81 41.16 51.74 39.36 7 814.05
 x   F11 F12   x 
 y F 1 (15)
F22   y 
8 028.73 45.81 51.01 149.57 140.96 7 951.35
   21 8 161.32 90.00 55.43 221.10 237.05 8 000.00
2
3
D  3
D D  8 400.00 90.00 57.02 353.79 435.44 8 000.00
where F11    i1  F12  F21    i1 2 i 2  8 700.00 90.00 59.02 512.67 689.90 8 000.00
i 1  Ri  i 1  Ri 
9 000.00 90.00 61.02 662.57 949.75 8 000.00
2
D  3 9 300.00 90.00 63.02 803.32 1 214.67 8 000.00
F22    i 2  9 600.00 90.00 65.02 934.73 1 484.34 8 000.00
i 1  Ri 
9 900.00 90.00 67.02 1 056.65 1 758.43 8 000.00
Dij  Bij  Bi 3C j (i=1, 2, 3; j=1, 2) 10 161.32 90.00 68.76 1 155.00 2 000.52 8 000.00

 410 
 LIU Xiushan / Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2019, 46(2): 407–412

Table 2. The evaluation results of error ellipsoid and error ellipsoid cylinder of borehole trajectory.
Measured Error ellipsoid Error ellipsoid cylinder
depth/m R1/m R2/m R3/m W/(°) W/(°) W/(°) R1/m R2/m /(°)
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
900.00 3.17 3.17 1.29 0 0 0 3.17 3.17 0
1 800.00 6.40 6.40 2.68 0 0 0 6.40 6.40 0
2 700.00 9.62 9.62 4.79 0 0 0 9.62 9.62 0
3 600.00 12.85 12.85 7.66 0 0 0 12.85 12.85 0
4 500.00 16.08 16.08 11.33 0 0 0 16.08 16.08 0
5 400.00 19.30 19.30 15.80 0 0 0 19.30 19.30 0
6 300.00 22.53 22.53 21.07 0 0 0 22.53 22.53 0
7 200.00 25.76 25.76 27.15 0 0 0 25.76 25.76 0
7 660.00 27.41 27.41 30.57 0 0 0 27.41 27.41 0
7 831.77 27.90 27.97 31.72 2.41 38.37 8.40 16.13 27.98 0.55
8 028.73 28.24 28.71 32.71 6.36 44.26 3.48 16.54 28.85 4.01
8 161.32 28.32 29.35 33.10 9.10 47.70 2.13 32.25 28.17 34.85
8 400.00 28.20 31.00 33.43 13.97 51.33 1.10 27.38 33.37 35.10
8 700.00 28.03 34.29 34.06 18.53 53.02 1.44 26.69 36.17 21.83
9 000.00 27.86 38.62 34.87 21.55 55.25 0.76 26.70 40.23 15.36
9 300.00 27.74 43.69 35.82 23.44 56.65 0.68 27.13 44.87 10.80
9 600.00 27.68 49.29 36.89 24.55 57.90 0.64 27.85 49.91 7.46
9 900.00 27.70 55.26 38.07 25.13 59.07 0.61 28.80 55.17 4.85
10 161.32 27.78 60.68 39.16 25.33 60.05 0.60 29.78 59.81 2.95

Table 3. The evaluation results of sectional error ellipse of borehole trajectory.

Measured Error ellipse of horizontal section Error ellipse of vertical section Error ellipse of normal section
depth/m R1/m R2/m /(°) R1/m R2/m /(°) R1/m R2/m /(°)
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
900.00 3.17 3.17 0 1.29 3.17 0 3.17 3.17 0
1 800.00 6.40 6.40 0 2.68 6.40 0 6.40 6.40 0
2 700.00 9.62 9.62 0 4.79 9.62 0 9.62 9.62 0
3 600.00 12.85 12.85 0 7.66 12.85 0 12.85 12.85 0
4 500.00 16.08 16.08 0 11.33 16.08 0 16.08 16.08 0
5 400.00 19.30 19.30 0 15.80 19.30 0 19.30 19.30 0
6 300.00 22.53 22.53 0 21.07 22.53 0 22.53 22.53 0
7 200.00 25.76 25.76 0 27.15 25.76 0 25.76 25.76 0
7 660.00 27.41 27.41 0 30.57 27.41 0 27.41 27.41 0
7 831.77 27.97 27.91 42.30 31.71 27.97 0.11 29.76 27.97 0.02
8 028.73 28.71 28.30 41.80 32.66 28.71 0.79 30.13 28.71 2.19
8 161.32 29.35 28.45 39.90 32.99 29.34 1.47 32.99 29.34 1.47
8 400.00 31.00 28.53 37.46 33.15 30.98 2.77 33.15 30.98 2.77
8 700.00 34.29 28.69 35.47 33.47 34.28 9.32 33.47 34.28 9.32
9 000.00 38.62 28.90 33.98 34.00 38.56 2.01 34.00 38.56 2.01
9 300.00 43.69 29.17 32.68 34.66 43.58 1.27 34.66 43.58 1.27
9 600.00 49.29 29.48 31.48 35.47 49.09 1.01 35.47 49.09 1.01
9 900.00 55.26 29.84 30.34 36.41 54.94 0.88 36.41 54.94 0.88
10 161.32 60.68 30.19 29.38 37.33 60.22 0.81 37.33 60.22 0.81

