IPM-PR-WCI-007 Survey Program Preparation PDF

Prepared by: G.Lindsay IPM Ref.
IPM-PR-WCI-007
Verified by: IPM WCI WEM Survey Program Preparation Ver. 1.0.0 Page 1 of 8
Approved by: IPM WCI VP Procedure Issued: 28/Feb/03
IPM
SURVEY PROGRAM PREPARATION
PROCEDURE
Schlumberger Private
1.0.0 28-02-03 Supersedes G.Lindsay G.Ritchie L.Hibbard
IPM-WELL-S031 IPM WCI Well IPM WCI VP
Engineering
Manager
Rev Issue Date Revision Description Prepared by Verified by Approved by
This revision approved by ; Signed
L.Hibbard, IPM WCI VP
Warning: Paper copies of this document are UNCONTROLLED. This copy valid only at the time of printing.
The controlled version of this document is stored on the Schlumberger IPM Intouch Web Site
http://www.intouchsupport.com/
Please check the Revision History on the first page of the document at that site for any revisions.
The CUSTODIAN of this document is the VERIFYING ENTITY. The document control requirements are
outlined in the IPM-PR-QAS-001 Document Control & Numbering Procedure.
Schlumberger, Private.  Copyright, Schlumberger, Unpublished Work. All rights reserved. This work contains the
confidential and proprietary trade secrets of Schlumberger and may not be copied or stored in an information retrieval
system, transferred, used, distributed, translated or retransmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, in
whole or in part, without the permission of the copyright owner.
Prepared by: G.Lindsay IPM Ref. IPM-PR-WCI-007
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. PURPOSE............................................................................................................................................... 3
2. SCOPE.................................................................................................................................................... 3
3. DEFINITIONS ......................................................................................................................................... 3
4. REFERENCE DOCUMENTS.................................................................................................................. 4
5. PROCEDURE ......................................................................................................................................... 4
5.1 Regulatory Requirements................................................................................................................. 4
5.2 Handling Legacy Data – Accuracy and Completeness ................................................................. 4
5.3 Tool Error Models and Ellipsoid of Uncertainty (EOU).................................................................. 4
5.4 Standard Anti-Collision Well Design ............................................................................................... 5
5.5 Standard Anti-Collision Rules.......................................................................................................... 5
5.6 Anti Collision Risk Assessment ...................................................................................................... 5
5.7 Drilling Target Size ............................................................................................................................ 6
5.8 Survey Redundancy .......................................................................................................................... 6
5.9 Survey Contingency Planning.......................................................................................................... 6
5.10 Survey Quality.................................................................................................................................... 6
5.10.1 General ............................................................................................................................................ 6
5.10.2 Survey Quality Control ..................................................................................................................... 6
5.10.3 Survey Frequency............................................................................................................................ 7
5.10.4 Magnetic Interference ...................................................................................................................... 7
6. RESPONSIBILITIES............................................................................................................................... 7
7. RECORDS .............................................................................................................................................. 8
1. PURPOSE
This procedure covers the steps to be followed to prepare a survey program which will comply with
the requirements of the IPM Wellbore Surveying and Collision Avoidance Standard, IPM-ST-WCI-
027.
2. SCOPE
This procedure applies to all IPM managed well construction operations.
3. DEFINITIONS
Survey Program
The survey program is the planned series of survey instruments to be used, and surveying
requirements to be met, during the execution of the well. It will normally be presented in the Basis
Of Design as a listing or table indicating as a minimum: survey depths for each survey tool to be
used, required survey frequency, whether run in cased hole, open hole or drill pipe, any special
corrections or contingencies and also the tool error code to be used for that survey. The survey
program is designed to achieve target sizing, well position uncertainty for relief well purposes and
anti-collision, in the most cost effective manner possible consistent with safe practice.
Definitive Survey Database
The Definitive Survey Database is the collection of survey and supporting data in both hard and
soft copy, which represents the most accurate and current description of the positions of all well
paths in any operating area. It includes survey tool descriptions, references, datums and such
information as is required to unambiguously define all well trajectories. The definitive surveys must
be clearly marked as such in all survey databases to distinguish them from other surveys.
Well Types
All wells considered under this procedure will be classified as either Single Wells or Nearby Wells.
Any well whose classification is not immediately clear, will be treated as a Nearby Well. Any well,
which after a scan of the definitive database, can be shown to have no other wellhead within
24,000 meters of it’s own surface location, may be treated as a Single Well. All others will be
classified as Nearby Wells. Any abandoned well, whose position, pressure profile and completion
status is known with sufficient accuracy may be exempted from this procedure following a risk
assessment approved by the Project Manager.
Separation Factor
Separation Factor is defined as the center to center distance between two nearby wells divided by
the sum of the radii (major semi-axis) of their associated ellipsoids of uncertainty. Note : Care
needs to be taken when comparing “separation factors” quoted from different sources, as the
above definition, although commonly used, can not be considered a universal industry standard.
Oriented Separation Factor
This is a concept developed by Schlumberger for advanced anti-collision analysis, whereby a
particular value of Oriented Separation Factor actually refers to a specific probability of collision,
which is not the case for the simplistic Separation Factor defined above. The use of Oriented
Separation Factor avoids the over conservatism sometimes associated with traditional Separation
Factor and in some special circumstances, may allow the planning of a well trajectory which
otherwise would be considered impossible. More details on the use of Oriented Separation Factors
may be found in the Schlumberger D&M Standard Anti-Collision Procedures.
Allowable Deviation from Plan
The Allowable Deviation from Plan (ADP) is defined as the “drilling tunnel” which is created as a
result of maintaining a Separation Factor of at least 1.5 with the nearest well.
Note : Deviations of the well trajectory from plan within the pre defined ADP are permissible at the
wellsite, as this may be required and even encouraged in order to permit improved drilling
efficiency and optimum reservoir penetration whilst geo-steering. The determination of the ADP
should be part of the Basis Of Design.
4. REFERENCE DOCUMENTS
IPM-ST-WCI-001, Well Engineering Management System Standard
IPM-ST-WCI-027, Wellbore Surveying and Collision Avoidance Standard,
Schlumberger Drilling & Measurements. Well Surveying & Anti-Collision Policy, V.3.00, 29-03-2002
Schlumberger Drilling & Measurements. Standard Anticollision Procedures, V.3.00, 03-06-2002
5. PROCEDURE
5.1 Regulatory Requirements
All government regulations relating to well spacing and well safety, in the jurisdiction where the
activities are planned to take place, will be strictly adhered to at all times.
5.2 Handling Legacy Data – Accuracy and Completeness

