See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/254510510

Development of a Robust Gyroscopic Orientation Tool for MWD Operations

Article · October 2000

DOI: 10.2118/63274-MS

CITATIONS READS

6 186

2 authors:

Robert Alan Estes Dave Epplin

Halliburton Baker Hughes Incorporated
8 PUBLICATIONS   15 CITATIONS    2 PUBLICATIONS   8 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Robert Alan Estes on 05 May 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

SPE 63274
Development of a Robust Gyroscopic Orientation Tool for MWD Operations
R. A. Estes, SPE, and D. M. Epplin / Baker Hughes INTEQ
Copyright 2000, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.
This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2000 SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition held in Dallas, Texas, 1–4 October 2000.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300
words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O.
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.
Abstract
The allure of a gyroscopic directional sensor for MWD
(Measurement While Drilling) operations has spanned over
two decades now. The authors first investigated potential
sensors for MWD applications in 1982 and were disappointed
to find technological limitations precluded such a device.
Why is it so difficult to build a gyroscope into an MWD tool,
and why don’t we have one available for commercial use in
the industry today? Also, what should oil companies expect
from a service company who promises an “MWD Gyro Tool”
in the next year or two?
Currently there are several service companies working on
directional modules that incorporate some type of gyroscopic
sensor and promise to provide an indication of “True North”
direction in conjunction with MWD tools. This paper is
intended to establish realistic expectations for the performance
that might be delivered by these early gyroscopic tools in the
harsh MWD environment.
The paper also describes the investigation, specification,
design decisions, and testing done in the development of a tool
to meet the most common application requirements for an
MWD Gyro. Initial testing of the tool has proven it
surprisingly accurate and at least as robust as existing
conventional mag/accel sensors. Extensive qualification
testing in both lab and field settings has proven the instrument
capable of surviving the harsh MWD environment.
Introduction
Directional drilling instruments (particularly MWD tools)
have benefited during the past two decades from application of
aerospace sensors known as quartz servo accelerometers and
fluxgate magnetometers. Adopting these sensors put an end to
the previous malady of continually shifting biases, which
caused directional errors. These solid state devices offer much
higher reliability than the older electromechanical inclination
and compass sensors. Buoyed by improvements in the
ruggedness of accelerometers and magnetometers, MWD tools
became the standard for guiding and surveying our more
highly-deviated and horizontal wells. This sensor reliability
has set a hurdle for introduction of new MWD sensors: they
must maintain accuracy, even in the face of extremely harsh
environmental conditions. Global deployment mandates that
directional tools remain stable for months, or even years,
without need for repair or recalibration.
Magnetic compass-based directional tools do not work
well when placed near steel casing or steel drill string
components. This is due to the magnetic interference caused
by these materials. Therefore, is sometimes necessary to use a
gyroscopic-based instrument to find “true north” headings.
These gyro tools were wireline-conveyed sondes in the past.
MWD tools haven’t yet successfully implemented a
gyroscopic directional sensor, in part due to expectations for
high standards for ruggedness established by accels and mags.
Now aerospace technology has again provided a sensor for
the oilfield to address this age-old desire in drilling
measurements. Combining a miniature 2-axis tactical-grade
spinning mass gyro with a stepper motor-driven indexing
mechanism, a robust instrument has been developed to address
the gyro orientation market.
Applications
There are three general applications in which gyros have been
employed or could be useful in the drilling of a well.
Orientation Tools. The growing reentry market often
requires quick, reliable orientation of packers and whipstocks
to exit casing and penetrate adjacent formations with new
horizontal wells. Complex multi-well platforms require initial
gyroscopic alignment at kickoff below casing to avoid
intersecting existing wells. These requirements for “true
north” orientation measurements in the presence of magnetic
interference from nearby steel casing are currently addressed
by repeated wireline gyro check shots, which consume much
rig time. Using a gyro sensor integral to the MWD tool could
save substantial rig time and eliminate drilling blind during
kickoff when magnetometers cannot accurately find north.
2 ESTES, R. A. AND EPPLIN, D. M.
Table 1 illustrates expected savings on a window-cutting
job for an MWD Gyro over conventional drilling operations.
Each time an orientation measurement is needed when using a
wireline gyro tool, the drilling or milling operation must be
suspended and the survey instrument is run to the bottom of
the drillpipe on the wireline. After the measurement is
recorded, the wireline and survey instrument must be pulled
out of hole before drilling resumes. An integrated gyro sensor
in the MWD tool could be expected to save up to 12 hours
during a typical two-day process.
Table 2 illustrates further savings possible using an MWD
gyro, and compares three possible means of drilling through
the casing window and building the initial curve for the
sidetrack or reentry.
MWD Alone: In the first case, the kickoff is done using a
conventional drilling motor and MWD tool with mag/accel
sensors. The drilling assembly is assumed to follow the
whipstock and not veer off course for the first 30m or so of
well path. During this time, the magnetometer is still high
above the bit in casing, and cannot give any usable magnetic
north orientation data. High-side toolface orientation from the
accelerometers is not very useful either, since most of these re-
entries are begun in vertical holes so the driller is blindly
forging ahead. Often, the drilling does veer off course and the
well must be plugged back and re-drilled. The directional
driller has learned the expected response of the drilling
assembly in this situation and the next attempt is usually
successful.
Wireline Gyro Steering Tool: These devices are in limited
supply and can be quite expensive. If the driller can find a
wireline gyro to withstand the vibration environment long
enough to drill and verify the build section, then he can avoid
the probable plug-back operation. But there will still be extra
time required in dealing with the wireline itself and its
interference with drilling operations. Additional bottom-hole
assembly (BHA) changes will probably have to occur, or
otherwise the gyro sensor must be located high up above the
motor and MWD tool, reducing steering control.
Nevertheless, using this tool for steering is estimated to result
in net savings of $45,000 for this example, based on avoidance
of the cost to plug back and re-drill.
MWD Gyro: Having an MWD tool with a gyro module
allows the driller to proceed immediately with the kickoff and
build operation, pausing briefly when desired to take gyro
orientation measurements. After the magnetometer sensor is
sufficiently clear of the casing’s magnetic interference, it can
be used as the primary guidance and survey sensor. At this
point, the gyro sensor “goes along for the ride,” but would
only be used periodically as a confirmation of the magnetic
readings. The gyro must be rugged enough to survive the
remaining drilling operations, until it is time to trip the pipe