tional field, and the use of survey interval and non-magnetic

6. Conclusions
The deeper the well, the greater the trajectory error will be.
The position error of borehole trajectory in deep and ultra-
deep wells can reach tens of meters. In order to improve the
monitoring and control accuracy of borehole trajectory, the
well survey operation should be in strict accordance with the
industry norms, including regular and rigorous calibration of
survey tools, in-field checks of geomagnetic field and gravita-
 411 
spacing for MWD surveys according to industry norms.
The principal axes of error ellipsoid of borehole trajectory
does not coincide with the coordinate axes of borehole coor-
dinate system. The spatial posture of the error ellipsoid is
characterized by the inclination, azimuth and rotation angle of
the principal axis of error ellipsoid, which has definite physi-
cal significance and is convenient for engineering application.
The concept and algorithm of sectional error ellipse of
 LIU Xiushan / Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2019, 46(2): 407–412

borehole trajectory have universality, and can be used to dr

—effect matrix of the survey errors on the borehole position in
evaluate the errors of borehole trajectory on horizontal plane, dp
vertical plane, normal plane and even arbitrary plane, and to the N-axis, E-axis, and H-axis.
analyze target-hitting probability etc.
The error elliptical cylinder of borehole trajectory can References
evaluate the axial envelope error of borehole trajectory and its
[1] GUO Yanli, SUN Baojiang, GAO Yonghai, et al. Gas kick
variation along measured depth. The maximum principal axis
radius of the cross-section ellipse of the error elliptical cylin- during carbonate reservoirs drilling and its risk assessment.

der is greater than or equal to the maximum principal axis Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2017, 44(3): 431–438.
[2] BROOKS A G, WILSON H. An improved method for com-
radius of the error ellipse of the normal cross-section, and
even may be greater than the maximum principal axis radius puting wellbore position uncertainty and its application to col-

of the error ellipsoid. lision and target intersection probability analysis. SPE 36863,
1996.
[3] WILLIAMSON H S. Accuracy prediction for directional
Nomenclature
MWD. SPE 56702, 1999.
[4] WILLIAMSON H S. Accuracy prediction for directional
A, B, H, F, T—coordinate transformation matrix;
measurement while drilling. SPE Drilling & Completion,
C—covariance matrix;
2000, 15(4): 221–233.
E—east coordinate, m;
[5] BROOKS A G, WILSON H, JAMIESON A L, et al. Quantifi-
e—the error vector of borehole trajectory with respect to N, E, and
cation of depth accuracy. SPE 95611, 2005.
H coordinates;
[6] GRINDROD S J, CLARK P J, LIGHTFOOT J D, et al.
Glob—global error;
OWSG standard survey tool error model set for improved
G—the inverse matrix of the matrix F;
quality and implementation in directional survey management.
H—true vertical depth, m;
SPE 178843, 2016.
h—number of error sources;
[7] TORKILDSEN T, HAVARSTEIN S T, WESTON J L, et al.
k—scaling factor of error ellipse, dimensionless;
Prediction of wellbore position accuracy when surveyed with
L—measured depth, m;
gyroscopic tools. SPE 90408, 2008.
m—normal vector;
[8] EKSETH R, TORKILDSEN T, BROOKS A G, et al. The reli-
N—north coordinate, m;
ability problem related to directional survey data. SPE
Rand—random error;
103734, 2006.
R—principal axis radius of error ellipsoid, m;
[9] EKSETH R, TORKILDSEN T, BROOKS A G, et al. High
r—principal axis radius of error ellipse, m;
integrity wellbore surveys: Methods for eliminating gross er-
r—position error vector of borehole trajectory;
rors. SPE 105558, 2007.
Syst—systemic error;
[10] JAMIESON A. Introduction to wellbore positioning. Scotland:
U, V, W—coordinates of principal axes of error ellipsoid;
University of the Highlands & Islands, 2017.
Well—well error;
[11] WOLFF C J M, de WARDT J P. Borehole position uncer-
X—high side coordinate of sectional coordinate system, m;
tainty-analysis of measuring methods and derivation of sys-
x—high side coordinate of borehole trajectory, m;
tematic error model. Journal of Petroleum Technology, 1981,
Y—right coordinate of sectional coordinate system, m;
33(12): 2338–2350.
y—right coordinate of borehole trajectory, m;
[12] LIU Xiushan. Directional deflection equations for steerable
Z—normal coordinate of sectional coordinate system, m;
drilling tools and the control mechanism of wellbore trajec-
z—tangential coordinate of borehole trajectory, m;
tory. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2017, 44(5):
—inclination angle, ();
788–793.
—error source;
[13] DONG Benjing, GAO Deli, LIU Gonghui. Discussion on the
 —azimuth angle, ();
analytical method of well track uncertainty. Natural Gas In-
—eigenvalue of covariance matrix, m2;
dustry, 1999, 19(4): 59–63.
 —rotation angle of error ellipsoid or ellipse, ();
[14] LIU Gonghui, DONG Benjing, GAO Deli. Probability analy-
 —error magnitude, or variance and covariance, m2;
p sis of error ellipsoid (ellipse) and hole intersection. Drilling &
—weighting function vector;
ε Production Technology, 2000, 23(3): 5–12.

 412 