1 PHASE 1 FINAL PRESENTATION: Intelligent BOP RAM Actuation Sensor Systems 11121-5503-01 Emad Andarawis GE Global Research Ultra-Deepwater Drilling, Completions and Interventions TAC meeting June 4, 2014 Greater Fort Bend Economic Development Council Boardroom, Sugar Land, TX rpsea.org
45
Embed
PHASE 1 FINAL PRESENTATION: Intelligent BOP RAM Actuation … · 2018-06-07 · 1 . PHASE 1 FINAL PRESENTATION: Intelligent BOP RAM Actuation Sensor Systems . 11121-5503-01 Emad Andarawis
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
1
PHASE 1 FINAL PRESENTATION: Intelligent BOP RAM Actuation Sensor Systems
11121-5503-01
Emad Andarawis
GE Global Research
Ultra-Deepwater Drilling, Completions and Interventions TAC meeting
June 4, 2014
Greater Fort Bend Economic Development Council Boardroom, Sugar Land, TX
rpsea.org
2
Working Group / Domain Experts
o Leonard Childers (BP)
o Herve De_Naurois (Total)
o Greg Gillette, Anthony Spinler (GE Hydril)
3
Program Overview
o Phase 1
• Develop sensing system for detecting drill collars, tool joints and other
un-shearable objects in vicinity of BOP rams
• Develop sensor error correction scheme for reliable detection
• Develop sensor integration concept
o Phase 2
• Design and construct and test prototype
o Phase 1 Oct 2013 – July 2014
o Phase 2 July 2014 – July 2016
o POP 33 - months
4
Program Schedule, Milestones and Deliverables
5
Task 5 — Develop BOP Ram Sensing and Interface Concept
o 5.1 — Perform sensor evaluation for diameter, thickness, and
location measurement
o 5.2 — Characterize drilling fluids
o 5.3 — Develop sensor signal conditioning and processing concepts
o 5.4 — Evaluate sensing system error sources
o 5.5 — Evaluate multi-sensor data correlation
o 5.6 — Perform sensor system operational reliability and risk
assessment
6
Task 6 — Develop Sensor Integration Concept
o 6.1 — Evaluate mechanical integration of sensor with BOP
o 6.2 — Evaluate software integration of sensor with BOP
o 6.3 — Phase 1 report
7
Phase 2
o Task 7 —Detailed Sensor System Design
• 7.1 — Define sensor configuration and design sensor electronics
• 7.2 — Design signal conditioning and sensor data processing algorithms and
software
• 7.3 — Develop mechanical integration design
o Task 8 — Prototype Construction
• 8.1 — Build sensor prototype
• 8.2 — Develop software for integration with sensor prototype
• 8.3 — Evaluate sensing system manufacturability
o Task 9 — Sensor System Prototype Test
• 9.1 — Design and build test bed
• 9.2 — Perform sensor system functional testing in simulated environment
• 9.3 — Perform mechanical and endurance testing
8
Financials
Through May 2nd
Tech Transfer current spend: $10,761
$-
$200,000
$400,000
$600,000
$800,000
$1,000,000
$1,200,000
$1,400,000
$1,600,000
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Year 1 Cumulative Baseline/Actual Comparison
Project
Cost
Baseline
Actual
9
Envisioned BOP Sensing System
Envisioned Auto-compensated sensing system capable of accurately performing the measurement in the presence of confounding noise.
• Multi-sensor data correlation / auto-compensation approach
Homogeneous sensors
Heterogeneous sensors
o Prototype
• Functional testing in lab-scale test bed
• Functional validation in BOP emulating test bed
• Endurance testing in simulated vibe, pressure and temperature environment
11
Sensor Selection
12
Sensor Evaluation testbed
o Initial-subscale sensor evaluation testbeds for sensor down selection
• Sub scale/fullscale geometries
Critical performance parameters
• Sensor down-selection based on
Attenuation/coupling through drilling fluid
Signal/noise versus distance
Achievable measurement resolution/fidelity
13
Sensor Evaluation – X-ray
o Critical Parameters
• Energy level
• Wetted versus unwetted
• Field shaping
• Distance/attenuation
• Integration time
• Transmission vs. backscatter
Image Quality Indicator
X-ray test setup
14
Sensor Evaluation – X-ray
Drilling mud
Drilling mud + 1 1” steel plate (BOP body)
Drilling mud + 2 1” steel plates (BOP body)
15
Sensor Evaluation – X-ray
X-ray attenuation evaluation through oil & water based mud for wetted and unwetted source and detector
Mud Thickness (inches)
X-ra
y co
unts
(si
gnal
leve
l – lo
g sc
ale)
16
X-ray summary
o Mud is more attenuating than water.