for the next normal change of the bit or BHA components.
Making best use of this multi-purpose MWD tool could be
expected to save $115,000 in this example, based on net rig
time savings and avoiding the need to plug back and re-drill
the sidetrack.
SPE 63274
Steering Tools. The attribute that distinguishes a steering tool
from an orientation tool is its ability to operate and make
angular measurements while drilling ahead. Obviously, the
mode of drilling must involve sliding the drill pipe behind a
motor and bent sub, or some other type of deviation tool.
Rotary drilling (rotating the drill string from the rig floor)
would produce no consistent direction of the well's deviation.
It is only when the deviating tool’s preferred direction (“tool
face”) is maintained for an extended period of time that the
drilling direction can be controlled. The job of the steering
tool is to monitor the average value of the tool face angle, and
to report its reading in real time, or at least every few seconds
– to aid the driller in steering the well. At the analog level, it
operates as a continuous attitude tool, providing angular
tracking measurements while drilling progresses.
A gyro steering tool must be able to survive the drilling
environment, and take static surveys - just as is required of an
orientation tool. But it must also have sufficient accuracy,
stability, speed, and dynamic range to track the average angle
of the steering assembly in the presence of significant
vibrations and torsional oscillations.
Definitive Survey Tools. A survey tool is a directional
measurement tool that can provide data to produce a course
trajectory of a well path in 3-D displacements. When its
accuracy is such that it can be commonly used as a definitive
record of the well path for archival purposes, then it is called a
definitive survey tool.
These instruments may include orientation, continuous
heading and inertial navigation tools. The instruments that
produce angular measurements must have their individual
station surveys combined with depth in post-processing at the
surface to produce the well trajectory. Inertial navigation
tools produce a well trajectory directly in 3-D displacements.
MWD magnetic tools have commonly been used as the
definitive record of a well trajectory over the past several
years - particularly in high-angle wells where it is difficult to
obtain a wireline survey after the well is drilled. For an MWD
Gyro tool to be usable as a definitive survey tool on a well, its
accuracy must be comparable to existing wireline survey tools.
This would imply azimuth accuracy of better than one degree,
and presents a significant challenge for the future.
Misconceptions
First, we will address the common misconceptions that arise in
the marketplace about the capabilities of this first set of
“MWD Gyro” products. When the term “gyro” is mentioned,
most people in the oilfield industry form an association with
the traditional survey tools that have been available for many
years. These are gyroscopic tools for providing Orientation,
Continuous Orientation, or Inertial Survey measurements.
The oldest gyro survey devices were spinning-mass
gimbaled gyroscopes with photomechanical cameras. These
tools were run in the hole via slickline and retrieved, and took
measurements under command from a timer. The gyroscope
was aligned to North at the surface, and preserved its
alignment through inertia during the trip to the bottom-hole
SPE 63274 DEVELOPMENT OF A ROBUST GYROSCOPIC ORIENTATION TOOL FOR MWD OPERATIONS
location. During the trip to bottom, the gyro drifts according
to its bias error rate and may shift if exposed to shocks and
vibration beyond its specification. These gimbaled devices are
generally too fragile to withstand drilling vibrations.
Rate gyros used in “North Seeking” assemblies have come
into common use in survey tools1 and some steering tools.
Especially when used in a “strapdown” configuration (no
gimbals), they can be fairly rugged and still deliver reasonable
accuracy.
Full inertial gyroscopic survey tools measure
displacements, not just orientations, by integrating the
acceleration and rate measurements from the sensors. The
most accurate of these devices uses a military ring-laser gyro
(RLG) sensor and can deliver survey measurements of 2m
lateral accuracy per 1000m hole depth. This correlates to
approximately 0.11 degrees accuracy for the azimuth (angle
from North) measurement.
One common advantage that all of these gyro survey tools
have is that the predominant error terms result in a random
azimuth error. As a consequence, the more surveys are done
with a single tool (and the more tools are run) the greater the
confidence in the average measurement of hole trajectory.
Systematic errors that result in a constant azimuth error are
usually smaller and primarily a result of the initial alignment
or North reference value. The other obvious advantage of the
gyro tools is that they are not subject to the magnetic
interference from drillstring components that plagues typical
MWD directional tools, which navigate with respect to
Magnetic North using magnetometers. For many years, this
magnetic interference and the poor reliability of early MWD
directional sensors led to a general consensus that the gyro
survey was the definitive record of well trajectory.
But, over the past decade, studies have shown MWD
magnetic directional measurements improving substantially in
accuracy and reliability. This is the only practical method to
obtain survey data to establish the well path, especially in
horizontal and high-angle wells. The more accurate survey
tools (RIGS) are too big and expensive to run in open hole or
in these horizontal sections. And the smaller gyro survey tools
that might be candidates for a “pump down” operation through
drill pipe are no longer clearly superior to the basic MWD
magnetic azimuth measurements. They are often run,
however, as a check on the well path to establish greater
confidence than MWD alone could afford. Most critical
directional wells today are still surveyed by some sort of gyro
wireline survey device • either through drill pipe or within
casing.
So, when most oilfield personnel are told of an upcoming
MWD Gyro tool, they customarily assume that this device will
be able to provide the same functions as continuous wireline
gyro survey tools.
Search for a gyro sensor
Due to the above-mentioned high standards for ruggedness
established by accels and mags, MWD tools have never
successfully implemented a gyroscopic sensor. Indeed, very
few gyroscopes could long survive the downhole drilling
3
environment, let alone maintain performance within
specifications. The key to the puzzle is clearly in finding or
developing a gyro to meet the specifications and survive the
drilling environment.
What type of gyroscope? The gyro sensor in an MWD tool
forms the heart of a primary Attitude and Heading Reference
System (AHRS), and it must derive its orientation independent
of any other means. Because it is switched off between survey
stations to conserve battery power, it cannot retain an initial
alignment. Even if it remained powered, the extended period
downhole (24 to 100 hours on each run) would allow
accumulation of unacceptable drift error over time. Gimbals
are too fragile, so it must take the form of a “strapdown”
configuration. Thus, it must operate in a “gyrocompass” or
North-seeking mode, and must be of a “rate gyro”, or “rate-
integrating gyro” type.
Rate gyros are best suited for the MWD application,
because they can operate without any pre-alignment step
required. They can spin up and find the North-referenced
headings at any point while downhole. Such an instrument
can then provide the “connection survey” each time the
drilling process stops to add drill pipe. Each sensor has an
output proportional to the rate of rotation about its sensitive
axis. For gyrocompass modes of operation, the tool is
