DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the following operations" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 2-6 are rejected as stated above because due to their dependency from claim 1. Claims 2-6 are also indefinite.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the operations" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim as related to the limitations “the following operations” in claim 1 because the operations are equivalent to steps in the instructions.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the operations" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim as related to the limitations “the following operations” in claim 1 because the operations are equivalent to steps in the instructions.
Claim Objections
Claims 7-13 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 7 recites the limitations “an event occurrence” in line 3. For consistency in the claim and expediency of the prosecution, Examiner suggests to change the limitations “an event occurrence” to the new limitations “the event occurrence”.
Claim 7 recites the limitations “a wellbore” in line 5. For consistency in the claim and expediency of the prosecution, Examiner suggests to change the limitations “a wellbore” to the new limitations “the wellbore”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 8-13 are objected as stated above because due to their dependency from claim 7.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
1. Claim(s) 1-12 and 14-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Foucault (US2005/0267719A1) in view of Grayson (US2005/0197813A1).
Regarding claim 1, Foucault discloses a drilling system comprising:
a computer system (fig 1:50; par[0031]: Apparatus 50 preferably optimizes the performance of drilling system 10 for drilling a selected wellbore in a given formation 24 is shown. In the present preferred embodiment, drilling prediction system 50 is remotely located with respect to drilling rig 12. Data from drilling rig 12 and other offset wells may be transmitted to system 50 via a network connection or may be physically uploaded via a storage medium such as a diskette, CD-ROM or the like) comprising a processor (fig 1:44/52; par[0030], [0032]: The processor 44 can be part of the drilling optimization apparatus 50, wherein the Logging data is then transmitted through the logging cable to a processor (such as processor 44) located at or near the logging truck 50 to process the logging data as appropriate for use with the instruments of the present disclosure. Further, the Prediction apparatus 50 further includes a device 52 (which will be referred to herein as a "processing system") that may include any suitable commercially available computer, controller, or data processing apparatus, further being programmed for carrying out the method and apparatus), a memory (fig 11:602; par[0064]: Processing system 600 includes memory 602 which may be used to store log data or other lithology data from offset wells received by data input module 604.), and instructions stored in the memory that are capable of execution by the processor (par[0036]: Processing system 52 preferably includes a computer readable medium having executable instructions stored thereon for carrying out the steps described herein. Processing system may incorporate different modules for carrying out the different steps or processes described in FIG. 11.), the instructions comprising instructions for performing the following operations:
receive, by the computer system, an indication of an event occurrence, wherein the indication is based at least in part on data related to one or more drilling operations associated with a wellbore (par[0037]: The processing system 52 operates to synthesize well logs from multiple offset wells. The drilling performance of the selected wellbore are synthesized by first collecting data from offset wells. The data is preferably selected in order to be significant for the next field development. Next the lithology, porosity, mechanical properties are evaluated. Next, multi-well statistical studies are conducted in order to determine the geological field trends. The field trends may include variations of lithology, mechanical properties, thickness, depth of formation, and dips in function of the well location. The statistical studies may include, for instance: averages, histograms for dispersion evaluation, cross sections, cross plots graphs to study the correlation between a set of parameters, and mappings.), wherein the event occurrence comprises at least one of a path difference between a measured borehole and a planned borehole (par[0050], [0054]: The method begins 208 by collecting data from offset wells 210 technically equivalent to the measured boreholes. In the present embodiment, offset well data must be obtained for at least three offset wells that are located in proximity to the location of the new well that is desired to be drilled technically equivalent to the planned borehole. For the purposes of this disclosure, an offset well may be considered to be any well located within the same field as the well that is desired to be drilled and whose lithology and drilling data may (in combination with information from other offset wells) be useful in the prediction of the drilling performances of the new well to be drilled. During the drilling of the new wellbore, well logs from the new well bore may be analyzed in real time. This real time analysis may include comparing the performance of the actual performance of the drilling device with the predicted performance of the drilling device), and an unplanned geological reading (fig 7; par[0039], [0051][0060]: A geologic context may include any discretely defined drilling environment. For example, a geologic context may include portions of a drilling environment that have rock strength of a given interval (such as a having a rock strength between 15 Kpsi and 40 Kpsi. The mechanical properties, in this example--rock strength technically equivalent to unplanned geological reading, of the formations of the three or more offset wells are assessed 304. The rock strength assessment may be performed using a rock strength model as described in U.S. Pat. No. 5,767,399 or any other suitable rock strength model. Next the rock strength data from the offset wells is synthesized 306. The synthesized field data is then analyzed and one of more drilling contexts of interest are selected. FIG. 7 shows a graphical comparison 400 of multiple drill bits within a geologic context of rock strength from 15-40 Kpsi.);
determine, by the computer system, a predicted impact of the event occurrence, wherein the predicted impact is based at least in part on data related to one or more drilling parameters and the event occurrence (par[0053], [0054]: After completion of the simulation, the performance of the different drilling devices or drilling parameters is analyzed and the design of the drilling device (in this case a fixed cutter drill bit) is modified using drilling design utilities 220. In some embodiments drilling design utilities may be associated with an Application Design Engineer or another operator to facilitate the modifications to the drill bit design. The performance of the modified drilling device may then be simulated for the desired wellbore and compared with the original or unmodified drilling device. The process may be repeated until an optimized drill bit has been identified. This real time analysis may include comparing the performance of the actual performance of the drilling device with the predicted performance of the drilling device. The predicted performance of the drilling device is preferably previously determined utilizing a well prognosis of the new wellbore. The wellbore profile typically includes the expected geology of the wellbore.);