o The WBM and OBM is very similar in behavior.
o X-ray counts through 2” steel, 19” mud very low.
o These data taken over 6 second integration window. Drill string
movement during that time would cause image blurring.
o Challenge with high energy, high-flux marinized x-ray sources
Un-wetted x-ray not a suitable modality to measure drill string location.
17
Sensor Evaluation – Electromagnetic
o Critical Parameters
• Wetted versus unwetted.
• Field shaping
• Frequency
• Distance
• Losses in magnetic materials / Distance of sensor from BOP body
• Power
18
Sensor Evaluation – Electromagnetic
Test Setup enables evaluation of pipe diameter and position on measurement
Baseline (no drill pipe)
Smaller diameter pipe
Larger diameter pipe (drill collar)
Complex impedance versus pipe diameter (1-coil test system)
Impe
danc
e Time
Drill Collar BOP Body
19
Oscillator Amplitude & Phase Detector
Drive coil
Meas. coil
Input Amp.
EM Monitor
2-coil system
Sensor Evaluation – Electromagnetic operation and detection
Region of highest detection sensitivity
20
Electromagnetic validation tests
1. Measurement in air 2. With tool joint 3. Measurement in drilling mud
Medium frequency excitation
Low frequency excitation
• Low frequency excitation provides better signal quiality in the presence of ferromagnetic shield.
• Electromagnetic measurement is insensitive to presence of drilling mud
21
Two-Coil EM Measurement
Sig
nal
leve
l V
Signal Magnitude for tool joint passing in vecinity of sensor
22
EM error sources - Estimation error versus drill pipe diameter
Uncertainty due to measurement noise increases for larger pipe diameter
Actual pipe diameter
Cal
cula
ted
pipe
dia
met
er
Pipe Diameter %
err
or in
dia
met
er e
stim
ate
3.5” 9.5”
23
Two-Coil EM Measurement
24
EM error sources - Estimation error versus drill pipe position
o Large region with flat signal response: no diameter estimation error
o Signal drop when drill pipe gets close to bop body wall apparent reduction in pipe diameter
o Error correction needed for accurate
detection of un-shearable pipes
Uncertainty due to signal dependence on pipe position
25
Differential detection- Position Error Correction
-2.5
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
-30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
diff centered
diff-offset
Diff
eren
tial o
utpu
t (V)
Position (inches)
Tx Rx1 Rx2
26
EM Characterization - Summary
Config. Single Element sensor 2-element Wheatstone bridge
2-element Drive-Receive
3-element Differential-Receive
Baseline Air High High High High
Wetted sensor Med Med High High
Un-wetted sensors Low Low Med Med
Coils Embedded in BOP body
No detection
Error due to pipe movement
High Med Med Low
Differential receive wetted sensor configuration capable of accurate pipe diameter detection
27
EM Sensor-BOP integration
Wire port
o 3-element differential sensor
o Separate differential and single ended receive chains
o Local signal conditioning for signal demodulation, filtering and thresholding
o Estimated power consumption of sensor system ~2-3Watt @100% duty cycle
28
Sensor Evaluation -- Ultrasound
o Critical parameters
• Mechanical Coupling
• Wetted versus unwetted
• Frequency
• Ring-down
• Distance
• Placement
29
Setup
Steel plate positioned at various distances from transducer.
Mixing motor to stir up mud and prevent settling.