Legacy well survey data is data acquired in the past using older technology surveying instruments
and techniques as compared to what is currently available. In addition, several different
contractors may have recorded this data and its accuracy may be suspect or unknown. In any
case where legacy data is introduced into the definitive database, and where it’s quality is suspect,
it must be assigned the least accurate “unknown” error model until such time as its status is
confirmed, or the well is resurveyed.
Verifying the accuracy and completeness of any survey database before performing an anti-
collision scan is absolutely crucial and it will be the responsibility of the Well Engineer to take all
reasonable steps and precautions to ensure that this is carried out. All reasonable precautions
includes, but is not limited to, checking that the number of well paths used for the anti-collision
scan is at least equal to the number of used slots on an offshore platform or land pad and cross
checking with government databases and those of previous survey contractors, previous partners
or previous well owners, if any. The completeness and correctness of imported legacy data must
be reviewed, verified and approved in writing by the client before any subsequent wells are
planned in the operating area.
5.3 Tool Error Models and Ellipsoid of Uncertainty (EOU)

The ellipsoid of uncertainty (EOU) is a volume used to indicate the magnitude of the well bore
position uncertainty at a particular depth. Calculation of the ellipsoid of uncertainty (quoted at a
95% confidence level corresponding to 2.79 sigma) involves the use of survey tool error models in
the well planning software. These error models are in a constant state of evolution to take into
account new surveying technologies, improved knowledge of sensor performance and attempts
across the industry at standardization.
The default tool error model used by Schlumberger is the Schlumberger – Industry Steering
Committee for Wellbore Survey Accuracy (SLB-ISCWSA) model. Alternatively, the older and more
widely used Schlumberger Topographic error model, which yields slightly more conservative
results, may also be used. In some circumstances, an Operator may specify an error model that is
not normally available in the Schlumberger well planning software. This is acceptable provided it is
possible to cross check and verify that it has a safety threshold at least equivalent to that of the
Schlumberger default error model. It is the responsibility of the Well Engineer to ensure that the
appropriate tool error model is used for every survey station in the database.
5.4 Standard Anti-Collision Well Design