modify, by the computer system, the one or more drilling parameters based at least in part on the predicted impact of the event occurrence (fig 5:222; par[0053], [0055]: After completion of the simulation, the performance of the different drilling devices or drilling parameters is analyzed and the design of the drilling device (in this case a fixed cutter drill bit) is modified using drilling design utilities 220. In some embodiments drilling design utilities may be associated with an Application Design Engineer or another operator to facilitate the modifications to the drill bit design. The performance of the modified drilling device may then be simulated for the desired wellbore and compared with the original or unmodified drilling device. The process may be repeated until an optimized drill bit has been identified. The optimized drilling device or parameter is then recommended 222 and the method ends 224 until the desired the desired wellbore is drilled and a subsequent wellbore is desired to be drilled in the field. As the new wellbore is drilled, the performance of the selected drilling device using the selected drilling parameter may be compared with the anticipated performance for the portion of the wellbore that has been drilled. In the event that the actual performance deviates significantly from the predicted performance, the actual drilling data may be re-synthesized with the existing offset well data to determine whether drilling device selection or drilling parameters should be modified to optimize the drilling of the well. In many cases this may involve re-evaluating the selection of the critical context for the new wellbore.); and
a drilling rig control system configured to receive the modified one or more drilling parameters and control a drilling rig to drill the wellbore based at least in part on the modified one or more drilling parameters responsive to a deviation between the modified one or more drilling parameters and the one or more drilling parameters being below a predetermined value therefor (par[0058]: Following selection of an optimized drilling device it is determined whether the drilling performance of the new wellbore is to optimized in real time. If so, then during the drilling of the new wellbore, the actual drilling performance may be compared with the predicted drilling performance of the new wellbore. If the actual drilling performance deviates significantly (in a negative manner) from the predicted performance, the evaluation and selection of drilling contexts may be reconsidered. This may include incorporating drilling data that is obtained in real time or substantially in real time during the drilling of the new wellbore (as in steps 300 and 332 below) into field synthesis and using the newly obtained data to perform a new iteration of the present method.).
Foucault does not explicitly disclose the drilling system wherein the event occurrence comprises at least one of an equipment malfunction, and an upcoming maintenance period.
Grayson discloses the drilling system wherein the event occurrence comprises at least one of an equipment malfunction (par[0034]: Once the predicted statistical reliability calculation is made, a determination is made as to whether the downhole device's predicted statistical reliability is above a predetermined reliability (block 418). If the candidate downhole device's predicted statistical reliability falls below the predetermined threshold, the particular device may be unsuitable for the potential project, and a new candidate device may be selected (block 412).), and an upcoming maintenance period (par[0038]: The rig site computer 314 may combine the actual use time with the downhole temperature and vibration data, and update the reliability prediction model for the LWD tool 10. In this way, the field engineer knows, in substantially real-time, the statistical reliability of the LWD tool=10 and may take note of when the statistical reliability as predicted by the reliability prediction module falls below a predetermined threshold. If the LWD tool 10, or any downhole device for which this information is tracked, falls below the predetermined threshold, the field engineer may schedule the downhole device for maintenance or repair while the downhole device is still downhole, and also replace the downhole device with a new or rebuilt device after the next "tripping" of the drill string. In the exemplary case of an LWD tool, the drilling engineer may schedule replacement of the tool 10 if its statistical reliability falls below 0.80 (80%) even though the tool continues to be fully functional.).
One of ordinary skill in the art would be aware of both the Foucault and the Grayson references since both pertain to the field of telemetry downhole systems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have improved the drilling system of Foucault with the equipment feature as disclosed by Grayson to achieve predictable results and gain the functionality of updating and/or predicting statistical reliability for devices using reliability prediction models, operating a downhole device, and updating (e.g. at the rig site) a reliability prediction model for the downhole device using at least one of a downhole condition and an amount of time the downhole device is used downhole.
Regarding claim 2, Foucault in view of Grayson discloses the drilling system of claim 1, wherein the data related to the one or more drilling operations comprises at least one of a rate of penetration (ROP) and GAMMA data (Foucault par[0033]: The offset well log data received by processing system that is associated with borehole 14 and other offset well data may include, for example well logs that incorporate caliper, Gamma Ray, Spectral Gamma Ray, Resistivity, Spontaneous Potential, Sonic, Neutron and Density, Photoelectric, and NMR data. Well log data may further include survey-deviation, UTM coordinates, and information from mud logs including geologic and formation tops information. The offset well log data may further include drilling data such as: bit performance data, bit Records, and drilling parameters such as rate of penetration (ROP), weight on bit (WOB), revolutions per minute (RPM), torque, flow rate).
Regarding claim 3, Foucault in view of Grayson discloses the drilling system of claim 1, wherein the operations further comprise:
send, by the computer system, an alert signal to the drilling rig control system responsive to the deviation between the modified one or more drilling parameters and the one or more drilling parameters being above the predetermined value therefor (Grayson par[0037]: In accordance with embodiments of the invention, the surface or rig site computer 314 may track actual use time of the LWD tool 10, and substantially simultaneously update the reliability prediction model, which may have been previously provided or acquired from the central computer 310 (not shown in FIG. 5). The field engineer may thus determine the current statistical reliability of the downhole tool 10, and if the statistical reliability falls below a predetermined threshold, the tool may be tagged to be removed from the drill string and replaced with a downhole device whose statistical reliability may stay above the predetermined threshold. The tool removed from the drill string may be used in other, less harsh, environments, or the tool may be subjected to maintenance.).