stationary with respect to the earth during the measurements.
Thus, the rate to be measured is the rotational rate of the earth
in inertial space - about 15.04 degrees per hour (°/h). Azimuth
is defined in the horizontal plane, where the horizontal earth
rate is proportional to the cosine of the local latitude2.
Desirable rate gyro specifications: The technological
capabilities and deliverable measurements from the prototype
gyro tools currently being developed for MWD are similar to
the first generation of wireline gyro survey tools of the
“North-Seeking” variety. That is, they can be used to take
AHRS surveys at discrete depths along the well path. The
gyrocompass operation must occur in a static condition,
usually during a connection with no pipe motion and with the
drilling mud pumps off, to ensure accuracy. Then the course
trajectory can be calculated by traditional means, as it is done
now with multiple MWD magnetic survey measurements.
This mode of gyro measurement is called Gyro Orientation.
Its primary application is to orient the drilling deviation tool
when a magnetometer can’t be used. When the well is near
vertical, it must derive the Toolface angle of the deviation tool
with respect to True North (γ) to initiate drilling at the correct
heading.
For this application, the gyro can be a supplemental sensor
to the magnetometer. Magnetic MWD tools can determine
azimuth in one second to an accuracy of 0.3° at one standard
deviation (1σ) at temperatures up to 200°C. No presently-
available small gyro is able to approach that performance. But
near casing, the mag is useless, and the gyro can be helpful
with an accuracy of 5.0° (1σ) in a one minute integration
period. Because it is used for a short segment of the well
4 ESTES, R. A. AND EPPLIN, D. M.
trajectory, and usually at low inclinations, the net
displacement error introduced is small. And because such
“kickoffs” from casing are often shallow (moderate
temperatures), a temperature limit of 125°C (257°F) could be
tolerated.
The primary parameters determining heading accuracy in a
gyrocompass mode of operation are the gyro bias (δω) and the
gyro random noise (η), or angle random walk. To achieve the
5° azimuth accuracy desired, these errors will have to combine
to produce a net rate error on each axis of about 1.0°/h or less.
This relationship is illustrated in the simplified vertical, 2-axis
sensor example below1, where the horizontal earth field at 45°
latitude is about 10.6°/h:
δγ = TF error = TF (perturbed) - TF (ideal) …(1)
δγ = tan-1((ωx+δωx)/(ωy+δωy)) - tan-1((ωx)/(ωy)) …(1.1)
δγ = tan-1((0 + 1) / (10.6 + (-1))) - tan-1(0 / 10.6) …(1.2)
δγ = tan-1(1 / 9.6) - tan-1(0) …(1.3)
δγ = 5.9° …(1.4)
In equation (1.2) above, the orientation is due North, and
the polarities of the δωx and δωy were chosen to show a worst-
case resultant error. At other TF angles and polarities of axial
rate bias, the resultant TF error (δγ) varies from 0° to about
7.5°, averaging about 5°.
Similarly, for a single axis calculation in the horizontal
plane, equation (1) could have been written simply as:
δγ = sin-1( δωx / (Ω cos L )) …(2)
then
δγ = sin-1( 1 / 10.6 ) …(2.1)
δγ = 5.4° …(2.2)
where δγ is the heading or TF error in degrees
δωx is the residual bias error on rate X
Ω is the Earth’s turn rate (15.04°/h)
L is the Latitude in degrees
This simplistic example shows2 that to a first
approximation, we are looking for a 2-axis rate gyro that can
deliver model-corrected rate outputs in the X and Y axes of
about 1.0 °/h accuracy or better.
An MWD Gyro tool is designed to save drilling time, so it
must spin up, settle, find north and analyze data very quickly.
Typically, it must spend less than one minute to acquire the
present attitude information whenever requested. In order to
accomplish this, an AHRS accuracy of +/- 5° in azimuth and
toolface angle is required. As shown in equation (2) above, to
SPE 63274
achieve this angular accuracy, a rate measurement accuracy of
1°/h is necessary. Also, to resolve this rate precisely in one
minute’s integration time, a rate gyro’s bias must be near zero
and the noise level must be very low. Even so, at an
integration time (also called alignment time) as short as one
minute, the gyro random noise figure contributes most of the
1°/h error budget. (In one minute, the error contribution from
the long-term bias drift is negligible.) The random noise
figure (η) contributes error that is inversely proportional to the
square root of the integration time2. It has units of degrees per
root hour (°/√h):
δγ = sin-1(η / (Ω cos L √ti)) …(3)
where δγ is the heading or TF error in degrees
η is the gyro random noise in °/√h
Ω is the Earth’s turn rate (15.04107°/h)
L is the Latitude in degrees
ti is the integration time in hours
Applying equation (3) to the 45° latitude case, and
assuming only 30 seconds of the 1 minute survey time is
available for sensor measurement integration, we see that a
random noise value of 0.05°/√h produces a 3° error. This
consumes 3/5 of our error budget, and requires that the
residual bias error be held to about 0.3°/h. These are very
high performance levels and not commonly seen among
tactical-grade rate gyros. Therefore, the gyroscope selected
must be small, rugged and perform to near-navigational grade
in the MWD system.
Specifications of available sensors: The author first began
an investigation into potential rate gyros for MWD in 1982
with a study of DTG (Dynamically Tuned Gyro) technology.
The limiting factor in these mechanical sensors was the
lubricant in the bearings, which had a limited life at
temperatures above 85°C (185°F.) Some high-temp, low-
viscosity lubricants could operate up to 125°C (257°F), but
would require maintenance after 30 to 60 hours operation.
There was also concern about the life expectancy of the
bearings and suspension. An additional limitation in
technology at that time was a lack of high-temperature analog-
to-digital (A/D) converters with precision of 18 bits or more.
The high dynamic range is needed to resolve the small signal
from earth’s rotational rate, and still quantize substantial
oscillatory vibration while drilling.
Baker Hughes and its predecessor companies have pursued
at least five major efforts to develop an MWD gyro sensor
over the past 20 years, and have spent several million dollars
in the process. Sensor types included DTG, RLG (Ring Laser
Gyro), FOG (Fiber Optic Gyro), HRG (Hemispherical
Resonator Gyro), and MEMS (Micro-ElectroMechanical
Systems) silicon vibratory1,3 (Coriolis acceleration) varieties.
None of those efforts has yet proved successful, and each had
a central goal of developing or improving the sensor itself.
SPE 63274 DEVELOPMENT OF A ROBUST GYROSCOPIC ORIENTATION TOOL FOR MWD OPERATIONS
Other oilfield service companies have also spent much
time and money in search of a suitable gyro for MWD, but no
commercial device has emerged yet, despite years of basic
sensor R&D. Table 3 illustrates generally expected
performance values of various gyros.
Limitations of the chosen rate gyro sensor
Note that the column labeled GBG (for Gas Bearing Gyro) in
Table 3 is an acronym not yet defined. It is a spinning mass,
2-axis rate gyro that runs in a spherical air bearing. No
lubricant is required — as the rotor spins, it acts as a self-
pumping gas bearing which supports the rotor without flexures
or ball bearings. This makes the GBG device very rugged and
very quiet. It behaves much like the DTG with 2 rate outputs
from a single rotor.
These specs are for the particular GBG sensor chosen for
use in our prototype MWD Gyro assembly. Note also the
asterisk [*] on the bias instability spec of 15°/h. A special
bias compensation technique is required to cancel this bias
value. All the other specs are acceptable, but the GBG has a
large turn-on to turn-on bias instability. Figure 1 illustrates
the close relationship between the rate outputs and the gyro
