Share
3,612 Posts.
lightbulb Created with Sketch. 6744
clock Created with Sketch.
17/04/26
09:26
Share
Originally posted by deadpossum:
↑
I should clarify my experience , and therefore perhaps some understanding of the things I state & the questions I ask. I spent 35 years on the practical side of oil & gas exploration & drilling. My first oilfield job in 1979 was Schlumberger Wireline services and I did 5 years of well logging , mainly offshore. When I quit I was an RFT specialist , which at that time was the tool usually run near the end of the wireline sequence that measured formation pressure and most importantly obtained 5 US gallon + fluid samples that were the legal minimum[ mostly worldwide] for the Exploration company to be able to declare a 'Find'. These days the tool has been upgraded somewhat and is now called MDT , but performs essentially the same function. Most wireline logging tools measure the desired formation characteristics whilst in constant , relatively slow movement from the bottom of the open hole section of the well upwards to the cased section of the well. ie they are constantly in motion. The MDT functioning requires the Tool to be 'set' , stationary at a point determined by the previous logs whilst the probe is deployed into the formation and after purging , measures the formation pressure and then if required can be cycled to allow formation fluid to enter it and be directed to multiple 'chambers/tanks' attached to the bottom of the tool. Herein lies the inherent problem with the tool. For the well to be entirely safe whilst 'open hole' is in direct communication to the surface , the mud weight/density must be such that the pressure in the well bore exceeds the pressure in the formation , called the hydrostatic pressure. The formation has different profiles depending on its geophysics and so the well hydrostatic pressure must set to the maximum formation pressure experienced in the open hole section. This maximum is frequently not the Hydrocarbon bearing formation and when a tool is set in these formations for up to an hour at a time [ sometimes longer] then the pressure difference between hydrostaic pressure and formation pressure forces the tool hard into the formation , and it becomes 'key seated' /stuck. This happens regularly , not infrequently . These tools are worth millions[so Schlumberger says] and the contract reads that if the tool is lost then it becomes the property of the Oil company and they must pay Schlumberger full replacement value. On Australia's NW shelf there is a clastic shale that has claimed dozens of them . We referred to them as 'million dollar rebar' as they ended up cemented into the well when it was abandoned. Baker Hughes [owned by Schlumberger SLB] offer directional drilling [ mud turbines] and LWD services. The advent of LWD occurred after I quit Sclumberger and began working for drilling companies. It is fascinating technology and has revolutionised precision drilling , particularly Horizontal Production wells. Baker Hughes were always less reliable than Halliburton and over the years I saw very little of them. Usually only hired when budgets were tight or that Halliburton were too busy elsewhere. But this does vary in different parts of the world and I have never worked in Africa. So in short: M1 was stuffed up by Schlumberger MDT tool failure. M2 was impaired by Baker Hughes LWD tool failure AND increasing HC ingress into open hole with no ability to ascertain which formations and their characteristics were at fault AND tricky hole conditions for quality wireline logging resulting not being able to identify a suitable position to call 'section TD' and set 7" liner.
Expand
thx for sharing @deadpossum