Regarding claim 4, Foucault in view of Grayson discloses the drilling system of claim 1, wherein the one or more drilling parameters comprises at least one of weight on bit (WOB) (Foucault par[0033]: The offset well log data may further include drilling data such as: bit performance data, bit Records, and drilling parameters such as rate of penetration (ROP), weight on bit (WOB)), flow rate of mud (Foucault par[0033]: The offset well log data may further include drilling data such as: bit performance data, bit Records, and drilling parameters such as rate of penetration (ROP), weight on bit (WOB), revolutions per minute (RPM), torque, flow rate.), toolface orientation (Foucault fig 3:118; par[0048]: The column 118 lists the deviation of each well. Deviation may be considered because mechanical properties commonly vary as a function of deviation. Additionally, deviation values are preferably taken into account in defining well profile), and bit selection (Foucault par[0044], [0045]: in simulating the performance of a drill bit, drill bit design parameters such as number of blades, cutter type, bit profile, sharp slope, dull slope, friction slope, wear exponent, max work, initial contact area, and final contact area may be selectively adjusted and compared with the simulated performance of other drill bits. The results of the simulation may then be analyzed and the attributes of the bit (such as bit profile, number of cutters, cutter size and other suitable parameters) may be modified. The performance of the modified drill bit may then be simulated and compared with the performance of the original bit.).
Regarding claim 5, Foucault in view of Grayson discloses the drilling system of claim 1, wherein the event occurrence comprises at least one of an unplanned geological reading (Foucault (fig 7; par[0039], [0051][0060]: A geologic context may include any discretely defined drilling environment. For example, a geologic context may include portions of a drilling environment that have rock strength of a given interval (such as a having a rock strength between 15 Kpsi and 40 Kpsi. The mechanical properties, in this example--rock strength technically equivalent to unplanned geological reading, of the formations of the three or more offset wells are assessed 304. The rock strength assessment may be performed using a rock strength model as described in U.S. Pat. No. 5,767,399 or any other suitable rock strength model. Next the rock strength data from the offset wells is synthesized 306. The synthesized field data is then analyzed and one of more drilling contexts of interest are selected. FIG. 7 shows a graphical comparison 400 of multiple drill bits within a geologic context of rock strength from 15-40 Kpsi.)), an equipment malfunction (Grayson par[0034]: Once the predicted statistical reliability calculation is made, a determination is made as to whether the downhole device's predicted statistical reliability is above a predetermined reliability (block 418). If the candidate downhole device's predicted statistical reliability falls below the predetermined threshold, the particular device may be unsuitable for the potential project, and a new candidate device may be selected (block 412).), and a maintenance period (Grayson par[0038]: The rig site computer 314 may combine the actual use time with the downhole temperature and vibration data, and update the reliability prediction model for the LWD tool 10. In this way, the field engineer knows, in substantially real-time, the statistical reliability of the LWD tool=10 and may take note of when the statistical reliability as predicted by the reliability prediction module falls below a predetermined threshold. If the LWD tool 10, or any downhole device for which this information is tracked, falls below the predetermined threshold, the field engineer may schedule the downhole device for maintenance or repair while the downhole device is still downhole, and also replace the downhole device with a new or rebuilt device after the next "tripping" of the drill string. In the exemplary case of an LWD tool, the drilling engineer may schedule replacement of the tool 10 if its statistical reliability falls below 0.80 (80%) even though the tool continues to be fully functional.).
Regarding claim 6, Foucault in view of Grayson discloses the drilling system of claim 1, wherein the operations further comprise: compare, by the computer system, a projected well path drilled in accordance with the modified one or more drilling parameters and a planned well path for the wellbore (Foucault par[0050], [0054]: The method begins 208 by collecting data from offset wells 210 technically equivalent to the measured boreholes. In the present embodiment, offset well data must be obtained for at least three offset wells that are located in proximity to the location of the new well that is desired to be drilled technically equivalent to the planned borehole. For the purposes of this disclosure, an offset well may be considered to be any well located within the same field as the well that is desired to be drilled and whose lithology and drilling data may (in combination with information from other offset wells) be useful in the prediction of the drilling performances of the new well to be drilled. During the drilling of the new wellbore, well logs from the new well bore may be analyzed in real time. This real time analysis may include comparing the performance of the actual performance of the drilling device with the predicted performance of the drilling device).