temperature. It also shows the difficulty of getting accurate
angular data from the gyro during the first minute after power-
up. Large transients are occurring, which are not
representative of the stability exhibited after 15 minutes or so.
Shop calibration takes place after thermal stability is reached.
To cancel this bias each time power is applied, an indexing
motor must be used to rotate the gyro around its spin axis in
the presence of the Earth’s rotational field. This technique,
called “Indexed Gyrocompassing Definition,” has been
employed before in North-Seeking gyro devices2. The
sinusoidal curve for the sensor’s response can be derived
through analysis of the measurements made at multiple index
angles. The baseline offset value of that sine curve is the bias,
which is used to correct subsequent readings from the sensor.
With careful indexing and sampling, the residual bias error
can be reduced to 0.2°/h or less.
Aerospace technology has again provided an answer to
address the demands of the oilfield drilling industry. This
spherical GBG is used in the IMU (Inertial Measurement Unit)
of guided submunitions intended for anti-tank warfare. It also
has been used on several other military programs as a tactical
gyro. Tales of its toughness are impressive — what convinced
the authors of its suitability for MWD was a picture of a GBG
IMU that had been embedded (est. shock >10,000 g) into a
tank in mock combat. After the sensor was returned to the lab
and connected with new cables, it still worked.
Preliminary Lab Testing
Lab testing was carried out to prove the indexing concept and
verify the stability of the GBG sensor through a regimen of
environmental stress testing. Readings were taken on a servo-
positioned calibration test stand to simulate the indexing
rotation that would be performed in the final assembly. Total
survey time was about 80 seconds, and the readings were
sampled for a 5 second average at each index position.
5
Figure 2 shows the initial performance of sensor #1683
after lab calibration. The indication is that this gyro starts out
with accuracy sufficient for the specified application (0.9° rms
azimuth error).
To evaluate the likelihood of retaining this performance
level after exposure to MWD downhole conditions, we
performed a regimen of thermal cycling, shock testing, and
vibration testing that is a standard qualification procedure for
other MWD components. Incremental performance
verification was done at each stage of the process. The final,
and harshest, environmental test was the 20g rms random
vibration at elevated temperature.
To our delight, the sensor maintained its initial accuracy
very well throughout all stages of the environmental testing.
As shown in Figure 3, the azimuth accuracy test after the 20g
rms random vibration showed essentially the same accuracy as
the original run the month before.
Based on these encouraging preliminary tests, we
embarked on a program to develop a module to test downhole
as an MWD prototype.
MWD Gyro Assembly
The MWD Gyro assembly consists of two sections united by a
tandem (support housing with dual connectors) to
accommodate the bending parameters required in a short
radius application. As shown in Figure 4, the downhole
section contains the directional sensors and stepper motor
assembly and the uphole section is composed of the essential
electronic PCBs needed for operation. During this initial
phase, the probe performed up to 115°C (239°F) with the gyro
itself being the limiting factor. The entire probe also operates
at rugged vibration up to 20g rms.
Downhole Section. The downhole section is commonly
referred to as the analog section since it contains only the
sensors without any PCBA electronics. Figure 5 illustrates an
actual photograph of the hardware. As expected, the 2-axis
rate gyro stands as the primary sensor in the sensor section.
As stated earlier this gas bearing, 9 piece mechanical gyro
comes from the aerospace industry as an ‘off the shelf’
product. One drawback exists in that this gyro exhibits an
inherent high turn-on bias that must be removed by an
indexing method explained later in this article.
The gravity specific measurements are gathered with
special small-diameter, quartz-flexure accelerometers recently
tested and qualified to downhole MWD environmental
specifications. The accelerometers are installed as a triaxial
package and for use in calculations for toolface (roll),
inclination (pitch), and azimuth (yaw). Apart from calculated
survey results, the toolface data gathered from these
accelerometer calculations also become useful in the gyro
indexing technique.
Two temperature sensors are also available in the sensor
section. One temperature sensor, the LM-135 ‘can style’, rests
nearby the accelerometers, while the other sensor is located
internally in the gyro itself. The close proximity to these
sensors improves temperature dependent errors by providing a
6 ESTES, R. A. AND EPPLIN, D. M.
temperature measurement near the respective sensor, thus
reducing the chance of any temperature gradients.
The stepper motor assembly exists as the remaining crucial
component of the analog section. For the rate gyro to be at its
most accurate, the aforementioned high turn-on bias must be
removed by an indexing technique. This indexing is
accomplished by using a stepper motor assembly to rotate the
gyro to a predetermined set of positions. The gyro and
accelerometers mounted in the isolated chassis are coupled to
the stepper motor by a shaft and motor gear protection
components. When the stepper motor turns, the isolated
sensor assembly rotates to a known set of angles where sensor
output data is recorded and later used in bias removal.
The stepper motor itself is constructed of quadrature
windings controlled by the Stepper Motor Driver PCBA.
Joined with a 100:1 ratio gearbox, the assembly can rotate to
0.05° increments. This allows for precise positioning to the
indexing angles for more accurate results.
Uphole section. The uphole section of the MWD Gyro probe
consists of the necessary electronics for operation and is
referred to as the digital section. Four electronic components
are present in the digital section: Microprocessor A/D PCBA,
Gyro Hybrid, Stepper motor driver PCBA, and power supply
PCBA. All of these components are rated to standard
temperature and environmental parameters outlined for MWD
use, and all PCBs are fabricated of special polyimide board
material that has been shown capable and durable to 200° C
(392°F.) The electronic components have also been designed
to accommodate the future enhancement of a 3rd axis of rate.
The only major change would be a modification in the housing
and chassis design.
Each electronic board serves a specific function in the
operation of the MWD Gyro. The ‘heart’ of the digital
section, the 68332 based microprocessor A/D PCB, performs
tasks such as:
1. stepper motor operation
2. data sampling
3. thermal calibration model correction
4. downhole bias computation and removal
5. survey calculations
6. bus communication
7. data storage during drilling operation
The present design involves channel multiplexing which
restricts the data sampling to 75 Hz and the Sigma-Delta
converters are utilized to 16 bits of resolution. For future
enhancements, multiplexing will be eliminated and each
channel will have a dedicated Sigma-Delta converter for better
sampling. The improved sampling will result in better
calibration and higher accuracy.
Once the data have been obtained, the microprocessor will
use the results, apply thermal and time correction coefficients
and calculate the desired survey measurements. The data will
then be communicated via the DV-485 network bus to the
master node and ready for transmission to the surface.
SPE 63274
One of the powerful features of using the MC68C332
microprocessor is the ability to control stepper motor position
and speed. A preprogrammed motor profile can be
