IADC/SPE-199585-MS

Gyro Wellbore Placement Using Advanced Solid-State Sensor Technology

Adrián Ledroz and John Weston, Gyrodata Inc,; James Moisan, Apache Corporation

Copyright 2020, IADC/SPE International Drilling Conference and Exhibition

This paper was prepared for presentation at the IADC/SPE International Drilling Conference and Exhibition held in Galveston, Texas, 3–5 March 2020.

This paper was selected for presentation by an IADC/SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s).
Contents of the paper have not been reviewed by the International Association of Drilling Contractors or the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction
by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the International Association of Drilling Contractors or the Society of Petroleum Engineers,
its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the International Association of Drilling
Contractors or the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations
may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of IADC/SPE copyright.

Abstract
This paper describes the construction of a wellbore that has been drilled using gyroscopic measurements
alone to control the path of the well. Wellbores have not been drilled solely using gyroscopes since the early
days of oil and gas extraction in the last century, and it is many years since a wellbore has been constructed
without the use of magnetic MWD measurements. The exercise described here therefore marks a milestone
in the application of downhole gyroscopic technology.
The wellbore development described has been implemented using advanced solid-state gyroscopic
sensors based on a new Coriolis vibratory gyroscope (CVG). Recent studies have demonstrated how this
new sensor technology has become both a viable and practical option for high accuracy wellbore placement,
largely achievable since CVGs are not affected significantly by the high levels of shock and vibration that
can be experienced under extreme drilling conditions. The new technology provides an attractive option for
while-drilling application, not only as an alternative to conventional gyro while drilling technology but also
as a potential replacement for magnetic MWD.
The results presented here illustrate the ability to use the gyroscopic measurements alone to achieve
a planned wellbore trajectory. For the purpose of this case study, a post-drilling gyroscopic survey was
conducted using a high accuracy gyro tool to verify the accuracy of the while drilling measurements.
The paper sets out the numerous benefits that accrue from the application of CVG technology for the
drilling of all types of well. First of all, it allows close proximity well placement in top-hole sections since
the gyros are immune to magnetic interference from nearby wells. It also eliminates the need to add a
nudge to the wellbore trajectory, a process that normally increases the tortuosity. The need to incorporate
non-magnetic drill collars in the tool string is now removed, as well as the need for magnetic models and
corrections, both with consequent cost savings. The new survey tool allows measurements to be taken near
the bit facilitating more precise well path control. Multiple gyro sensor packages may be run simultaneously,
thus providing independent surveys for quality control purposes and greater confidence in the detection of
gross error.
2 IADC/SPE-199585-MS

Introduction
The use of magnetic measurement while drilling (MWD) techniques has been the de-facto norm for the
control of wellbore placement for many years. The sensors employed in MWD tools, magnetometers and
accelerometers, are extremely rugged devices able to withstand the rigors of extreme drilling environments,
particularly high shock and vibration and high temperature (175°C is becoming the norm). The accuracy
of the resulting survey measurements is greatly enhanced by careful modelling of the Earth's magnetic
field vector at the drilling location (the horizontal component of which constitutes the magnetic survey
reference direction). This is achieved through the application of various in-field referencing (IFR) methods
(Williamson et al., 1998; Poedjono et al., 2011), to overcome the limitations of the method attributable to
the unstable nature of the reference field vector.
Further significant sources of error arise in MWD measurements that are attributable to magnetic
disturbances external to the MWD tool. These include the effects of magnetic interference which arise
when the wellbore under construction is located in close proximity to other wells, as well as from ferrous
components within the drill string itself. The use of non-magnetic drill collars installed in the drill string,
above and below the MWD tool, offset the latter issue. External interference due to the proximity of nearby
wells, which is often most significant in top-hole sections of a well, is more difficult to overcome. In such
cases, gyro measurements, which rely upon measurements of the Earth's rate of rotation, offer a sensible and
reliable alternative to MWD. Gyro while drilling (GWD) tools are deployed successfully in this situation
(Weston et al., 2014).
GWD systems may, of course, be used to control the complete path of a wellbore as it is drilled, not
just the top-hole section. The application of gyroscopic survey and well placement systems offers a number
of advantages that arise directly or indirectly from their reliance on a stable reference: the Earth's rotation
vector. While the accuracy of MWD survey data is a function of errors in the parameters associated with
the reference field used (magnetic declination and dip errors) as well as error in the sensor measurements,
this is not the case for gyroscopic systems. Inaccuracies in GWD survey measurements are entirely a result
of internal imperfections within the tool itself (gyroscope and accelerometer errors) and as a result of
movement or noise. As a result of these characteristics, two or more GWD tools may be deployed within
the bottom hole assembly (BHA) to provide surveys that are largely independent of one another; a valuable
attribute for quality control (QC) purposes, as described by Ekseth et al (2010).
A further significant benefit arises because of the insensitivity of gyroscopic tools to magnetic field
disturbances. It is no longer necessary to deploy drill collars or other BHA components manufactured using
non-magnetic materials. This results in the elimination of measuring BHA components for magnetic hot
spots which is a tedious and usually unreliable process. It is noted that GWD systems are subject neither
to disturbances when drilling in close proximity to other wells, nor to the effects of magnetic anomalies
within the formation.
The availability of a survey tool incorporating new solid-state gyroscopic technology, in combination
with the arguments set out above, has led to the study described here, in which an entire wellbore was drilled
using gyroscopic measurements while drilling. The new gyroscopic tool is described before the results of
the drilling exercise are presented.