Regarding claim 7, Foucault discloses a method of drilling a wellbore in accordance with an event occurrence, the method comprising:
receiving, by a computer system, an indication of an event occurrence, wherein the indication is based at least in part on data related to one or more drilling operations associated with a wellbore (par[0037]: The processing system 52 operates to synthesize well logs from multiple offset wells. The drilling performance of the selected wellbore are synthesized by first collecting data from offset wells. The data is preferably selected in order to be significant for the next field development. Next the lithology, porosity, mechanical properties are evaluated. Next, multi-well statistical studies are conducted in order to determine the geological field trends. The field trends may include variations of lithology, mechanical properties, thickness, depth of formation, and dips in function of the well location. The statistical studies may include, for instance: averages, histograms for dispersion evaluation, cross sections, cross plots graphs to study the correlation between a set of parameters, and mappings.), wherein the event occurrence comprises at least one of a path difference between a measured borehole and a planned borehole (par[0050], [0054]: The method begins 208 by collecting data from offset wells 210 technically equivalent to the measured boreholes. In the present embodiment, offset well data must be obtained for at least three offset wells that are located in proximity to the location of the new well that is desired to be drilled technically equivalent to the planned borehole. For the purposes of this disclosure, an offset well may be considered to be any well located within the same field as the well that is desired to be drilled and whose lithology and drilling data may (in combination with information from other offset wells) be useful in the prediction of the drilling performances of the new well to be drilled. During the drilling of the new wellbore, well logs from the new well bore may be analyzed in real time. This real time analysis may include comparing the performance of the actual performance of the drilling device with the predicted performance of the drilling device), and an unplanned geological reading (fig 7; par[0039], [0051][0060]: A geologic context may include any discretely defined drilling environment. For example, a geologic context may include portions of a drilling environment that have rock strength of a given interval (such as a having a rock strength between 15 Kpsi and 40 Kpsi. The mechanical properties, in this example--rock strength technically equivalent to unplanned geological reading, of the formations of the three or more offset wells are assessed 304. The rock strength assessment may be performed using a rock strength model as described in U.S. Pat. No. 5,767,399 or any other suitable rock strength model. Next the rock strength data from the offset wells is synthesized 306. The synthesized field data is then analyzed and one of more drilling contexts of interest are selected. FIG. 7 shows a graphical comparison 400 of multiple drill bits within a geologic context of rock strength from 15-40 Kpsi.);
determining, by the computer system, a predicted impact of the event occurrence, wherein the predicted impact is based at least in part on data related to one or more drilling parameters and the event occurrence (par[0053], [0054]: After completion of the simulation, the performance of the different drilling devices or drilling parameters is analyzed and the design of the drilling device (in this case a fixed cutter drill bit) is modified using drilling design utilities 220. In some embodiments drilling design utilities may be associated with an Application Design Engineer or another operator to facilitate the modifications to the drill bit design. The performance of the modified drilling device may then be simulated for the desired wellbore and compared with the original or unmodified drilling device. The process may be repeated until an optimized drill bit has been identified. This real time analysis may include comparing the performance of the actual performance of the drilling device with the predicted performance of the drilling device. The predicted performance of the drilling device is preferably previously determined utilizing a well prognosis of the new wellbore. The wellbore profile typically includes the expected geology of the wellbore.);
modifying, by the computer system, the one or more drilling parameters based at least in part on the predicted impact of the event occurrence (fig 5:222; par[0053], [0055]: After completion of the simulation, the performance of the different drilling devices or drilling parameters is analyzed and the design of the drilling device (in this case a fixed cutter drill bit) is modified using drilling design utilities 220. In some embodiments drilling design utilities may be associated with an Application Design Engineer or another operator to facilitate the modifications to the drill bit design. The performance of the modified drilling device may then be simulated for the desired wellbore and compared with the original or unmodified drilling device. The process may be repeated until an optimized drill bit has been identified. The optimized drilling device or parameter is then recommended 222 and the method ends 224 until the desired the desired wellbore is drilled and a subsequent wellbore is desired to be drilled in the field. As the new wellbore is drilled, the performance of the selected drilling device using the selected drilling parameter may be compared with the anticipated performance for the portion of the wellbore that has been drilled. In the event that the actual performance deviates significantly from the predicted performance, the actual drilling data may be re-synthesized with the existing offset well data to determine whether drilling device selection or drilling parameters should be modified to optimize the drilling of the well. In many cases this may involve re-evaluating the selection of the critical context for the new wellbore.); and
sending, by the computer system, the modified one or more drilling parameters to a control system of a drilling rig to drill the wellbore based at least in part on the modified one or more drilling parameters responsive to a deviation between the modified one or more drilling parameters and the one or more drilling parameters being below a predetermined value therefor (par[0058]: Following selection of an optimized drilling device it is determined whether the drilling performance of the new wellbore is to optimized in real time. If so, then during the drilling of the new wellbore, the actual drilling performance may be compared with the predicted drilling performance of the new wellbore. If the actual drilling performance deviates significantly (in a negative manner) from the predicted performance, the evaluation and selection of drilling contexts may be reconsidered. This may include incorporating drilling data that is obtained in real time or substantially in real time during the drilling of the new wellbore (as in steps 300 and 332 below) into field synthesis and using the newly obtained data to perform a new iteration of the present method.).
Foucault does not explicitly disclose the method wherein the event occurrence comprises at least one of an equipment malfunction, and an upcoming maintenance period.
Grayson discloses the method wherein the event occurrence comprises at least one of an equipment malfunction (par[0034]: Once the predicted statistical reliability calculation is made, a determination is made as to whether the downhole device's predicted statistical reliability is above a predetermined reliability (block 418). If the candidate downhole device's predicted statistical reliability falls below the predetermined threshold, the particular device may be unsuitable for the potential project, and a new candidate device may be selected (block 412).), and an upcoming maintenance period (par[0038]: The rig site computer 314 may combine the actual use time with the downhole temperature and vibration data, and update the reliability prediction model for the LWD tool 10. In this way, the field engineer knows, in substantially real-time, the statistical reliability of the LWD tool=10 and may take note of when the statistical reliability as predicted by the reliability prediction module falls below a predetermined threshold. If the LWD tool 10, or any downhole device for which this information is tracked, falls below the predetermined threshold, the field engineer may schedule the downhole device for maintenance or repair while the downhole device is still downhole, and also replace the downhole device with a new or rebuilt device after the next "tripping" of the drill string. In the exemplary case of an LWD tool, the drilling engineer may schedule replacement of the tool 10 if its statistical reliability falls below 0.80 (80%) even though the tool continues to be fully functional.).
One of ordinary skill in the art would be aware of both the Foucault and the Grayson references since both pertain to the field of telemetry downhole systems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have improved the drilling system of Foucault with the equipment feature as disclosed by Grayson to achieve predictable results and gain the functionality of updating and/or predicting statistical reliability for devices using reliability prediction models, operating a downhole device, and updating (e.g. at the rig site) a reliability prediction model for the downhole device using at least one of a downhole condition and an amount of time the downhole device is used downhole.