30
Ultrasound Signal, low freq probe
Blue: ~12” of Oil Based Mud Red: ~9” of Oil Based Mud
0 2 4 6 8
x 10-4
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
Volt
s
time (seconds)
Received signals
9” echo 12” echo
Acceptable Signal-to-Noise ratio achieved with one-way distance of 10+”
Transducer ring-down
31
Ultrasound signal versus distance to pipe
5” distance
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
x 10-3
-0.5
0
0.5
Volts
Time (s)
6” distance
7” distance
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
x 10-3
-0.5
0
0.5
Volts
Time (s)
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
x 10-3
-0.5
0
0.5Vo
lts
Time (s)
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
x 10-3
-0.5
0
0.5
Volts
Time (s)
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
x 10-3
-0.5
0
0.5
Volts
Time (s)
8” distance
9” distance
32
Ultrasound Modeling Approach
Discretized Approach, Random Sampling Track Surface, Length, Coordinates Assign Signal Strength Integrate over visible/exposed region for overall effect
• Estimate the Center of the Pipe • Estimate Diameter
• How many Sensors ? (3 Vs 4 Vs 5) • Sensor Parameters
• Width, Cut Off • Fresnel Zone Vs Far Field Zone
For a given Diameter At least 2 Sensors needed to determine Center For a continuous diameter estimation At least 3 Sensors essential
Sensor Count improves quality of diameter inference
37
UT Sensor-BOP integration
o Local, per sensor, time-of-flight signal processing
o Multi-sensor pipe position triangulation and diameter detection
o Estimated power consumption of sensor system ~1 Watt per sensor
@100% duty cycle
Impedance matching coupler and protective liner
BOP body
UT Transducer
38
Sensor mechanical integration
UT sensors
EM Sensors
EM wire ports
Protective layer
39
Sensing approach and down-selection summary
• X-ray least promising detection technology for environment
• EM not affected by drilling mud characteristics, but suffers signal
losses due to steel in BOP body
• Error in pipe position can be corrected in 3-coil system
• Drilling mud highly attenuative to ultrasound signals
• Acceptable signals detectable to 10+ inches
• Multiple circumferentially placed transducers capable of localizing
and detecting pipe diameter
• Total sensing system power consumption of <10 watts expected –
reduction of 2-5x possible with duty-cycle control
System combining ultrasound and 3-coil EM sensors provides robust signal detection and error correction
40
Phase 2 plan:
o Task 7 —Detailed Sensor System Design
• 7.1 — Define sensor configuration and design sensor electronics
• 7.2 — Design signal conditioning and sensor data processing algorithms
and software
• 7.3 — Develop mechanical integration design
o Task 8 — Prototype Construction
• 8.1 — Build sensor prototype
• 8.2 — Develop software for integration with sensor prototype
• 8.3 — Evaluate sensing system manufacturability
o Task 9 — Sensor System Prototype Test
• 9.1 — Design and build test bed
• 9.2 — Perform sensor system functional testing in simulated environment
• 9.3 — Perform mechanical and endurance testing
41
Task 7: Detailed Sensor System Design
o Task 7 —Detailed Sensor System Design
• 7.1 — Define sensor configuration and design sensor electronics
Finalize number of sensors, locations, sensing duty cycle and performance
requirements
Validate performance in simulation environment
• 7.2 — Design signal conditioning and sensor data processing algorithms
and software
Develop signal processing algorithms for data analysis, error correction and
noise reduction
Validate algorithm performance using lab and simulated data
• 7.3 — Develop mechanical integration design
Select target BOP for integration
Define components need for integration, including support and sealing.
Analyze mechanical integrity of design
42
Task 8: Prototype Construction
o Task 8 — Prototype Construction
• 8.1 — Build sensor prototype
Construct prototype sensor and electronics
Evaluate subcomponent performance relative to design specifications
• 8.2 — Develop software for integration with sensor prototype
Design and write software required for integrating sensor output into the
BOP software for transmission through MUX cable
• 8.3 — Evaluate sensing system manufacturability
Refine estimates of system costs and reliability
43
Task 9: Sensor System Prototype Test
o Task 9 — Sensor System Prototype Test
• 9.1 — Design and build test bed
Build sensor evaluation test bed with application-relevant materials and geometries
• 9.2 — Perform sensor system functional testing in simulated environment
Test sensing system prototype under simulated well conditions
• 9.3 — Perform mechanical and endurance testing
Evaluate sensor mechanical endurance over vibration, pressure and temperature
cycling
Leverage Hydril Test Facilities for prototype testing
44
Questions?
"This presentation was prepared with the support of RPSEA under Award No. 11121-5503-01. However, any opinions, findings, conclusions or other recommendations expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of RPSEA."