constructed for acceleration, speed, direction and position. The
corresponding signals can be sent to the Stepper Motor Driver
PCBA through designated TPU lines for motor operation.
This feature of the MC68C332 eliminates the need for a
separate stepper motor controller PCBA since it can handle the
required tasks internally.
Also, the Microprocessor PCBA has 256K of 16-bit
SRAM available and 2 megabytes of Flash EEPROM
Memory. A portion of this flash memory (1 MB) is reserved
for embedded code while the remaining megabyte is reserved
for data storage during drilling operations. The data saved in
this manner consists of sequential survey results and
individual indexing positions related to the sequential survey.
This data can be retrieved once the MWD toolstring has been
brought to the surface and will be useful in diagnostics.
The gyro hybrid is the custom hybrid MCM (Multi-Chip
Module) with an ASIC (Application Specific Integrated
Circuit). The Gyro hybrid provides the drive signals to allow
the gyro to spin-up, synchronize, and servo the rotor. The
hybrid is also used to scale the rate outputs to the desired
level.
The stepper motor driver PCBA converts TPU signals
from the microprocessor to regulated voltages required to turn
the stepper motor itself. This PCBA is designed with a current
feedback loop that controls the stepper motor torque by
switching the timed drive currents required to turn the motor.
Finally, the 30 watt Power Supply PCBA provides all the
necessary voltages to the aforementioned PCB’s by stepping
down the voltage delivered by power source in the main
MWD system. The power supply supplies +/-24, +/-15, and
+/- 5 volts. For power conservation, logic controlled
MOSFETs allow the voltages to be switched to the sensor
section while the microprocessor remains powered up at all
times while in the drillstring.
All components and modules, except the gyro itself, are
screened to verify reliability well beyond the MIL-Spec
temperature range. Each subassembly must pass
environmental qualification tests (“shake and bake”) at 150°C
(302°F) while under random vibration at 20 g rms. Sine
vibration sweeps at 30 g peak are also performed on each
subassembly. Based on analysis of these tests, iterative design
improvements in the elastomeric isolation were made to
reduce the transfer of vibration to the inner sensor chassis.
Survey methods for the MWD Gyro
For accurate survey results, the MWD Gyro must go through a
series of predetermined toolface indexing points to eliminate
the natural high bias exhibited from the gyro. The stepper
motor assembly has the function of moving the accel/gyro
sensor chassis to these set positions. This chassis isolates
itself from the rest of the assembly through bearings so that it
may index without disturbing the toolface of the entire
downhole assembly. Once a survey is requested, the stepper
SPE 63274 DEVELOPMENT OF A ROBUST GYROSCOPIC ORIENTATION TOOL FOR MWD OPERATIONS
motor conducts a two-part process: orientation and indexing.
This permits proper bias compensation.
During normal drilling, the MWD Gyro will remain
powered off to conserve battery power. The power
consumption is about 10 watts for a survey and about 30 watts
while the chassis rotates. A survey is requested from the
Master module in the MWD system by setting a flag that is
queried by the MWD Gyro microprocessor. This flag is set
when the Master module has recognized that flow off
condition has occurred. Therefore, the operator may request
an MWD Gyro survey by turning off the mud pumps for a
given amount of time (usually 4 minutes). When a survey is
requested, the microprocessor will switch power to the gyro
assembly components. The orientation phase of the survey
will now begin. After power up, the gyro/accel assembly will
travel in either a clockwise or counter-clockwise direction till
a lever arm on the stepper motor shaft comes in contact with
an electromechanical contact pin then reverse direction till it
encounters the contact pin again. At this point, the stepper
motor will reverse direction and stop to begin the first
indexing measurement. This initial orientation method allows
the gyro/accel assembly to begin its survey at the same point
each time a survey is requested, ensures proper motor
operation and eliminates any excessive wire harness twisting.
After the orientation process, the gyro is ready to begin
indexing. Rotating the toolface, the gyro/accel sensor chassis
will travel to selected points, settle for a few seconds and then
take measurements containing accel, gyro, and temperature
data used for calculations. The gyro is indexed to four
different angles from its initial point and returns to the initial
point after each angle is reached — equating to nine different
recorded positions. Currently, the entire process (including
the orientation phase) takes about one minute. Other options
are being explored to reduce time and the potential for
indexing errors.
As indicated, the raw measurements at the indexing
positions are used in the final gyro survey calculations. After
the accel and gyro raw data has been temperature corrected,
the gyro data will be corrected for the time drift using the
indexed data taken from the initial point (5 measurements)
followed by a sine curve fit against the indexed angles. These
corrections improve the accuracy and allow for an error of less
than 1° RMS Azimuth error over a sequence of indexed
positions, using a five second/position sampling time (Fig. 2).
When the survey is complete, the results are obtained by
the Master module and prepared for transmission to the
surface for observation by the operator. To obtain the results
the operator must turn on the mud pumps to stimulate flow so
the pulsing sequence can begin and the data can be decoded
from the pulses via surface decoding gear.
Error codes are established in the embedded code to
indicate a functional error (e.g. gyro spin-up, motor indexing),
which will alert the operator of a faulty survey. In this case,
he will disregard this data and acquire another survey. Quality
checks on the data values are also enabled through computed
parameters such as Total Gravity Field and Horizontal Earth
Rate.
7
Since the MWD Gyro module is run as an additional
sensor with the conventional magnetic MWD instrument, it is
possible to compare the redundant accelerometer-based
calculations from the two directional modules. The High Side
Toolface and the Inclination values from the two directional
instruments should agree – offset by the distance between the
assemblies. This sensor offset distance can vary, because of
the modular placement capability of the probe MWD design,
but is typically in the range of 2 to 5 meters.
Field Testing
One of the anticipated milestones was to demonstrate the
MWD Gyro as a suitable wireline gyro replacement. The
initial field test was run in California in November, 1999, to
prove this capability. As seen in Table 4, the MWD Gyro and
the Wireline Gyro compare favorably in their Azimuth and
Inclination measurements at the same depths. Furthermore,
after the magnetic instrument cleared casing at a depth of 7805
feet (2379 m) the Magnetic Azimuth and the MWD Gyro
Azimuth began to agree. This is evident in the last three
readings of Table 4. Note that the first toolface in the MWD
Magnetic column was a magnetic toolface transmitted
automatically because the inclination was less than 3 degrees.
The remaining toolface values in that column are high side
toolfaces. They compare closely with the Accel Toolface
values on the MWD Gyro data for the first several surveys.
On the last 8 readings the values begin to differ – generally by
a few degrees.
This first field test ended in a failure of the MWD Gyro
module after 27 circulating hours. The failure was caused by
a coupling fracture between the stepper motor and the isolated
sensor chassis, resulting in a failure to rotate the sensor chassis
properly. Set screws securing the coupling to the shaft had