Regarding claim 8, Foucault in view Grayson discloses the method of claim 7, wherein the data related to the one or more drilling operations comprises at least one of a ROP and GAMMA data (Foucault par[0033]: The offset well log data received by processing system that is associated with borehole 14 and other offset well data may include, for example well logs that incorporate caliper, Gamma Ray, Spectral Gamma Ray, Resistivity, Spontaneous Potential, Sonic, Neutron and Density, Photoelectric, and NMR data. Well log data may further include survey-deviation, UTM coordinates, and information from mud logs including geologic and formation tops information. The offset well log data may further include drilling data such as: bit performance data, bit Records, and drilling parameters such as rate of penetration (ROP), weight on bit (WOB), revolutions per minute (RPM), torque, flow rate).
Regarding claim 9, Foucault in view Grayson discloses the method of claim 7, further comprising: sending, by the computer system, an alert signal to the control system responsive to the deviation between the modified one or more drilling parameters and the one or more drilling parameters being above the predetermined value therefor (Grayson par[0037]: In accordance with embodiments of the invention, the surface or rig site computer 314 may track actual use time of the LWD tool 10, and substantially simultaneously update the reliability prediction model, which may have been previously provided or acquired from the central computer 310 (not shown in FIG. 5). The field engineer may thus determine the current statistical reliability of the downhole tool 10, and if the statistical reliability falls below a predetermined threshold, the tool may be tagged to be removed from the drill string and replaced with a downhole device whose statistical reliability may stay above the predetermined threshold. The tool removed from the drill string may be used in other, less harsh, environments, or the tool may be subjected to maintenance.).
Regarding claim 10, Foucault in view Grayson discloses the method of claim 7, wherein the one or more drilling parameters comprises at least one of WOB (Foucault par[0033]: The offset well log data may further include drilling data such as: bit performance data, bit Records, and drilling parameters such as rate of penetration (ROP), weight on bit (WOB)), flow rate of mud (Foucault par[0033]: The offset well log data may further include drilling data such as: bit performance data, bit Records, and drilling parameters such as rate of penetration (ROP), weight on bit (WOB), revolutions per minute (RPM), torque, flow rate.), toolface orientation (Foucault fig 3:118; par[0048]: The column 118 lists the deviation of each well. Deviation may be considered because mechanical properties commonly vary as a function of deviation. Additionally, deviation values are preferably taken into account in defining well profile), and bit selection (Foucault par[0044], [0045]: in simulating the performance of a drill bit, drill bit design parameters such as number of blades, cutter type, bit profile, sharp slope, dull slope, friction slope, wear exponent, max work, initial contact area, and final contact area may be selectively adjusted and compared with the simulated performance of other drill bits. The results of the simulation may then be analyzed and the attributes of the bit (such as bit profile, number of cutters, cutter size and other suitable parameters) may be modified. The performance of the modified drill bit may then be simulated and compared with the performance of the original bit.).
Regarding claim 11, Foucault in view Grayson discloses the method of claim 7, wherein the event occurrence comprises at least one of an unplanned geological reading (Foucault (fig 7; par[0039], [0051][0060]: A geologic context may include any discretely defined drilling environment. For example, a geologic context may include portions of a drilling environment that have rock strength of a given interval (such as a having a rock strength between 15 Kpsi and 40 Kpsi. The mechanical properties, in this example--rock strength technically equivalent to unplanned geological reading, of the formations of the three or more offset wells are assessed 304. The rock strength assessment may be performed using a rock strength model as described in U.S. Pat. No. 5,767,399 or any other suitable rock strength model. Next the rock strength data from the offset wells is synthesized 306. The synthesized field data is then analyzed and one of more drilling contexts of interest are selected. FIG. 7 shows a graphical comparison 400 of multiple drill bits within a geologic context of rock strength from 15-40 Kpsi.)), an equipment malfunction (Grayson par[0034]: Once the predicted statistical reliability calculation is made, a determination is made as to whether the downhole device's predicted statistical reliability is above a predetermined reliability (block 418). If the candidate downhole device's predicted statistical reliability falls below the predetermined threshold, the particular device may be unsuitable for the potential project, and a new candidate device may be selected (block 412).), and a maintenance period (Grayson par[0038]: The rig site computer 314 may combine the actual use time with the downhole temperature and vibration data, and update the reliability prediction model for the LWD tool 10. In this way, the field engineer knows, in substantially real-time, the statistical reliability of the LWD tool=10 and may take note of when the statistical reliability as predicted by the reliability prediction module falls below a predetermined threshold. If the LWD tool 10, or any downhole device for which this information is tracked, falls below the predetermined threshold, the field engineer may schedule the downhole device for maintenance or repair while the downhole device is still downhole, and also replace the downhole device with a new or rebuilt device after the next "tripping" of the drill string. In the exemplary case of an LWD tool, the drilling engineer may schedule replacement of the tool 10 if its statistical reliability falls below 0.80 (80%) even though the tool continues to be fully functional.).
Regarding claim 12, Foucault in view of Grayson discloses the method of claim 7, further comprising: comparing, by the computer system, a projected well path drilled in accordance with the modified one or more drilling parameters and a planned well path for the wellbore (Foucault par[0050], [0054]: The method begins 208 by collecting data from offset wells 210 technically equivalent to the measured boreholes. In the present embodiment, offset well data must be obtained for at least three offset wells that are located in proximity to the location of the new well that is desired to be drilled technically equivalent to the planned borehole. For the purposes of this disclosure, an offset well may be considered to be any well located within the same field as the well that is desired to be drilled and whose lithology and drilling data may (in combination with information from other offset wells) be useful in the prediction of the drilling performances of the new well to be drilled. During the drilling of the new wellbore, well logs from the new well bore may be analyzed in real time. This real time analysis may include comparing the performance of the actual performance of the drilling device with the predicted performance of the drilling device).
