decision support for the wellbore path,

(Inclination and Azimuth) while LWD refers

to measurements concerning the
geological formations penetrated while
drilling.[1]

History
Initial attempts to provide MWD and LWD
date back to the 1920s, and attempts were
made prior to WW2 with mud pulse, wired
pipe, acoustic and electromagnetics. JJ
Arps produced a working directional and
resistivity system in the 1960s.[2]
Competing work supported by Mobil,
Standard Oil and others in the late 1960s
and early 1970s led to multiple viable
systems by the early 1970s, with the MWD
of Teleco Oilfield Services, systems from
Schlumberger (Mobil) Halliburton and
BakerHughes. However, the main impetus
to development was a decision by the
Norwegian Petroleum Directorate to
mandate the taking of a directional survey
in wells offshore Norway every 100
meters. This decision created an
environment where MWD technology had
an economic advantage over conventional
mechanical TOTCO devices, and lead to
rapid developments, including LWD, to add
gamma and resistivity, by the early
1980s.[3][4] [5]
Measurement
MWD typically concerns measurement
taken of the wellbore (the hole) inclination
from vertical, and also magnetic direction
from north. Using basic trigonometry, a
three-dimensional plot of the path of the
well can be produced. Essentially, a MWD
operator measures the trajectory of the
hole as it is drilled (for example, data
updates arrive and are processed every
few seconds or faster). This information is
then used to drill in a pre-planned direction
into the formation which contains the oil,
gas, water or condensate. Additional
measurements can also be taken of
natural gamma ray emissions from the
rock; this helps broadly to determine what
type of rock formation is being drilled,
which in turn helps confirm the real-time
location of the wellbore in relation to the
presence of different types of known
formations (by comparison with existing
seismic data).

Density and porosity, rock fluid pressures

and other measurements are taken, some
using radioactive sources, some using
sound, some using electricity, etc.; this can
then be used to calculate how freely oil
and other fluids can flow through the
formation, as well as the volume of
hydrocarbons present in the rock and, with
other data, the value of the whole reservoir
and reservoir reserves.

An MWD downhole tool is also "high-

sided" with the bottom hole drilling
assembly, enabling the wellbore to be
steered in a chosen direction in 3D space
known as directional drilling. Directional
drillers rely on receiving accurate, quality
tested data from the MWD operator to
allow them to keep the well safely on the
planned trajectory.

Directional survey measurements are

taken by three orthogonally mounted
accelerometers to measure inclination,
and three orthogonally mounted
magnetometers which measure direction
(azimuth). Gyroscopic tools may be used
to measure azimuth where the survey is
measured in a location with disruptive
external magnetic influences, inside
"casing", for example, where the hole is
lined with steel tubulars (tubes). These
sensors, as well as any additional sensors
to measure rock formation density,
porosity, pressure or other data, are
connected, physically and digitally, to a
logic unit which converts the information
into binary digits which are then
transmitted to surface using "mud pulse
telemetry" (MPT, a binary coding
transmission system used with fluids,
such as, combinatorial, Manchester
encoding, split-phase, among others).

This is done by using a downhole "pulser"

unit which varies the drilling fluid (mud)
pressure inside the drillstring according to
the chosen MPT: these pressure
fluctuations are decoded and displayed on
the surface system computers as wave-
forms; voltage outputs from the sensors
(raw data); specific measurements of
gravity or directions from magnetic north,
or in other forms, such as sound waves,
nuclear wave-forms, etc.
Surface (mud) pressure transducers
measure these pressure fluctuations
(pulses) and pass an analogue voltage
signal to surface computers which digitize
the signal. Disruptive frequencies are
filtered out and the signal is decoded back
into its original data form. For example, a
pressure fluctuation of 20psi (or less) can
be “picked out” of a total mud system
pressure of 3,500psi or more.