Gyroscope technology
Recent advances in solid-state gyroscopic technology have resulted in a new Coriolis vibratory gyroscope
(CVG) which has been shown to exceed the performance of the best spinning mass gyroscopes currently
used to generate high accuracy wellbore surveys (Weston and Ledroz, 2019). Mechanical gyroscopes rely
on a spinning mass maintaining its angular momentum when subject to a rotation rate allowing relative
changes in displacement to be detected and used as a measure of rotation rate (Titterton and Weston, 2004).
These sensors are subject to a variety of errors including gravity-dependent biases due to mass balance
IADC/SPE-199585-MS 3

changes and other imperfections within the sensor. Current GWD systems limit such effects and allow them
to be contained within acceptable levels through careful sets of procedures and real-time compensation
methods (Weston et al., 2014).
CVGs make use of a vibrating element to sense angular rate. While the vibrating component may take
various forms, the principle of operation is illustrated here for the tuning fork configuration shown in Figure
1. Oscillatory motion of the tines of the tuning fork is induced in the direction of the arrow 1. This vibratory
motion is modified by the Coriolis acceleration that is induced in the direction of arrow 2 when the sensor
is rotated about the orthogonal axis 3. This motion is detected indicating the magnitude of the applied
rotation rate Ω (Titterton and Weston, 2004; Apostolyuk, 2016). Such instruments are far less susceptible
to g-dependent errors, making them easier to use and eliminating the concern about the effect that mass
unbalance may be having on survey accuracy.

Figure 1—Schematic representation of a Coriolis vibratory gyroscope

Several factors make advanced solid-state gyroscope technology a desirable option for wellbore
surveying and measurement while drilling applications:

• The application of CVGs results in a considerable reduction in the physical size of gyroscopic tools
incorporating this technology;
• Power requirements are greatly reduced;

• Start time is significantly reduced (spinning mass gyroscopes take time for the rotor to reach the
required spin speed and temperature stability); and
• The frequency of required calibrations is expected to decrease significantly.

Field Tests
The initial laboratory test including calibrations and "survey maps" of the CVG technology dates back to
2012. Several prototypes and iterations have been tested and modified to achieve a gyroscopic survey tool
with, what is believed to be, the lowest positional uncertainty. The initial deployment of this technology
was in the form of a memory tool used for post-drilling surveying. The main reason for this type of test
application is the absence of HSE risk since the well has already been drilled and has a valid survey with
a proven survey tool. Today, the memory version of the tool has surveyed more than 1.5 million feet of
wellbore trajectory.
The gyro while drilling version of the tool started field testing in 2018 in "ghost mode". Ghost mode
refers to having the survey tool, with electronics and flow detector sensor in a collar and as a part of the
BHA, but without a pulser or any means of communication to the surface. It also had a dedicated battery
and a shock and vibration monitoring system. This approach allows the collection of field data, exposure to
downhole temperature, vibration and real drilling conditions with little to no impact on the drilling process.
4 IADC/SPE-199585-MS