Regarding claim 14, Foucault discloses a non-transitory, computer readable medium comprising instructions that, when executed by a processor, causes the processor to:
receive, by a computer system, an indication of an event occurrence, wherein the indication is based at least in part on data related to one or more drilling operations associated with a wellbore (par[0037]: The processing system 52 operates to synthesize well logs from multiple offset wells. The drilling performance of the selected wellbore are synthesized by first collecting data from offset wells. The data is preferably selected in order to be significant for the next field development. Next the lithology, porosity, mechanical properties are evaluated. Next, multi-well statistical studies are conducted in order to determine the geological field trends. The field trends may include variations of lithology, mechanical properties, thickness, depth of formation, and dips in function of the well location. The statistical studies may include, for instance: averages, histograms for dispersion evaluation, cross sections, cross plots graphs to study the correlation between a set of parameters, and mappings.), wherein the event occurrence comprises at least one of a path difference between a measured borehole and a planned borehole (par[0050], [0054]: The method begins 208 by collecting data from offset wells 210 technically equivalent to the measured boreholes. In the present embodiment, offset well data must be obtained for at least three offset wells that are located in proximity to the location of the new well that is desired to be drilled technically equivalent to the planned borehole. For the purposes of this disclosure, an offset well may be considered to be any well located within the same field as the well that is desired to be drilled and whose lithology and drilling data may (in combination with information from other offset wells) be useful in the prediction of the drilling performances of the new well to be drilled. During the drilling of the new wellbore, well logs from the new well bore may be analyzed in real time. This real time analysis may include comparing the performance of the actual performance of the drilling device with the predicted performance of the drilling device), and an unplanned geological reading (fig 7; par[0039], [0051][0060]: A geologic context may include any discretely defined drilling environment. For example, a geologic context may include portions of a drilling environment that have rock strength of a given interval (such as a having a rock strength between 15 Kpsi and 40 Kpsi. The mechanical properties, in this example--rock strength technically equivalent to unplanned geological reading, of the formations of the three or more offset wells are assessed 304. The rock strength assessment may be performed using a rock strength model as described in U.S. Pat. No. 5,767,399 or any other suitable rock strength model. Next the rock strength data from the offset wells is synthesized 306. The synthesized field data is then analyzed and one of more drilling contexts of interest are selected. FIG. 7 shows a graphical comparison 400 of multiple drill bits within a geologic context of rock strength from 15-40 Kpsi.);
determine, by the computer system, a predicted impact of the event occurrence, wherein the predicted impact is based at least in part on data related to one or more drilling parameters and the event occurrence (par[0053], [0054]: After completion of the simulation, the performance of the different drilling devices or drilling parameters is analyzed and the design of the drilling device (in this case a fixed cutter drill bit) is modified using drilling design utilities 220. In some embodiments drilling design utilities may be associated with an Application Design Engineer or another operator to facilitate the modifications to the drill bit design. The performance of the modified drilling device may then be simulated for the desired wellbore and compared with the original or unmodified drilling device. The process may be repeated until an optimized drill bit has been identified. This real time analysis may include comparing the performance of the actual performance of the drilling device with the predicted performance of the drilling device. The predicted performance of the drilling device is preferably previously determined utilizing a well prognosis of the new wellbore. The wellbore profile typically includes the expected geology of the wellbore.);
modify, by the computer system, the one or more drilling parameters based at least in part on the predicted impact of the event occurrence (fig 5:222; par[0053], [0055]: After completion of the simulation, the performance of the different drilling devices or drilling parameters is analyzed and the design of the drilling device (in this case a fixed cutter drill bit) is modified using drilling design utilities 220. In some embodiments drilling design utilities may be associated with an Application Design Engineer or another operator to facilitate the modifications to the drill bit design. The performance of the modified drilling device may then be simulated for the desired wellbore and compared with the original or unmodified drilling device. The process may be repeated until an optimized drill bit has been identified. The optimized drilling device or parameter is then recommended 222 and the method ends 224 until the desired the desired wellbore is drilled and a subsequent wellbore is desired to be drilled in the field. As the new wellbore is drilled, the performance of the selected drilling device using the selected drilling parameter may be compared with the anticipated performance for the portion of the wellbore that has been drilled. In the event that the actual performance deviates significantly from the predicted performance, the actual drilling data may be re-synthesized with the existing offset well data to determine whether drilling device selection or drilling parameters should be modified to optimize the drilling of the well. In many cases this may involve re-evaluating the selection of the critical context for the new wellbore.); and
send, by the computer system, the modified one or more drilling parameters to a control system of a drilling rig to drill the wellbore based at least in part on the modified one or more drilling parameters responsive to a deviation between the modified one or more drilling parameters and the one or more drilling parameters being below a predetermined value therefor (par[0058]: Following selection of an optimized drilling device it is determined whether the drilling performance of the new wellbore is to optimized in real time. If so, then during the drilling of the new wellbore, the actual drilling performance may be compared with the predicted drilling performance of the new wellbore. If the actual drilling performance deviates significantly (in a negative manner) from the predicted performance, the evaluation and selection of drilling contexts may be reconsidered. This may include incorporating drilling data that is obtained in real time or substantially in real time during the drilling of the new wellbore (as in steps 300 and 332 below) into field synthesis and using the newly obtained data to perform a new iteration of the present method.).
Foucault does not explicitly disclose the drilling system wherein the event occurrence comprises at least one of an equipment malfunction, and an upcoming maintenance period.