Downhole electrical and mechanical

power is provided by downhole turbine
systems, which use the energy of the
“mud” flow, battery units (lithium), or a
combination of both.
Types of information
transmitted

Directional information

MWD tools are generally capable of taking

directional surveys in real time. The tool
uses accelerometers and magnetometers
to measure the inclination and azimuth of
the wellbore at that location, and they then
transmit that information to the surface.
With a series of surveys; measurements of
inclination, azimuth, and tool face, at
appropriate intervals (anywhere from every
30 ft (i.e., 10m) to every 500 ft), the
location of the wellbore can be calculated.
By itself, this information allows operators
to prove that their well does not cross into
areas that they are not authorized to drill.
However, due to the cost of MWD systems,
they are not generally used on wells
intended to be vertical. Instead, the wells
are surveyed after drilling through the use
of multi-shot surveying tools lowered into
the drillstring on slickline or wireline.

The primary use of real-time surveys is in

directional drilling. For the directional
driller to steer the well towards a target
zone, he must know where the well is
going, and what the effects of his steering
efforts are.
MWD tools also generally provide toolface
measurements to aid in directional drilling
using downhole mud motors with bent
subs or bent housings. For more
information on the use of toolface
measurements, see Directional drilling.

Drilling mechanics information

MWD tools can also provide information

about the conditions at the drill bit. This
may include:

Rotational speed of the drillstring

Smoothness of that rotation
 Type and severity of any vibration
downhole
Downhole temperature
Torque and weight on bit, measured
near the drill bit
Mud flow volume

Mud Motors

Use of this information can allow the

operator to drill the well more efficiently,
and to ensure that the MWD tool and any
other downhole tools, such as a mud
motor, rotary steerable systems, and LWD
tools, are operated within their technical
specifications to prevent tool failure. This
information is also valuable to geologists
responsible for the well information about
the formation which is being drilled.

Formation properties

Many MWD tools, either on their own, or in

conjunction with separate LWD tools, can
take measurements of formation
properties. At the surface, these
measurements are assembled into a log,
similar to one obtained by wireline logging.
LWD tools are able to measure a suite of
geological characteristics including
density, porosity, resistivity, acoustic-
caliper, inclination at the drill bit (NBI),
magnetic resonance and formation
pressure. [6]

The MWD tool allows these

measurements to be taken and evaluated
while the well is being drilled. This makes
it possible to perform geosteering, or
directional drilling based on measured
formation properties, rather than simply
drilling into a preset target.
Most MWD tools contain an internal
gamma ray sensor to measure natural
gamma ray values. This is because these
sensors are compact, inexpensive, reliable,
and can take measurements through
unmodified drill collars. Other
measurements often require separate LWD
tools, which communicate with the MWD
tools downhole through internal wires.

Measurement while drilling can be cost-

effective in exploration wells, particularly
in areas of the Gulf of Mexico where wells
are drilled in areas of salt diapirs. The
resistivity log will detect penetration into
salt, and early detection prevents salt
damage to bentonite drilling mud.

Data transmission methods

Mud-pulse telemetry

This is the most common method of data

transmission used by MWD tools.
Downhole, a valve is operated to restrict
the flow of the drilling fluid (mud)
according to the digital information to be
transmitted. This creates pressure
fluctuations representing the information.
The pressure fluctuations propagate
within the drilling fluid towards the surface
where they are received from pressure
sensors. On the surface, the received
pressure signals are processed by
computers to reconstruct the information.
The technology is available in three
varieties: positive pulse, negative pulse,
and continuous wave.[7]

Positive pulse
Positive-pulse tools briefly close and
open the valve to restrict the mud flow
within the drill pipe. This produces an
increase in pressure that can be seen at
surface. The digital information can be
encoded in the pressure signal using
line codes or pulse-position
modulation.[8]

Diagram showing the MWD

Negative pulse
Negative pulse tools briefly open and
close the valve to release mud from
inside the drillpipe out to the annulus.
This produces a decrease in pressure
that can be seen at surface. The digital
information can be encoded in the
 pressure signal using line codes or
pulse-position modulation.[9]

Continuous wave
Continuous wave tools gradually close
and open the valve to generate
sinusoidal pressure fluctuations within
the drilling fluid. Any digital modulation
scheme with a continuous phase can be
used to impose the information on a
carrier signal. The most widely used
modulation scheme is continuous phase
modulation.[10]

When underbalanced drilling is used, mud

pulse telemetry can become unusable.
This is usually because, in order to reduce
the equivalent density of the drilling mud, a
compressible gas is injected into the mud.
This causes high signal attenuation which
drastically reduces the ability of the mud
to transmit pulsed data. In this case, it is
necessary to use methods different from
mud pulse telemetry, such as
electromagnetic waves propagating
through the formation or wired drill pipe
telemetry.