also slipped — which probably caused the erratic offset
between the High Side Toolface values toward the end of the
run. No failures were encountered in the electronics or the
sensors themselves.
The next several field tests confirmed the initial
performance capability of the prototype tools but,
unfortunately, resulted in similar failures. The shaft
couplings, set screws and gearbox linkage proved to be
inadequate to withstand the torsional dynamics of re-entry
drilling. Iterative improvements in this mechanical linkage
produced more and more robust designs. During 5 ensuing
field tests in California, one failure of an electronic component
occurred (an FPGA chip), and one accelerometer broke. All
other failures involved the mechanical parts. The FPGA
failure was attributed to infant mortality, and the accel was
known to be of an early, inferior design for these small quartz
flexure devices. The encouraging news was that there was no
failure or performance shift in the gyro sensor. It appeared
that the concept could be made to work in an MWD Gyro tool
if the mechanical linkage problems could be solved.
Figure 6 is a chart of survey data values recorded on the
most recent field test prior to the publishing deadline for this
paper. The test was run on a well in North Dakota in May,
2000 and offered the opportunity to compare the magnetic and
8 ESTES, R. A. AND EPPLIN, D. M.
gyro module calculations during an extended open-hole
section. Surveys were initiated during the first section of the
well inside the casing, which was set at 393 feet (120 m.) As
expected, at these 4 stations there was no correlation between
the Magnetic Toolface and the Gyro Toolface due to magnetic
interference. The first survey out of casing also exhibits some
interference but, afterwards, there is generally close agreement
between the gyro and magnetic readings. During this rotary
drilling phase the hole was essentially vertical down to 2750
feet (838 m). Although not shown, the inclination values from
the gyro and magnetic modules generally agreed within 0.2
degrees. Total gravity field values matched within a span of
0.002 g (0.0196 m/sec2.) The improvement in acceleration
measurements was attributed to improved calibration methods,
including application of the total field technique4 on the accels
in the gyro module.
At the kickoff point, Figure 6 shows inclination building to
horizontal at a rate of 10°/100 ft (10°/30 m.) At this point the
emphasis shifts from toolface to azimuth, and the plot shifts
accordingly. Note the close correlation between the toolface
values and the azimuth values at the kickoff point. Figure 7
shows a detailed view of this build section of the well.
Initially, there is very close agreement between the magnetic
azimuth (adjusted for declination) and the gyro azimuth. The
dashed lines show the 2 sigma error bound for the specified
goal of this tool — 10°. Note that as inclination increases to
60° (the maximum tool spec) and beyond, there is increasing
error in the gyro azimuth. As the inclination approaches 90°,
the 2-axis gyro tool cannot resolve the azimuth at all, and
errors increase exponentially.
This field test ran 65 circulating hours and 90 hours
downhole without failure and with good performance. It
indicates recent improvements in the mechanical linkage have
brought the design to a more acceptable survival rate. The
known weaknesses in the electronic sampling and the
calibration process are the likely causes of the variation
between the gyro and magnetic headings. We know we can
do better in subsequent tool designs. The important, gratifying
fact is that the gyro sensor itself has proven to be reliable and
stable during a variety of drilling environments.
Limitations
The technological capabilities and deliverable measurements
from this developing group of gyro tools for MWD are similar
to the first generation of wireline gyro survey tools of the
“North-Seeking” variety. That is, they can be used to take
individual attitude surveys at multiple depths along the well
path. The gyrocompass operation must be taken in a
stationary condition, usually during a connection with no pipe
motion and with pumps off, to assure a good reading. Then
the course trajectory can be calculated by traditional means, as
it is done now with MWD magnetic survey measurements.
Why can’t the new MWD gyro tools deliver continuous
attitude measurements, based on the gyroscope’s stable
reference position, during the progress of drilling? Why can’t
we expect to see inertial surveys produced in real-time during
drilling that are comparable to surveys from the RIGS (ring-
SPE 63274
laser gyro inertial surveyor) tool? The answer lies in the
nature of the application, and the limits of today’s technology.
Let us consider the wireline survey tool generally
recognized as the most accurate in the industry. The RLG
used in the RIGS tool is considered a navigation grade gyro
and is commonly used in commercial and military aircraft as a
primary navigation sensor. It is of very high accuracy and the
main reason that the RIGS tool can deliver precise surveys.
However, it represents a class of inertial measurement units
(IMUs) that are accurate to 1.0 nautical mile per hour. This
means that the IMU can track its position, but may drift off in
any direction by as much as 1 mile (1600m) in an hour’s time.
Aiding the position computation via GPS signals or radar
information greatly improves the uncertainty in aircraft.
Downhole, the RIGS IMU can be aided only by the along-
borehole depth, which is available constantly from the cable
depth measurement. MWD tools have neither of these aiding
measurements available.
The RIGS tool also benefits from a short survey time.
Shorter run times allow less time for the IMU's computed
position to drift off. Wireline surveys can run up to 600
ft/min., whereas MWD drilling is typically less than 200
ft./hour. Gyros used for surveying dynamically during drilling
would have to hold their heading for a long time — typically
half an hour between connections.
Let us assume that we were able to overcome the practical
limitations and build this RLG-based IMU into an MWD gyro
sensor module. Lacking the real-time depth update for an
aiding signal, the calculated position would drift off
unacceptably after only a few minutes. At a drift rate of 0.05
deg/hr, the computed Gyro Toolface could be in error by
atan((0 + 0.05)/(11 - 0.05)), or 0.26° in an hour’s time. This
single error term would then have eaten up a large part of the
error budget for a definitive survey tool in a very short time.
And dynamic motion during drilling is many times that
expected during centralized wireline survey runs.
Modifications to allow extended dynamic range of the RLG
would reduce the sensitivity and accuracy that are necessary to
achieve the historical RIGS survey results.
But the prime limitation of the RLG is its size. As shown
in Table 3, the RLG used for RIGS has a diameter of 90 mm.
This makes it impossible to fit in a small diameter (44 mm)
pressure barrel for use in flexible drillstrings for reentry
drilling. Reducing the diameter of an RLG dramatically
reduces its accuracy, so scaled-down versions could not expect
to produce results comparable to RIGS surveys.
Other service companies have similar physical limitations
to deal with in pursuit of an MWD Gyro tool. Existing HRG
devices are large (50 mm), and will encounter some reduced
accuracy in the process of developing smaller sensors. All the
mechanical sensors have temperature limitations of some sort
– and weaknesses in the chosen suspension and bearing
design. FOGs are all characterized by temperature limits –
chiefly in the optics components – and suffer like RLGs when
the dimensions are reduced. So the most prevalent operating
mode is likely to be an orientation tool run in the North-
SPE 63274 DEVELOPMENT OF A ROBUST GYROSCOPIC ORIENTATION TOOL FOR MWD OPERATIONS 9