Grayson discloses the drilling system wherein the event occurrence comprises at least one of an equipment malfunction (par[0034]: Once the predicted statistical reliability calculation is made, a determination is made as to whether the downhole device's predicted statistical reliability is above a predetermined reliability (block 418). If the candidate downhole device's predicted statistical reliability falls below the predetermined threshold, the particular device may be unsuitable for the potential project, and a new candidate device may be selected (block 412).), and an upcoming maintenance period (par[0038]: The rig site computer 314 may combine the actual use time with the downhole temperature and vibration data, and update the reliability prediction model for the LWD tool 10. In this way, the field engineer knows, in substantially real-time, the statistical reliability of the LWD tool=10 and may take note of when the statistical reliability as predicted by the reliability prediction module falls below a predetermined threshold. If the LWD tool 10, or any downhole device for which this information is tracked, falls below the predetermined threshold, the field engineer may schedule the downhole device for maintenance or repair while the downhole device is still downhole, and also replace the downhole device with a new or rebuilt device after the next "tripping" of the drill string. In the exemplary case of an LWD tool, the drilling engineer may schedule replacement of the tool 10 if its statistical reliability falls below 0.80 (80%) even though the tool continues to be fully functional.).
One of ordinary skill in the art would be aware of both the Foucault and the Grayson references since both pertain to the field of telemetry downhole systems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have improved the drilling system of Foucault with the equipment feature as disclosed by Grayson to achieve predictable results and gain the functionality of updating and/or predicting statistical reliability for devices using reliability prediction models, operating a downhole device, and updating (e.g. at the rig site) a reliability prediction model for the downhole device using at least one of a downhole condition and an amount of time the downhole device is used downhole.
Regarding claim 15, Foucault in view of Grayson discloses the non-transitory, computer readable medium of claim 14, wherein the data related to the one or more drilling operations comprises at least one of a ROP and GAMMA data (Foucault par[0033]: The offset well log data received by processing system that is associated with borehole 14 and other offset well data may include, for example well logs that incorporate caliper, Gamma Ray, Spectral Gamma Ray, Resistivity, Spontaneous Potential, Sonic, Neutron and Density, Photoelectric, and NMR data. Well log data may further include survey-deviation, UTM coordinates, and information from mud logs including geologic and formation tops information. The offset well log data may further include drilling data such as: bit performance data, bit Records, and drilling parameters such as rate of penetration (ROP), weight on bit (WOB), revolutions per minute (RPM), torque, flow rate).
Regarding claim 16, Foucault in view of Grayson discloses the non-transitory, computer readable medium of claim 14, wherein the instructions further comprise instructions that, when execute by the processor, causes the processor to:
send, by the computer system, an alert signal to the control system responsive to the deviation between the modified one or more drilling parameters and the one or more drilling parameters being above the predetermined value therefor (Grayson par[0037]: In accordance with embodiments of the invention, the surface or rig site computer 314 may track actual use time of the LWD tool 10, and substantially simultaneously update the reliability prediction model, which may have been previously provided or acquired from the central computer 310 (not shown in FIG. 5). The field engineer may thus determine the current statistical reliability of the downhole tool 10, and if the statistical reliability falls below a predetermined threshold, the tool may be tagged to be removed from the drill string and replaced with a downhole device whose statistical reliability may stay above the predetermined threshold. The tool removed from the drill string may be used in other, less harsh, environments, or the tool may be subjected to maintenance.).
Regarding claim 17, Foucault in view of Grayson discloses the non-transitory, computer readable medium of claim 14, wherein the one or more drilling parameters comprises at least one of WOB(Foucault par[0033]: The offset well log data may further include drilling data such as: bit performance data, bit Records, and drilling parameters such as rate of penetration (ROP), weight on bit (WOB)), flow rate of mud (Foucault par[0033]: The offset well log data may further include drilling data such as: bit performance data, bit Records, and drilling parameters such as rate of penetration (ROP), weight on bit (WOB), revolutions per minute (RPM), torque, flow rate.), toolface orientation (Foucault fig 3:118; par[0048]: The column 118 lists the deviation of each well. Deviation may be considered because mechanical properties commonly vary as a function of deviation. Additionally, deviation values are preferably taken into account in defining well profile), and bit selection (Foucault par[0044], [0045]: in simulating the performance of a drill bit, drill bit design parameters such as number of blades, cutter type, bit profile, sharp slope, dull slope, friction slope, wear exponent, max work, initial contact area, and final contact area may be selectively adjusted and compared with the simulated performance of other drill bits. The results of the simulation may then be analyzed and the attributes of the bit (such as bit profile, number of cutters, cutter size and other suitable parameters) may be modified. The performance of the modified drill bit may then be simulated and compared with the performance of the original bit.).
Regarding claim 18, Foucault in view of Grayson discloses the non-transitory, computer readable medium of claim 14, wherein the event occurrence comprises at least one of an unplanned geological reading (Foucault (fig 7; par[0039], [0051][0060]: A geologic context may include any discretely defined drilling environment. For example, a geologic context may include portions of a drilling environment that have rock strength of a given interval (such as a having a rock strength between 15 Kpsi and 40 Kpsi. The mechanical properties, in this example--rock strength technically equivalent to unplanned geological reading, of the formations of the three or more offset wells are assessed 304. The rock strength assessment may be performed using a rock strength model as described in U.S. Pat. No. 5,767,399 or any other suitable rock strength model. Next the rock strength data from the offset wells is synthesized 306. The synthesized field data is then analyzed and one of more drilling contexts of interest are selected. FIG. 7 shows a graphical comparison 400 of multiple drill bits within a geologic context of rock strength from 15-40 Kpsi.)), an equipment malfunction (Grayson par[0034]: Once the predicted statistical reliability calculation is made, a determination is made as to whether the downhole device's predicted statistical reliability is above a predetermined reliability (block 418). If the candidate downhole device's predicted statistical reliability falls below the predetermined threshold, the particular device may be unsuitable for the potential project, and a new candidate device may be selected (block 412).), and a maintenance period (Grayson par[0038]: The rig site computer 314 may combine the actual use time with the downhole temperature and vibration data, and update the reliability prediction model for the LWD tool 10. In this way, the field engineer knows, in substantially real-time, the statistical reliability of the LWD tool=10 and may take note of when the statistical reliability as predicted by the reliability prediction module falls below a predetermined threshold. If the LWD tool 10, or any downhole device for which this information is tracked, falls below the predetermined threshold, the field engineer may schedule the downhole device for maintenance or repair while the downhole device is still downhole, and also replace the downhole device with a new or rebuilt device after the next "tripping" of the drill string. In the exemplary case of an LWD tool, the drilling engineer may schedule replacement of the tool 10 if its statistical reliability falls below 0.80 (80%) even though the tool continues to be fully functional.).