Current mud-pulse telemetry technology

offers a bandwidths of up to 40 bit/s.[11]
The data rate drops with increasing length
of the wellbore and is typically as low as
0.5 bit/s[12] – 3.0 bit/s.[11] (bits per
second) at a depth of 35,000 ft – 40,000 ft
(10668 m – 12192 m).

Surface to down hole communication is

typically done via changes to drilling
parameters, i.e., change of the rotation
speed of the drill string or change of the
mud flow rate. Making changes to the
drilling parameters in order to send
information can require interruption of the
drilling process, which is unfavorable due
to the fact that it causes non-productive
time.

Electromagnetic telemetry
These tools incorporate an electrical
insulator in the drillstring, but due to the
challenges of receiving data through a
good conductor (Salt Water) this approach
is largely confined to onshore areas
without shallow saline aquifers. To
transmit data, the tool generates an
altered voltage difference between the top
part (the main drillstring, above the
insulator), and the bottom part (the drill bit,
and other tools located below the insulator
of the MWD tool). On surface, a wire is
attached to the wellhead, which makes
contact with the drillpipe at the surface. A
second wire is attached to a rod driven
into the ground some distance away. The
wellhead and the ground rod form the two
electrodes of a dipole antenna. The
voltage difference between the two
electrodes is the receive signal that is
decoded by a computer.

The EM tool generates voltage differences

between the drillstring sections in the
pattern of very low frequency (2–12 Hz)
waves. The data is imposed on the waves
through digital modulation.

This system generally offers data rates of

up to 10 bits per second. In addition, many
of these tools are also capable of
receiving data from the surface in the
same way, while mud-pulse-based tools
rely on changes in the drilling parameters,
such as rotation speed of the drillstring or
the mud flow rate, to send information
from the surface to downhole tools.

Compared to the broadly used mud-pulse

telemetry, electromagnetic pulse telemetry
is more effective in specialized situations
onshore, such as underbalanced drilling or
when using air as drilling fluid. It is
capable of transmitting data faster at
shallow drilling depths, onshore. However,
it generally falls short when drilling
exceptionally deep wells, and the signal
can lose strength rapidly in certain types
of formations, becoming undetectable at
only a few thousand feet of depth.

Wired drill pipe

Several oilfield service companies are

currently developing wired drill pipe
systems, though wired systems have been
trialled for many decades, and the
Russians had a system in use in the
1960s. These systems use electrical wires
built into every component of the
drillstring, which carry electrical signals
directly to the surface. These systems
promise data transmission rates orders of
magnitude greater than anything possible
with mud-pulse or electromagnetic
telemetry, both from the downhole tool to
the surface and from the surface to the
downhole tool. The IntelliServ[13] wired
pipe network, offering data rates upwards
of 1 megabit per second, became
commercial in 2006. Representatives from
BP America, StatoilHydro, Baker Hughes
INTEQ, and Schlumberger presented three
success stories using this system, both
onshore and offshore, at the March 2008
SPE/IADC Drilling Conference in Orlando,
Florida.[14] Cost for the drillstring, and the
complexity of deployment, make this a
niche technology compared to mud pulse.
Retrievable tools
MWD tools may be semi-permanently
mounted in a drill collar (only removable at
servicing facilities), or they may be self-
contained and wireline retrievable.

