h.
lADC/SPE 11382
Calculation of NMDC Length Required for Various
Latitudes Developed From Field Measurements of Drill
String Magnetisation
by S.J. (%indrod and J.M. Wolff, Konlnkh’jke/She//Exploratie & Producktie Lab.
Copyright 1983, lADC/SPE 1983 Drilling Conference
This paper was presented at the lADC/SPE 1983 Drilling Conference held in New Orleans, Louisiana, February 20-23,
1983. The material is subject to correction by the author. Permission to copy is restricted to an abstract of not more than
300 words. Write SPE, 6200 North Central Expressway, Drawer 64706, Dallas, Texas 75206.
One possible source of error in magnetic surveys
is ill based charts used for selecting the required
length of non-magneticdrill collar (NMDC). Baaed on
kheoreti.calconsiderationsand measurementsof pOle-
strength values in the field, well-defined charte can
be constructed for the selection of the minimum
tequiredNMDC length for a specific bottom hole
assembly and acceptable azimuth error.
INTRODUCTION
In recent years there has been an increasing
awarenessof poseible sources of error in directional
surveys. Comparison of magnetic and gyroscopic surveys
has shown systematic errors of up to 15° in azimuth.
W previously reported’, some of the eources of error
for magnetic survey toola result from drill-string
magnetisationeffects when too short a length of non-
magnetic drill collar (NMDC) ie used. Usually, the
NUDC length required is determi.nedbyusing non-
magnetic drill collar select:on charts. Since there is
little published informationou drill-etringmagnetic-
ation, the derivation,validity and limitationsof
these charts are, at least questionable In some cases
the cnarte appear to be based on pusely empirical
data! To reduce errors in magnetic surveys from this
eource, 10minklijke/BhellExploratie en Produktie
Lslxmatoriumhas made a study of drill-string
magnetisationwhich included measurements of magnetis-
ation of drill-stringcomponentsboth at the surface
and downhole. Furthermore, a theory has been developed
to extend tha area of applicationof the observed data
from the North Sea aree to other latitudes.
Finally, using these data, a general procedure
has been derived for determining the regpired length
of NMDC and the optimum spacing of the compass within
that length? for a specified acceptable maximum
compass error.
217
IADCISPE
Erroneous Magnetic fields in NMDC Sections
—
A drill string in use is in essentially static
orientation relative to the earth’s magnetic:field and
will become magnetised. Since the drill string ie long
and slender and ie rotated, this magnetisation is
orientated along the drill-stringaxis. &t the bit an~
above and below the NMDC section the magnetic flux is
forced to leave the steel, i.e. magnetic poles occur.
The strength of a magnetic pole Is defined ae equal tc
the magnetic flux that leavee or enters the steel at
the pole poeition and is expressed in weber (Wb). (~
practice, the micrcwsber (11~) is a more convenient
subunit.) At Northern latitudes, for imetence in the
North sea area, the upper pole above the NMDC section
is normally positive, whereas the lower pole is
negative (Fig. 1).
A compass placed near a magnetic body aligns
iteelf according to the total maqnetic field, which is
the vectorial sum of the earth%e magnetio field and
the field of the magnetic kmdy. The magnetic field
strength (officiallyflux dencity) at a distance r
from a magnetic monopole is equal to the quotient of
the flu%,-or pole st;ength, P; and the ar;a of a
sphere of radius r, around the pole, i.e.
P
B(r) =— **.... ● 1)
4nr2
In the SI-eystem,B ie expreesed in Tesla (T),
although in practice the microteela (1.IT)
is used
In a non-magneticsection of a drill string the
erroneous magnetic field is caused by the magnet;c
bodies above-and below the section, and is o&entated
in axial direction (Fig. 1). Taking acoount of the
three poles at the bottom of the drill etring, the
erroneous field (&z) is given by
IPul IPJ IPJ
ABz(z) = 2+—- (2)
2
4fi
(L-z) 4nz2 4m(z+LB1T)
where !pUladnlpLl are the moduli of the pole
strengths, respectively immediatelyabove and below
the NMDC section~ L is the length of Nt4DCsection, L-z
and z are the distances between the observed position
z and the upper and lower pole respectively,whilst
 is the length of the piece of drill string below
W’NMDC seation. Worn Fig. 1 it can be seen that
,hereis an optimum spacing Z. ~ where the error field
e a minimum Ibis is where th~ compass should be
Laced.
JOLE-SZWZNGTHVALUES
Field measurementswere made both at eurface and
[ownholein a number of wells in the Netherlands. (See to find the axial error field (AB ) at the optimum
~ppendicesA and B). The foLlc+?ingpole strengths were compass spacing (z. t). The incrcu?entsof the length
)bservadand ueed for calculations:
~er pole (PU)
Irillcollars (pin)? up to +900 Ilwb
landlines, up to +20 Ilwb Zquation (3) is now re-arrangedto give
.owerpole (PL)
kabilisers and bit (box)~ up to -90
10 m drill collar below NMDC (box), up to -300
?urbines(box)c Upto -1000
We: one turbine was found t~ have a pole strength as
— high as -3000 pWb. but this is considered to be
unrepressntetive.
It should be pointed out that the above pole strengths