Regarding claim 19, Foucault in view of Grayson discloses the non-transitory, computer readable medium of claim 14, wherein the drilling rig includes a BHA, wherein the instructions further comprise instructions that, when execute by the processor, causes the processor to:
compare, by the computer system, a projected well path drilled in accordance with the modified one or more drilling parameters and a planned well path for the wellbore (Foucault par[0050], [0054]: The method begins 208 by collecting data from offset wells 210 technically equivalent to the measured boreholes. In the present embodiment, offset well data must be obtained for at least three offset wells that are located in proximity to the location of the new well that is desired to be drilled technically equivalent to the planned borehole. For the purposes of this disclosure, an offset well may be considered to be any well located within the same field as the well that is desired to be drilled and whose lithology and drilling data may (in combination with information from other offset wells) be useful in the prediction of the drilling performances of the new well to be drilled. During the drilling of the new wellbore, well logs from the new well bore may be analyzed in real time. This real time analysis may include comparing the performance of the actual performance of the drilling device with the predicted performance of the drilling device).
2. Claim(s) 13 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Foucault in view of Grayson, and further in view of Theocharopoulos (PatentUS5538091).
Regarding claim 13, Foucault in view of Grayson does not explicitly disclose the method wherein the drilling rig includes a BHA, wherein the BHA is replaced with a second BHA responsive to the projected well path deviating from the planned well path outside a defined margin of error.
Theocharopoulos discloses the method wherein the drilling rig includes a BHA, wherein the BHA is replaced with a second BHA responsive to the projected well path deviating from the planned well path outside a defined margin of error (col 1 ln 35-43: Once the bit is oriented in the appropriate direction, it is rotated by means of the downhole motor, weight being applied to the bit from the surface in the usual manner but without rotation of the drillstring, and so is allowed to drill ahead in the desired direction. Once the trajectory of the borehole has deviated to the required degree, the drillstring is pulled from the well and the BHA replaced with a rotary BHA, and rotary drilling recommences to drill straight ahead or deviate in the conventional manner).
One of ordinary skill in the art would be aware of the Foucault, Grayson and Theocharopoulos references since all pertain to the field of telemetry downhole systems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have improved the drilling system of Foucault with the equipment feature as disclosed by Theocharopoulos to achieve predictable results and gain the functionality of improving drilling efficiency, ensuring wellbore quality, and reducing long-term operational costs.
Regarding claim 20, Foucault in view of Grayson does not explicitly disclose the non-transitory, computer readable medium wherein the BHA is replaced with a second BHA responsive to the projected well path deviating from the planned well path outside a defined margin of error.
Theocharopoulos discloses the non-transitory, computer readable medium wherein the drilling rig includes a BHA, wherein the BHA is replaced with a second BHA responsive to the projected well path deviating from the planned well path outside a defined margin of error (col 1 ln 35-43: Once the bit is oriented in the appropriate direction, it is rotated by means of the downhole motor, weight being applied to the bit from the surface in the usual manner but without rotation of the drillstring, and so is allowed to drill ahead in the desired direction. Once the trajectory of the borehole has deviated to the required degree, the drillstring is pulled from the well and the BHA replaced with a rotary BHA, and rotary drilling recommences to drill straight ahead or deviate in the conventional manner).
One of ordinary skill in the art would be aware of the Foucault, Grayson and Theocharopoulos references since all pertain to the field of telemetry downhole systems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have improved the drilling system of Foucault with the equipment feature as disclosed by Theocharopoulos to achieve predictable results and gain the functionality of improving drilling efficiency, ensuring wellbore quality, and reducing long-term operational costs.
Conclusion
US2011/0215809A1 to Legendre discloses a method to determine a characteristic of a subsurface formation using electromagnetic coupling components. A downhole logging tool having one or more transmitters and one or more receivers, and being capable of measuring the electromagnetic coupling components is provided. The electromagnetic coupling components are measured using the downhole logging tool and used to form a 3-D Lateral Indicator and/or a 3-D Longitudinal Indicator.
US2008/0173481A1 to Menezes discloses drilling systems offer multiple methods providing access to the open borehole without first tripping the drill string. In some embodiments, a drill bit has a tool port that is blocked by a plug during normal drilling operations. When a tool is deployed through the interior of the drill string, the tool port opens, enabling the tool to enter the borehole beneath the drill string and perform logging or sampling operations. The plug may be attached to the drill bit by a hinge or pivot, or alternatively, the plug may be discarded and a replacement seated in place after the tool is retracted into the drill string.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMINE BENLAGSIR whose telephone number is (571)270-5165. The examiner can normally be reached (571)270-5165.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Steven Lim can be reached at (571) 270-1210. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/AMINE BENLAGSIR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2688