Retrievable tools, sometimes known as

Slim Tools, can be retrieved and replaced
using wireline through the drill string. This
generally allows the tool to be replaced
much faster in case of failure, and it
allows the tool to be recovered if the
drillstring becomes stuck. Retrievable
tools must be much smaller, usually about
2 inches or less in diameter, though their
length may be 20 ft (6.1 m) or more. The
small size is necessary for the tool to fit
through the drillstring; however, it also
limits the tool's capabilities. For example,
slim tools are not capable of sending data
at the same rates as collar-mounted tools,
and they are also more limited in their
ability to communicate with, and supply
electrical power to, other LWD tools.

Collar-mounted tools, also known as fat

tools, cannot generally be removed from
their drill collar at the wellsite. If the tool
fails, the entire drillstring must be pulled
out of the hole to replace it. However,
without the need to fit through the
drillstring, the tool can be larger and more
capable.

The ability to retrieve the tool via wireline

is often useful. For example, if the
drillstring becomes stuck in the hole, then
retrieving the tool via wireline will save a
substantial amount of money compared to
leaving it in the hole with the stuck portion
of the drillstring. However, there are some
limitations on the process.

Limitations

Retrieving a tool using wireline is not

necessarily faster than pulling the tool out
of the hole. For example, if the tool fails at
1,500 ft (460 m) while drilling with a triple
rig (able to trip 3 joints of pipe, or about
90 ft (30 m) feet, at a time), then it would
generally be faster to pull the tool out of
the hole than it would be to rig up wireline
and retrieve the tool, especially if the
wireline unit must be transported to the
rig.

Wireline retrievals also introduce

additional risk. If the tool becomes
detached from the wireline, then it will fall
back down the drillstring. This will
generally cause severe damage to the tool
and the drillstring components in which it
seats, and will require the drillstring to be
pulled out of the hole to replace the failed
components; this results in a greater total
cost than pulling out of the hole in the first
place. The wireline gear might also fail to
latch onto the tool, or, in the case of a
severe failure, might bring only a portion of
the tool to the surface. This would require
the drillstring to be pulled out of the hole
to replace the failed components, thus
making the wireline operation a waste of
time.

Some tool designers have taken the

retrievable 'slim tool' design and applied it
to a non-retrievable tool. In this instance,
the MWD maintains all of the limitations of
a slim tool design (low speed, ability to
jam on dust particles, low shock &
vibration tolerance) with none of the
benefits. Curiously, these tools still have a
wireline spearpoint despite being lifted
and handled with a plate.

