Drilling Three-Mile Laterals Tighter and Safer with a New Magnetic Reference Technique

Andrew Paré, Nicolas Cosca, Alec Berarducci, Glenna Crookston, Ryan Paynter
{"title":"Drilling Three-Mile Laterals Tighter and Safer with a New Magnetic Reference Technique","authors":"Andrew Paré, Nicolas Cosca, Alec Berarducci, Glenna Crookston, Ryan Paynter","doi":"10.2118/212465-ms","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Three-mile laterals have become more common over the last five years of onshore US drilling. They are especially commonplace in the Appalachian and Permian basins and are used to overcome limited surface access for drill pads and for economic reasons. These long laterals pose significant wellbore positioning and anti-collision challenges. Horizontal position error grows at 2% (or more) of the lateral length per degree of wellbore azimuth error. This work addresses these wellbore positioning challenges with a new and significant improvement in magnetic field determination. With this procedure, multi-well pads with tightly spaced three-mile laterals can be drilled without compromising anti-collision standards or horizontal placement goals.\n Most commonly in the US land market, tightly spaced laterals are 1-2 miles in length and make use of In-Field Referencing (IFR-1) magnetic models built from airborne geophysical surveys to ensure proper positioning and avoid well collisions. For more challenging pad designs, such as three-mile laterals, a new method has been developed to combine an IFR-1 magnetic model with a near-well magnetic theodolite measurement to build a more precise magnetic model and positioning tool code. Specifically, the declination error terms in the ISCWSA (Industry Steering Committee on Wellbore Survey Accuracy) Error Model can shrink beyond the IFR-1 tool code specifications. This reduces the horizontal uncertainty in the ellipse of uncertainty (EOU) by upwards of 40% when compared to the MWD tool code standard.\n A study was conducted on a typical well and pad design for three-mile laterals in the Marcellus Shale in Pennsylvania. We find that the horizontal uncertainty with the MWD tool code at two and three miles of reach to be 206 feet and 303 feet, respectively. With the new tool code enabled by this body of work, we calculate the horizontal uncertainty at two and three miles of reach to be 120 feet and 174 feet, respectively. These results clearly show that this technique enables three-mile laterals to be drilled more safely and more tightly together. It is preferable for well pad design and lateral spacing to be determined by drilling and reservoir economics rather than collision concerns. Well planners and reservoir engineers can now safely access more of the reservoir from a single pad with longer laterals.\n This work is novel because it combines a ground based, near-well, magnetic measurement with an airborne derived IFR-1 model. This allows for a greater reduction in positioning uncertainty than has been available in the past. The application of this method to three-mile laterals is also new and has a profound impact on being able to plan optimally spaced wells and avoiding collisions.","PeriodicalId":255336,"journal":{"name":"Day 3 Thu, March 09, 2023","volume":"44 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Day 3 Thu, March 09, 2023","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2118/212465-ms","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Three-mile laterals have become more common over the last five years of onshore US drilling. They are especially commonplace in the Appalachian and Permian basins and are used to overcome limited surface access for drill pads and for economic reasons. These long laterals pose significant wellbore positioning and anti-collision challenges. Horizontal