are derived from a limited number of observations and
should be considered rather a conservativeupper
bound. A programme is underway to collect more data
that would allow a more precise definition of these
values.
Azimuth Zrror
——
m conventional~gnetic single and multiehot
instrument, the azimuth read by the compass is
determined by ths horizontal component of the earth’s
magnetic field. Srroneous drill-stringmagnetisation
influences the horizontal component, as follows.
The drill string is long and slender and is
rotated! therefore, the magnetic error field AB is
orientated along the drill-string axis. However; a
conventional compass unit responds to the horizontal
component of the eacth’s magnetic field. Hence, the
compase azimuth error depends on AB . sin x (Fig, 2),
the horizontal component. Figure 3 S%OWS how this
horizontal error field ccmponent and the earth’s
horizontal component (B ) produce the azimuth error
(AA). For small error f!!elde, which normally occur,
the azimuth error equals the ratio of the east/west
conpnent of the error vector (sin I . sin A . ABZ)
and the earth’a horizontal field (~).
sin I . sin A . ABZ.180
AA.
cos (DIP).IBI . m ● “**
where AA = azi~th error in degrees
x = tire-hole inclination
A = azimuth
DIP . earth’s MSgRetiC dip SSIgle
IB! = total magnitude of the earth’s magnetic NW
field
COS(DIP).(D)= horizontal component of earth”s
magnetic field
Hence, the compass azimuth error (AA) increases with
inclinationend also with a more easterly or westerly Assume in this case only two NMDCe (20 m) were used,
direction of the borehole.
Constructinga NMDC len~h Selection Chart
NMDC length selection charts can be constructed
as follws. First of all, the bottom hole assembly is
chosen, i.e. the bit and stabiliserbelow the NMDC
section, The upper and lower strengthe (Pu & P ) with
the length below the NMDC section (L~lT) can t~en be
used with equation (2) and a given length (L) of NMDC
(L) canbe the len& hof NMDc’s (say, 10 m). Examples
of these are given in Tables 1-4 for different
assemblies.
WA) AAacc.cos (DIP).IBI.n
ml sin I sin A = (4)
AB .180
Ilwb Zept
where AB=pt given L. from the appropriate table for a
is taken
is the acceptable azimuth error from
AA
acc
drill-stringmagnetisation (in degrees),
As discussed in ref. 1, thie error should
not exceed 0.25 degrees for good magnetic
surveys.
DIP and ]Bl are local values of dip and total field
magnitude for the area of the selection
chart. These values can be obtained from
sourcee such as ref. 2.
Hence, for a given bottomhole assembly and for
each NMDC length (L) a line of constant Sin I.Sin A
can be found.
A selection chart can then be produced by
plotting these lines on an azimuth-inclinationgraph.
Mis can be achievedby interpolatingbetween the
given lines of Sin X.Sin A ‘=0.1, 0.2, etc. to 1.0 on
the auxiliary graph (Fig. 4). ‘TOcomplete the chartt
the parameters chosen to produce the chart ehould be
given, together with the optimum spacing. k example
of a complete selection chart is given in Fig. 5, with
details of its derivation in Appendix C.
Using the NMDC selection Chart
To find the recommended length of NMDC section
for a particular assembly, the azimuth from north or
south and the inclinationof the borehole are used to
arrive at a point on the selection chart. For example~
referring to Fig. 5 and for tha conditions therein, a
borehole with an azimuth of 30° from North or South
and an inclinationof 60° requires between 30 and 40 m
(3)
of NMDC (actuallyabout 32 m). The decision to use
either three or four collars (30 or 40 m) is up to the
operator, but the chart can be used to estimate the
probable azimuth errors due to using a shorter NMDC
length than recommended.The compass error is
approximatelyinverselyproportional to the length of
squaredfii“e.
possible Azimuth error for length used
= acceptable azimuth error (length required 2
length used )
instead of the 32 m recommended,then the estimate of
218
ossible azimuth ekwor = 0.25 (~)2 = 0.64° TAWE 2 - MAGNITUDE AND POSITION OF MINIMUM ERRONEOUS
MAGNETIC FIELD IN NMDC SECTION
Iotethat thie value cannot ba used to correct eurvey
eaulta because, in practice, the actual pole BIT AND 10 m STEEL
trengths are not known.
Pu = 900 llwb
CONCLUSIONSAND RECOMMENDATIONS PL = 300 Wb
= 10III
‘BIT
) Basad on theoreticalconeiderationeand
measurementsof pale-strengthvalues in the field,
charts can be constructed for the selection of the L Zopt Zopt ‘ZOpt
minimum required NMDC length for a epeuific bottom- (m) (m) (%) (UT)
hole assembly and acceptable azimuth error.
Furthermore,the optimum spacing of the compasa 10 4.0 40.7 3.4
within that length can be determined. 20 S*O 40.2 00s0
30 11.9 39.6 0.34
!) E the maximum acceptable azimuth error due to 40 15.6 38.9 0.18
drill-stringmagnetisationie limited to 0.25° 50 19.1 3893 O*1I
(which ia taken to be the limit for good magnetic 60 22.6 37.7 0.075
surveys - see ref. 1), a comparison of these 70 26.0 37.2 0.054
results with some selection charts in current use 80 29.4 36.7 0.040
shw that these charts mey call for insufficient 90 32.6 36.3 0.031
NMDC length, particularly at high latitudes. 100 35.8 35.8 0.024