References
1. Dowell, Iain; Andrew Mills; Matt Lora
(2006). "Chapter 15 - Drilling-Data
Acquisition". In Robert F. Mitchell (ed.).
Petroleum Engineering Handbook (http://pe
trowiki.org/Surface_data_sensors_during_d
rilling) . Vol. II - Drilling Engineering. Society
 of Petroleum Engineers. pp. 647–685.
ISBN 978-1-55563-114-7.
2. J.J. Arps | J.L. Arps DOI
https://doi.org/10.2118/710-PA
3. "StackPath" (http://www.ogj.com/articles/p
rint/volume-90/issue-7/in-this-issue/genera
l-interest/advances-in-mwd-technology-imp
rove-real-time-data.html) .
4. Gearhart, Marvin; Ziemer, Kelly A.; Knight,
Orien M. (1981). "Mud Pulse MWD Systems
Report" (https://www.onepetro.org/journal-
paper/SPE-10053-PA) . Journal of
Petroleum Technology. 33 (12): 2301–
2306. doi:10.2118/10053-PA (https://doi.or
g/10.2118%2F10053-PA) .
5. Gearhart, M.; Moseley, L.M.; Foste, M.
(1986). "Current State of the Art of MWD
and Its Application in Exploration and
Development Drilling" (https://www.onepetr
o.org/conference-paper/SPE-14071-MS) .
All Days. doi:10.2118/14071-MS (https://do
i.org/10.2118%2F14071-MS) .
6. Moake, G.L.; Heysse, D.R.; Jackson, C.E.;
Merchant, G.A.; Schultz, W.E. (1997).
"Improved Measurement Quality and
Reliability in a Formation-Evaluation LWD
System" (https://doi.org/10.2118/28429-P
A) . Spe Drilling & Completion. 12 (3): 196–
202. doi:10.2118/28429-PA (https://doi.or
g/10.2118%2F28429-PA) .
7. Gearhart, M.; Moseley, L.M.; Foste, M.
(1986). "Current State of the Art of MWD
and Its Application in Exploration and
Development Drilling" (https://www.onepetr
o.org/conference-paper/SPE-14071-MS) .
All Days. doi:10.2118/14071-MS (https://do
i.org/10.2118%2F14071-MS) .
8. Gearhart, M.; Moseley, L.M.; Foste, M.
(1986). "Current State of the Art of MWD
and Its Application in Exploration and
Development Drilling" (https://www.onepetr
o.org/conference-paper/SPE-14071-MS) .
All Days. doi:10.2118/14071-MS (https://do
i.org/10.2118%2F14071-MS) .
 9. Gearhart, M.; Moseley, L.M.; Foste, M.
(1986). "Current State of the Art of MWD
and Its Application in Exploration and
Development Drilling" (https://www.onepetr
o.org/conference-paper/SPE-14071-MS) .
All Days. doi:10.2118/14071-MS (https://do
i.org/10.2118%2F14071-MS) .
10. Gearhart, M.; Moseley, L.M.; Foste, M.
(1986). "Current State of the Art of MWD
and Its Application in Exploration and
Development Drilling" (https://www.onepetr
o.org/conference-paper/SPE-14071-MS) .
All Days. doi:10.2118/14071-MS (https://do
i.org/10.2118%2F14071-MS) .
11. "Mud-pulse telemetry sees step-change
improvement with oscillating shear valves"
(http://www.ogj.com/articles/save_screen.
cfm?ARTICLE_ID=332411) . 2008.
Retrieved 23 March 2009.
12. "Orion II MWD System" (https://web.archive.
org/web/20090322020819/http://www.slb.
com/content/services/drilling/telemetry/ori
on_II_mwd.asp?entry=orion2&) . 2009.
Archived from the original (http://www.slb.c
om/content/services/drilling/telemetry/ori
on_II_mwd.asp?entry=orion2&) on 22
March 2009. Retrieved 23 March 2009.
13. "Intelliserv Network" (http://intelliserv.co
m/) . 2008. Retrieved 13 March 2008.
14. "T.H. Ali, et al., SPE/IADC 112636: High
Speed Telemetry Drill Pipe Network
Optimizes Drilling Dynamics and Wellbore
Placement; T.S. Olberg et al., SPE/IADC
112702: The Utilization of the Massive
Amount of Real-Time Data Acquired in
Wired-Drillpipe Operations; V. Nygard et al.,
SPE/IADC 112742: A Step Change in Total
System Approach Through Wired-Drillpipe
Technology" (https://web.archive.org/web/
20110707075148/http://www.aboutoilandg
as.com/spe-app/spe/meetings/DC/2008/t
ech_prog_THURS.htm) . 2008. Archived
from the original (http://www.aboutoilandg
as.com/spe-app/spe/meetings/DC/2008/t
ech_prog_THURS.htm) on 7 July 2011.
Retrieved 13 March 2008.
Bibliography

Mitchell, Bill (1995). Advanced Oilwell

Drilling Engineering Handbook (https://bo
oks.google.com/books?id=u4bqHAAA
CAAJ) (10th ed.). Lakewood, CO:
Mitchell Engineering.
ASIN B0006RMYTW (https://www.amaz
on.com/dp/B0006RMYTW) .
OCLC 46870163 (https://www.worldcat.
org/oclc/46870163) .

See also
Geosteering

External links
 Media related to Measurement while
drilling at Wikimedia Commons

Retrieved from
"https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?
title=Measurement_while_drilling&oldid=11455096
83"

This page was last edited on 19 March 2023, at

14:17 (UTC). •
Content is available under CC BY-SA 4.0 unless
otherwise noted.