Every well design shall be the subject of an anti-collision scan. This anti-collision scan shall be
evidenced as being complete in the Basis Of Design, and shall be checked during the design
approval process. An anti-collision scan is a proximity analysis of all nearby wells that takes into
account their respective positional uncertainty as a result of survey errors.
This analysis can be performed using standard Schlumberger Drilling Office well planning software
designed for this purpose that contains details of the positions of all wells, along with their
associated uncertainties, in the form of a definitive survey database. Where the results of the anti-
collision scan indicate a violation of the standard anti-collision rules in this procedure (see below),
the well trajectory must be redesigned and another scan performed. In the exceptional case where
no other design option is available, the Area Well Engineering Manager may grant an exemption
depending on the specific circumstances and following a Risk Assessment. The location and
identification of the definitive survey database used for the anti collision scan, shall be indicated in
the Basis Of Design.
5.5 Standard Anti-Collision Rules

For all normal drilling operations, the procedure for the drill ahead condition is that a minimum
Separation Factor of 1.5 shall be maintained. If the separation factor is less than 1.5, but greater
than 1.0, then a “close approach” situation exists, for which a project risk assessment is required.
With the exception of a sidetrack or a relief well, no well trajectory will be deliberately designed
which has a separation factor of less than 1.0 and if this situation does inadvertently occur during
execution, then drilling operations must stop immediately and the situation reviewed.
In addition, for surface hole drilling from multi well platforms or from land pads with closely spaced
wells where the risk of collision is substantially increased, a further requirement is that a minimum
separation of not less than 80% of the allowable deviation from plan (ADP) at the well reference
point be maintained. In all other circumstances, a minimum separation of 10 meters must be
maintained. Adhering to these rules at shallow depths in surface holes requires that particular
attention be paid to survey frequency and magnetic interference (see below).
5.6 Anti Collision Risk Assessment

Any anti-collision risk assessment must demonstrate a negligible risk to personnel or environment
in the event of an unplanned collision. The purpose of the risk assessment is to specifically deal
with exceptional or challenging circumstances that cannot be satisfactorily dealt with by standard
practice.
Sufficient and adequate contingency planning shall be part of the preparation of the risk
assessment. This can include, but is not limited to, specific additional procedures for close
approach drilling, such as special briefing of the rig crew, the shutting in of nearby wells, the
independent monitoring and calculation of well trajectory in town as the well is being drilled and the
installation of listening devices on nearby wells as necessary.
Consideration should always be given to any additional precautions that can be taken ahead of
time, such as sufficient resurveying of nearby wells, to ensure that the standard anti-collision rules
can be satisfied.
5.7 Drilling Target Size

The drilling target is established by the reduction of the geological target, as defined in the Well
Proposal, by an amount representing the survey errors, such that provided the survey program is
followed and the drilling target is penetrated, then the geological target must indeed also have
been reached and the well objectives based on position achieved.
5.8 Survey Redundancy