The data from the tool is stored in memory, and can be compared and validated against the definitive survey
generated while drilling the well or after advanced corrections have been applied. Even though the tool is
in ghost mode, it is possible to downlink (send a message to the tool) with a series of pump sequences, to
change the tool mode to outrun memory mode in which the tool collects data in gyrocompass mode from TD
to the surface. A drop gyro can be run on completion of a drilled section of wellbore allowing a comparison
of two independent high accuracy surveys.
The first generation of the while-drilling tools was run in multiple wells and BHAs, drilling more than
50,000 ft of wellbore. This included the harsh drilling conditions experienced during horizontal drilling in
the Bakken basin. Post-drilling analysis showed some minor shifts in the configuration as well as some wear
in the tool chassis that needed to be improved. The actual gyro sensors did not show any significant change
in the calibration coefficients, which was very encouraging.
The second generation of while drilling tools is what is currently being deployed in the field. To date, data
from 15 runs have been acquired with the second generation CVG gyro-while-drilling technology; all in
North American land drilling sites, which are normally regarded as one of the hardest drilling environments.
These runs include the vertical part of the well, the curve and the lateral part, with more than 50,000 ft at or
near horizontal. Below is an example of a well drilled in the North East area in US land. It shows very good
agreement in inclination and in azimuth, well within the expected tolerances defined by the uncertainty
models.

Figure 2—Inclination comparison ghost run

Figure 3—Azimuth comparison ghost run – horizontal section only

IADC/SPE-199585-MS 5

Case study
An operator in the Midland basin needed to drill a well with a high degree of accuracy owing to the presence
of another well in the area and lease line constraints. Of course, the goal of precise placement so future
wells can be drilled nearby to optimize production was also a key consideration.
Even though the solid-state gyro while drilling tool is a new tool, the operator wanted to use the tool
to reduce the lateral uncertainty while drilling the well. The reliability of the tool cannot be established
since it has a limited number of operating hours; however, the tool QC is based on the same principles as
those adopted in the previous gyro while drilling tools. Any failure or calibration shift will result in a QC
failure under which circumstances the tool would need to be pulled out of the hole and replaced; this was
considered a low and acceptable risk. Another important consideration for the operator was related to the
availability of redundant information, and the capability of reducing the risk of an NPT event. In the case
of a survey tool failure, with either the MWD or the gyro while drilling tool, the functioning tool can be
used to continue with the drilling process.
When considering the offset well, the separation factor for an MWD error model which included in-field
reference and multi-station analysis correction (MWD+IFR+MS), was 1.06, which presented a very high
level of risk (financial, non-HSE). For the same trajectory, the separation factor was increased to 1.83 when
considering the proposed error model for the new gyro while drilling tool.
The well was initially planned to be completed in three runs: one run for the vertical part, one for the
curve (intermediate) and one for the lateral section. An MWD tool was part of the BHA, but the gyro while
drilling data was to be used as the primary survey tool. One of the features of the gyro tool is the ability to
monitor the toolface at low inclinations (less than 3 degrees), when installed above the motor, in areas of
magnetic interference. The telemetry was configured in such a way that the gyro toolface while sliding was
sent to the surface. However, there were tool issues that generated toolface drift; it was later discovered the
drift was related to an electronics problem. This resulted in a trip out of the hole to re-program the telemetry
to replace the gyro toolface with magnetic toolface since there was no magnetic interference. The vertical
part of the well was therefore completed in two runs instead of one.
Telemetry problems and environmental noise prevented receiving data at some depths near 2000 ft. A
decision was made to drill ahead and collect a multi-shot gyro survey when pulling out of the hole to
complete the survey to comply with the operator's policy, as well as regulatory rules. Figure 4 shows the
inclination and Figure 5 shows the azimuth for the two runs and the outrun memory multishot (OMM) data.

Figure 4—Inclination data – Runs 1 and 2

6 IADC/SPE-199585-MS

Figure 5—Azimuth data – Runs 1 and 2

In the intermediate section, it was possible to get a valid survey at every stand connection and, as with the
previous runs, there was agreement between the gyro while drilling and the MWD data. The gyro tool was
again switched to outrun multishot mode to validate the data. Figure 6 shows the inclination comparison
data for all the surveys; Figure 7 shows the azimuth data for all the surveys.