CKNWLEDGEMENTS

Thie study has been possible only by the efforts TABLE 3 - MAGNITUDE AND POSITION OF MINIMUM ERRONEOUS
lfmy people in various companies. considerable MAGNETIC FIELD IN WC SECTION
upport was given by shell International petroleum
laatechappijB.V., and practical data were provided by BIT ANO TURBINE
kderlandee Aerdolie Maatechappij B.V. and Skell U.K.
explorationand Production. We are Indebted to Sperry pu = 900 llwb
km Inc. and Russell Attitude systems for discussions PC = 1000 Ilwb
md co-operation in field teste. 10 m
‘BIT =
KXi’ERENCES
L zopt
1* Wolff, C.J.M. & de Wardtt J.P., Borehole position Zopt Bzopt
uncertainty - Analysis of measuring methods and (m) (m) (%) (IIT)
derivation of systematic error model. J.P.T.
Dec. 1981 pp. 2339-2350. 10 5.0 50.6 5.7
20 9 ●9 49.8 1.3
),0 Magnetic charts iseued by the hydrographer of the 30 14.6 48.8 0.54
British Royal Navy. 40 19.2 48.1 0.29
50 23.7 47.3 0.18
60 28.0 46.6 O*I2
TABLE 1 - MAGNITUDE AND POSITION OF MINIMUM ERRONZOUS 70 32.2 46.0 0.082
MAGNETIC FIE&D IN NNDC SECTION 80 36.3 45.4 0.061
90 40.4 44.9 0.047
BIT AND STABILISER 100 44.4 44.3 0.037