position error grows at 2% (or more) of the lateral length per degree of wellbore azimuth error. This work addresses these wellbore positioning challenges with a new and significant improvement in magnetic field determination. With this procedure, multi-well pads with tightly spaced three-mile laterals can be drilled without compromising anti-collision standards or horizontal placement goals. Most commonly in the US land market, tightly spaced laterals are 1-2 miles in length and make use of In-Field Referencing (IFR-1) magnetic models built from airborne geophysical surveys to ensure proper positioning and avoid well collisions. For more challenging pad designs, such as three-mile laterals, a new method has been developed to combine an IFR-1 magnetic model with a near-well magnetic theodolite measurement to build a more precise magnetic model and positioning tool code. Specifically, the declination error terms in the ISCWSA (Industry Steering Committee on Wellbore Survey Accuracy) Error Model can shrink beyond the IFR-1 tool code specifications. This reduces the horizontal uncertainty in the ellipse of uncertainty (EOU) by upwards of 40% when compared to the MWD tool code standard. A study was conducted on a typical well and pad design for three-mile laterals in the Marcellus Shale in Pennsylvania. We find that the horizontal uncertainty with the MWD tool code at two and three miles of reach to be 206 feet and 303 feet, respectively. With the new tool code enabled by this body of work, we calculate the horizontal uncertainty at two and three miles of reach to be 120 feet and 174 feet, respectively. These results clearly show that this technique enables three-mile laterals to be drilled more safely and more tightly together. It is preferable for well pad design and lateral spacing to be determined by drilling and reservoir economics rather than collision concerns. Well planners and reservoir engineers can now safely access more of the reservoir from a single pad with longer laterals. This work is novel because it combines a ground based, near-well, magnetic measurement with an airborne derived IFR-1 model. This allows for a greater reduction in positioning uncertainty than has been available in the past. The application of this method to three-mile laterals is also new and has a profound impact on being able to plan optimally spaced wells and avoiding collisions.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
利用新型磁参技术,更安全、更紧密地钻进3英里水平段
在过去5年的美国陆上钻井中,3英里的水平段变得越来越普遍。它们在阿巴拉契亚和二叠纪盆地尤其普遍,用于克服钻井平台地面通道有限的问题,并出于经济原因。这些长水平段给井眼定位和防碰撞带来了重大挑战。水平位置误差每增加1度井眼方位误差,横向长度的2%(或更多)就会增加。这项工作解决了这些井眼定位挑战,在磁场测定方面有了新的重大改进。使用该方法,可以在不影响防碰撞标准或水平位置目标的情况下,钻出具有紧密间隔3英里水平段的多井平台。在美国陆地市场上,最常见的是长度为1-2英里的紧密间隔水平段,利用航空地球物理测量建立的现场参考(IFR-1)磁模型来确保正确定位,避免井间碰撞。对于更具挑战性的区块设计,例如3英里的水平段,研究人员开发了一种新方法,将IFR-1磁模型与近井磁经纬仪测量相结合,建立更精确的磁模型和定位工具代码。具体来说,ISCWSA(井筒测量精度行业指导委员会)误差模型中的偏角误差项可以缩小到超出IFR-1工具代码规范的范围。与MWD工具代码标准相比,这将不确定椭圆(EOU)中的水平不确定度降低了40%以上。对宾夕法尼亚州Marcellus页岩3英里分支的典型井和垫块设计进行了研究。我们发现,MWD工具代码在2英里和3英里处的水平不确定性分别为206英尺和303英尺。利用新工具代码,我们计算出2英里和3英里处的水平不确定性分别为120英尺和174英尺。这些结果清楚地表明,该技术可以更安全、更紧密地钻进3英里的水平段。井台设计和横向间距最好根据钻井和油藏的经济性来决定,而不是考虑碰撞问题。现在,井规划人员和油藏工程师可以通过一个更长的水平段,安全地进入更多的油藏区域。这项工作是新颖的,因为它结合了地面、近井、磁测量和机载衍生的IFR-1模型。这使得定位不确定性比过去有了更大的减少。将该方法应用于3英里的分支井也是一项新技术,对规划最佳井距和避免碰撞具有深远的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Geothermal Drilling – Collaborative and Holistic Applications Specific Solutions Drive Consistent Improvements in Drilling Efficiency and Operational Costs Downhole Trajectory Automation of RSS Tools: Autonomous Drilling Becomes Reality While-Drilling Pore Pressure Surveillance Using Machine Learning Drilling Three-Mile Laterals Tighter and Safer with a New Magnetic Reference Technique Continuous or Stacked Cement Bond Logs – Does It Matter?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1