seeking mode under static conditions—resulting in accuracy
that improves with the length of the survey time.
Conclusions and Next Steps
With the successful lab testing and field testing of the MWD
Gyro, this military tactical gyro has found a use in the
petroleum industry. The initial project goal was to prove the
concept and verify that a capable sensor can be implemented
to meet these tough specifications. These goals have clearly
been met, and the next phase of the program can now be
considered.
Commercial versions of the tool will now be built with
emphasis on improving the weaknesses pinpointed in the
prototype testing. These include the temperature limitation,
which will be boosted to 150°C (302°F). Also, the poor
sampling technique will be improved by using dedicated A/D
converters, and the simplistic calibration approach will be
enhanced by application of system-level TFC4 methods.
Enhanced diagnostics and quality indicators will be developed
to ensure the reliability of data delivered from the tool.
A 3-axis tool is also under development to address the
demands of horizontal operation in reentry and extended reach
drilling.
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to express their appreciation to Koen Noy of
Shell SIEP (Rijswijk) and Oddvar Lotsberg of Statoil
(Stavanger) for their valuable contributions regarding
application and functional specifications for this project.
Thanks also to Jack Angel, Pierre Collee, George Rizk, Phil
Burge and Steve Mullin for their input on market applications
for an MWD Gyro tool. Thanks also to the aerospace
navigation experts for producing the sensors that made
possible the building of this MWD Gyro tool. These include
Walter Kluss, Pei-Hwa Lo, Herb Califano, Bill Lee, Norm
Klein and Gene Olinger of AlliedSignal (now L3
Communications, Honeywell, and Condor Pacific), and
Hirohito Ito and Kiyoshi Fujino of Japan Aviation Electronics.
References
1 P. W. Ott, et al., “Azimuth Determination for Vector Sensor
Tools,” U.S. Patent No. 4 433 491, February 28, 1984.
2 D. H. Titterton and J. L. Weston, Strapdown Inertial Navigation
Technology, London, UK: Peter Peregrinus Ltd. on behalf of
IEE, 1997.
3 R. H. Hulsing, “MEMS Inertial Rate and Acceleration Sensor,”
Proc. of National Technical Meeting of the Institute of
Navigation, Long Beach, CA, January 21, 1998.
4 R. A. Estes and P. H. Walters, “Improvement of Azimuth
Accuracy by Use of Iterative Total Field Calibration Technique
and Compensation for System Environmental Effects,”
SPE19546 presented at the 64th Annual Technical Conference of
the Society of Petroleum Engineers, San Antonio, TX, October
11, 1989.