Pu = 900 llwb
PL = 90 llwb
2M
‘BIT =

L Zopt =Opt B2apt

(m) (m) (%) (uT)

10 3.0 30.0 1.8

20 5.6 28.1 0.45
30 8.0 26.8 0.19
40 10*2 25.7 O*IO
50 12.4 24.8 0.063
60 14.5 24.1 0.042
70 16.5 23.5 0.030
80 1s.4 23.0 0.023
90 20.3 22.5 0.018
100 22.1 22.1 0.014
 ‘A’ASLE Al - SURVSY OF RESULTS OF MACNETIC MZASURZMENTS
FABLE4 - MAGNITUDE ANO P(JSITIONOF MINW ERRONEOUS
MAGNETIC FIELD IN NMDC SECTION
ETVI sLIJA-2 LIR 43 ZANDT UNIT
31TAND TURBINE
MODSL PAFJiMETERs:
UPPER POLE PHI 900 780 180 780 II*
W = 900 IJwb LONER POLE PLO -310 -90 -120 -170 llwb
‘L = 3000 IJwb POSITION OF PHI 22.00 21.47 1s.30 7.1 Ill
10 m POSITION OF PLO 1.80 4.47 0.01 -3.5
‘BIT= OFFSET (ZERO) 0.21 -0.40 -0.12 0.0 u;
SRMS 0.030 0.089 0.101 0.052 MT
L =Opt z DERIVSO PARAMSTSRS:
opt ‘zOpt
rel.optimum
(m) (m) (%) ( uT) position 41 33 47 3s 9
ZHI - Z3iC 20.20 17.00 18.29 10.10 m
10 5.9 59.5 1002 actual NIDC length 19.27 16.50 17.93 9.73 m
20 1107 58.6 2.3 difference 0.93 0.s0 0.26 0.37 In
LBIT 13 4.7 8.2 1.9 m
30 17.3 57.5 0.92
40 22.6 56.6 0.48 MEASORZMZNT;
50 27.9 55.8 0.29 DSFTH 1980 2601 1050 1580
60 33.0 55.0 0.19 INCLINATION 22.7 45 21 1 d:g
70 54.3 0.13 AZ3MUTS 36 308 80 50 deg
38.0
80 42.9 53.7 0.096
90 47.8 53.1 0.073
100 52.5 52.5 0.057

APPENDIX B

MEASUREMENTSON SURFACE

APPENDIX A TO complement the downhole measurements,a number

,of drill collars, stabilisers and downhole motore were
DOWNHOLE MZASURZMENTS tested on the surface. The tests consisted in
measuring the axial magnetic error field at given
Four sets of measurementswere performed dcmrnhole distances from the component.
In wells in the Netherlandsto measure magnetic pole
strengths. lhe four bottom-hole assemblies are shown The drill collars or stabiliserswere laid on the
in Pig. Al. The test consisted in recurding the axial ground in a north-south position to reduce measurement
and oross magnetic fields every 0.5 m through the NMDC errors due to East/west misalignmentof the probe.
section of the string. The analysis of the results Vertical misalignmentwas minimised by using a long
assumed a simple two-pole model, ignoring the lower piece of timber as a supprt for the probes. Measure-
pole at the bit. The upper and lower pole strengths mente of the msgnetio fields were made both with (B)
and positions were found by varying the two-pole model and without the drill collars (Be) being present. The
parametersto minimise the standard deviation (BRMS) difference between these two series of measurements
of the differencesbetween the modelled and measured (B-Bo) was assumed to be due to the drill-stringcom-
axial error field (ABZ ABZwas), given by ponent under Investigation.
mod’
The strengths (P) and positions (ro) of the poles were
PH1 PLO found by fitting a theoretical curve
ABZmod = + ZERO
411(z-zHl)2 41T(Z-ZLO)2 P
Bz(r) = —
4n(r)2
BPJ!S= ~&~ (ABZmod - ABZmeas)2
where Bz(r) = axial magnetic field
1
P = pole strength
where ABZ = axial error field (MT) 2’ = distance from pole.
PHI = ~le strength at top of NMDC (Wb)
PLO = pole strength at bottom of NMDC (~~) For fitting, a graphical metho@!~using seml-
ZHl = position of top pole (m) logarithmicpaper (Fig. B.1) a transparent overlay of
ZLO = position of bottomhole (m) the theoretical results from a monople, was found to
ZZRO = offset of model (vT) be more suitable than the most advanced computer
BIUIS= standard deviation of residues (BT) program. These results are summarised In Tables B1 for
drill collars.
N = nu@3er of measurements