For all wells, it is highly desirable that no one individual survey instrument should be used to define
the definitive well trajectory in any single hole section without its performance having been
independently confirmed by another survey instrument. In the case of a magnetic survey tool this
may be done by comparison with overlapping data from any other survey tool of equal or greater
accuracy or alternatively, by the application of an approved multi-station analysis technique. In the
case of a gyroscopic survey tool this may be done by comparison with either confirmatory
magnetic survey data, or sufficient overlapping data from another gyroscopic survey tool.
5.9 Survey Contingency Planning
Although it is recognized that not all possibilities can be planned for in advance, every effort will be
made to perform reasonable contingency planning so as to maximize the operational effectiveness
of the survey program. For instance, what surveying contingencies need to be invoked if, based on
previous history of drilling in the area, memory tools such as drop gyro’s prove to be unreliable.
5.10 Survey Quality
5.10.1 General
Each survey carried out shall independently satisfy the service provider or operator specific quality
control requirements for that survey before being considered for inclusion into the final well
trajectory calculation.
5.10.2 Survey Quality Control
For magnetic surveys, quality control includes ensuring that surveys meet the field acceptance
criteria for total field strength |B|, total gravity |G| and Dip Angle. Values for these, expressed as
allowable deviations from the current BGGM geomagnetic model are: total |G| = +/- 2.5mg, total |B|
= +/- 300nT and Dip = +/- 0.45deg.
For gyro surveys quality control includes ensuring contractor specific terms for drift, repeatability,
earth rate and mass balance offset etc. are met.
In any case the MWD Engineer or the Surveyor shall check at the wellsite that comparisons
between survey tool runs provide confirmation of well position. If this is not the case, then further
investigation must be made and appropriate actions taken to rectify the situation.
If this confirmation still cannot be achieved, then the survey program is invalid and the first
response must be to re-survey the interval using a backup survey tool. The Well Engineer shall be
responsible for an investigation into any instance of reduced quality surveys and shall assess their
impact upon the survey program, invoking any contingency that may be required to maintain the
integrity of the survey program.
5.10.3 Survey Frequency
In order to avoid collisions in surface hole when drilling from multi-well platforms or land pads and
to optimize well position, special attention must be paid to any survey frequency requirements
specified in the survey program. The actual survey frequency depends on the individual capability
of the BHA being run (ie. How aggressively it can build angle) and the accuracy of the survey tool
in use, however as a general rule, for surface holes drilled in high well density areas, gyro single
shots should be run at least every joint (every 10 meters).
5.10.4 Magnetic Interference
Careful attention must be paid to the magnetic signature of all BHA components and calculation of
the requisite number of non-magnetic drill collars must be performed in advance to ensure that the
survey acceptance criteria values of total field strength |B| and Dip Angle can be met for normal
operations.
The responsibility for making this calculation is with the Directional Drilling Contractor at the BHA
planning stage and with the MWD Engineer and Directional Driller during execution. The small
residual amounts of magnetic interference present due to the effect of the drill string further up the
hole may be corrected for using magnetic interference correction algorithms as necessary.
Magnetic interference due to nearby wells is a particular problem in surface holes and can be the
source of significant errors. In such circumstances, it is mandatory that gyro surveys be run until all
MWD survey acceptance criteria settle down to within their normal range and gyro and MWD
measurements agree. Depending on the geographical location and other factors this may require
the nearest casing or conductor to be at a distance of 50 meters or more in extreme cases.
6. RESPONSIBILITIES
At the wellsite, it is the responsibility of the MWD Engineer or Surveyor to cross check and obtain a
sign-off from the Well Site Supervisor and Directional Driller on grid correction, magnetic
declination, well location and all relevant references. Strict adherence to this procedure is
mandatory in order to avoid gross errors.
The responsibility for the quality of the survey data recorded at the wellsite is that of the
measurement while drilling (MWD) Engineer or the Surveyor.
The responsibility for accurate well trajectory determination from these measurements as the well
is being drilled and for drilling the well as designed, is that of the Directional Driller. The Directional
Driller is also responsible for strict compliance with the anti-collision monitoring plan where
relevant. If during execution, the well trajectory deviates from plan and anti-collision monitoring
indicates a violation or an incipient violation of the standard anti-collision rules, then the Directional
Driller must exercise his/her authority and stop the drilling process until a review of the situation is
made, corrective action taken and an exemption obtained as necessary.
At the end of the well, the Well Engineer is responsible for ensuring for the timely transfer of
directional data recorded on the rig and the merging of this data into the definitive master database
in town.
The Project Manager is responsible for ensuring that a system is set up for the management of all
survey data including legacy data related to a particular field or fields. Sufficient data shall be
retained in a usable format such that the positions, references and datum for all wells being used
for anti-collision scanning and planning purposes can be positively verified. The upkeep of the
definitive survey database may be the responsibility of IPM, Schlumberger Drilling and
Measurements, the Operator, or a third party contractor, depending on local circumstances and
existing contractual arrangements. The identity of the party responsible for the upkeep of the
survey database must be clearly understood and specified in the appropriate Bridging Document.
7. RECORDS
The Survey Program, the Survey File and the Survey Database will constitute the records that
demonstrate the use of this procedure.

IPM-PR-WCI-007 Survey Program Preparation PDF

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

IPM-PR-WCI-007 Survey Program Preparation PDF

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Prepared by: G.Lindsay IPM Ref.

5.2 Handling Legacy Data – Accuracy and Completeness

5.3 Tool Error Models and Ellipsoid of Uncertainty (EOU)

5.4 Standard Anti-Collision Well Design

5.5 Standard Anti-Collision Rules

5.6 Anti Collision Risk Assessment

5.7 Drilling Target Size

5.8 Survey Redundancy

5.9 Survey Contingency Planning

5.10 Survey Quality

5.10.2 Survey Quality Control

5.10.3 Survey Frequency

5.10.4 Magnetic Interference

Potrebbero piacerti anche