Figure 6—Inclination data – Run 3

Figure 7—Azimuth data – Run 3

The lateral portion of the well was completed in three runs, a result of reductions in the rate of penetration
(ROP) that required changes to the BHA. The gyro survey tools showed no problems; one tool was used
IADC/SPE-199585-MS 7

for runs 4 and 6, and another tool was used for run 5. Figure 8 shows the azimuth comparison of the gyro
while drilling tool and the MWD tool. The average difference between the azimuth was 0.07 degrees, the
standard deviation of the difference was 0.50 degrees and the maximum difference was 2.97 degrees at
19,324 ft referenced to the MWD survey. Figure 9 shows the QC parameters for the runs in the lateral
section. Currently, the systems can only send to the surface the directional survey (azimuth, inclination and
toolface data), and status words indicating pass or fail for noise levels, Earth rate, latitude and gravity. A
version is under development in which the raw data from the six sensors will be sent to surface, similar
to an MWD, allowing a better understanding of the quality of the data and possibly enabling multi-station
correction analysis. Even though some points are outside the tolerance for Earth rate and latitude, they are
considered outliers and related to noise. There is no indication of any systematic shift in the data.

Figure 8—Azimuth data – Run 4,5 and 6

Figure 9—QC parameters – Run 4,5 and 6

8 IADC/SPE-199585-MS

Conclusions
The paper describes a new gyro while drilling tool employing solid-state gyroscopes and presents results
from its application in the field.

• The capability of the new gyro tool to survive the severe drilling environment encountered for the
entire well has been demonstrated.
• Comparison with the magnetic measurements, incorporating both IFR and muti-station analysis
correction, indicates good agreement, well inside the expected uncertainty model.
• Based on quality control tolerances derived from the preliminary error model, the ability to detect
noisy data and systematic changes related to the tool calibration has been demonstrated.
• This is the first time that a gyro while drilling tool has been utilized in every section of the well
from the surface to total depth. The case study described involved more than 270 circulating hours,
more than 400 hours below the rotary table and approximately 20,000 ft of drilled wellbore.
• Real-time gross error detection through comparison of MWD and gyro while drilling for all
sections of the well is now a reality.
There is now a viable real-time alternative to MWD systems to drill wells of any profile. This alternative
allows simplification of the BHA, directional sensors close to the bit and the removal of non-magnetic
collars brings benefits related to cost savings and directional control.

Acknowledgments
The authors want to thank Stuart Fleming and Luis Alberto Sanchez, Gyrodata, for providing valuable data
and discussion points. Furthermore, Gyrodata and Apache are thanked for the permission to accomplish
and publish this work.

References
1. Apostolyuk, V. (2016), "Coriolis Vibratory Gyroscopes Theory and Design", Springer
International Publishing Switzerland 2016
2. Ekseth, R., Torkildsen, T., Brooks, A. G., Weston, J. L., Nyrnes, E., Wilson, H., Kovalenko, K.,
(2010), "High-Integrity Wellbore Surveying", SPE Drilling and Completion 25 (4): 438-447.
SPE-133417-PA.
3. Poedjono, B., Olalare, I. B., Shevchenko, I. (2011), "Improved Drilling Economics and Enhanced
Target Acquisition through the Application of Effective Geomagnetic Referencing", SPE 140436,
Presented at the SPE EUROPEC/EAGE Annual Conference, Vienna, 23-26 May 2011.
4. Titterton D. H., Weston J. L. (2004), "Strapdown Inertial Navigation Technology, 2nd Edition".
Institution of Electrical Engineers, U.K. and the American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, 2004.
5. Weston J. L., Ledroz A. G., Ekseth R. (2014), "New Gyro While Drilling Technology Delivers
Accurate Azimuth and Real-Time Quality Control for All Well Trajectories", SPE 168052, SPE
Drilling and Completion, September 2014.
6. Weston J. L., Ledroz A. G. (2019), "Combined Gyroscopic and Magnetic Surveys Provide
Improved Magnetic Survey Data and Enhanced Survey Quality Control", SPE 194130, SPE/
IADC International Drilling Conference, March 2019, The Hague, The Netherlands.