Table 3 — RLG HRG FOG DTG GBG MEMS

Table 1 — Wireline Gyro Replacement Example Gyro Sensor
Casing Window Cutting Wireline MWD Gyro Specifications
Drilling Rig Daily Rental Rate $60,000 $60,000 Operating Temp. (°C) 100 100 75 120 125 150
Directional Drilling $10,000 $10,000 Shock [g] 3000 3000 3000 2000 2000 4000
Daily Rental Rate Random vibe [g rms] 20 30 20 30 36 40
Gyro Orienting (during 2 days) 13 hours 1 hour Size (OD) φ [mm] 90 50 40 19 25 25
Cost to Cut Window (during 2 days) $140,000 $105,000 Linearity SF [ppm] 10 200 500 70 50 100
Rig Time Saved 12 hours g-sensitive bias [°/h/g] 0 0 1 3 0.1 1
Window Cutting Savings $35,000 Bias [°/h] 0.01 0.03 20 0.3 15* 10
Total Savings/well $35,000 Random walk [°/√h] .005 .001 .05 .008 .002 0.15
Cost high high med low Med low
* Prior to bias removal by indexed gyrocompassing
Table 2 — Wireline Gyro Replacement Example
Intermediate Radius MWD Steering MWD
Re-Entry Kickoff Alone Gyro * Gyro
Drilling Rig Daily Rate $60,000 $60,000 $60,000
Directional Drilling $10,000 $10,000 $10,000
Daily Rental Rate
Window Cost $75,000 $75,000 $75,000
Drilling Time 1 day 1-1/2 days 1 day
Plug-Back Cost $80,000
Cost to Build Curve $225,000 $180,000 $145,000
Window Cutting Savings -$35,000
(from Table 1)
Cost to Cut Window & $365,000 $320,000 $250,000
Kickoff the Curve
Total Savings/Well $45,000 $115,000
* Assuming a wireline gyro steering tool is available
10 ESTES, R. A. AND EPPLIN, D. M. SPE 63274

Table 4. Results of first MWD Gyro downhole drilling test.

MWD GYRO DATA MWD Magnetic Wireline Gyro

Beginning: 22-Nov-1999 Horiz Accel Gyro Corr data
Time Depth Azimuth Incl Earth Toolface TF Surv# Azimuth Azim Toolface Azim Incl TF
01:05 30 286.5 0.2 11.33 60.4 84.3 1 234.8 250.0 158.9 (M)
07:40 7600 224.3 3.3 12.58 330.4 196.8 2 88.6 103.7 329.0
09:00 7665 223.9 3.3 10.78 251.7 118.1 3 242.6 257.7 250.0 228.9 3.28 71.0
11:10 7665 227.8 3.4 12.50 241.8 111.1 4 2.8 18.0 244.7
12:47 7705 254.2 4.0 12.50 92.8 350.1 5 90.4 105.5 90.0
14:35 7736 268.9 6.8 12.66 5.6 278.4 6 275.6 290.7 11.25 251.3 4.02 253.8
16:02 7736 265.1 5.9 13.98 42.2 309.3 7 178.6 193.7 49.2
17:53 7768 271.8 8.6 10.63 71.7 348.7 8 282.0 297.1 74.5
19:50 7799 285.1 9.8 11.95 331.8 262.9 9 260.0 275.1 122.4
21:50 7830 281.3 11.6 12.03 354.3 282.6 10 271.4 286.5 357.2
23:40 7862 290.7 12.6 14.53 115.3 52.0 11 285.5 300.6 125.0
02:00 7894 306.2 14.2 14.14 56.2 5.6 12 289.3 304.5 65.0
04:35 7927 309.7 15.6 14.06 36.5 351.5 13 293.2 308.3 43.3

Figure 1. Gyro turn-on transients

SPE 63274 DEVELOPMENT OF A ROBUST GYROSCOPIC ORIENTATION TOOL FOR MWD OPERATIONS 11

Figure 2. Gyro Lab Accuracy Check - Initial

Figure 3. Gyro Lab Accuracy Check – After Vibration Qualification Test

12 ESTES, R. A. AND EPPLIN, D. M. SPE 63274

Figure 4. MWD Gyro Module Block Diagram

Figure 5. Photograph of Downhole Sensor Section

SPE 63274 DEVELOPMENT OF A ROBUST GYROSCOPIC ORIENTATION TOOL FOR MWD OPERATIONS 13

Figure 6. Field Test Data Comparison

Figure 7. Field Test Detailed Data Comparison

View publication stats