The results for the four assemblies are summarised in For stabilisersa dipole pattern of the magnetic
Table Al. field was found due to the-proximityof another pole
at the opposite end of the stabiliser.Assuming the
distance between the poles to be 2m,

I.nmA
 APPENDIX C
L.c. BZ=~-~,
4m 4T(r+2)2
EXAMPLE CONSTRUCTIONOF A SELECTION CHART
te pole etrengths in Table S2 were found.
First, for the area of application of the
Ie pole strengths found at the tops of turbines are selection charts, the local values of the earth’s
Lven in Table 83. magnetic dip angle (DIP) and the total earth’s
magnetic field strength (lEl) are obtained.

For the northern North Sea

llBLEB1 - OBSERVED POLE STRENGTHS AT D’.SLL-COLLAR
PIN DXP = 72°
ENDS IBI = 50 IJT
taken from chart ref. 2.
Diameter, Pole strength The acceptable azimuth error is ~ policy decision, but
(north orientation), in this example let &acc = 0.25 . Next, the assembly
inch Kwb
is cho?en. In this case, let us assume a bit and
stabiliserbelow the NMDC section.
7 ‘/2 !50
8 220
Using equation (2),
9 1~2 230
9 400
8 400 *B(Z1=J.EIL+M-+
8 500 z
4n(L-z) 41Tz2 4T(Z+LB1T)
9 1/2 680
8 950
with the pole strengths
pu = 900 llwb,
pL u 90 @b
- most cases the associated pele Fsitions were
ocated at the shoulder of the drill collar or a short and SIT = 2 “
istance inwards (maximum 0.3 m). the optimum compass spacing Zom and the corresponding
error field AB can be found for different lengths
of NMDC. In thfg?ase, the lengths were taken as
‘ASLES2 - OBSERVED POLE STRENGTHS AT STABILISER PIN multiples of 10 mtwhich is equivalent to one collar.
ENDS The results of this are shown in Table Cl. For each
length of NMDC (L) equation (4)
Body diem., Blade diem., Pole strength, AAacc.cos(DIP) IBl.m
●

inch inch uNb

SIN I.SINA=
.180
‘ZOPT
8 12 3/16 25
7 1/2 8 19/32 60
can be used to find the values of sin I . sin A for
9 1/2 26 70
each NMDC length (L). These results are given in Table
8 12 3/16 80 Cl. Using the auxiliary constructionchart (Fig. 4),
8 170 these lines of constant sin I . sin A can be plotted
9 17 1/2 380
to produce the example in Fig. 5.

The optimum compass spacing is given as 30% of

the NMDC length and is valid for all these lengths
,’ABLE
83 - OBSERVED POLE STRi3NGTHSAT THE ~P OF because the position of Z can vary by *5% in this
NEYFOR TORBODRXLLS case, without giving an a$~;eciable variation in
B
Zopt ●

Diameter, inch Pole strength,

llNb TABLE Cl - EXAMPLE CALCULATION FOR SELECTION CHART

9 1/ -1100 Constructed using

714 - 600 - AA : 0,25°
9 1/2 -3000* - dificc: 72°
- [B[ : 50 VT
: value from Table 1
~ ‘lhisvalue is associatedwith only one particular - ‘ZOPT
turbodrill and ‘1OOO VW is more representative.
L (m) SIN I SIN A

10 0.03
20 0015
30 0.36
40 0.67
50 1.08
 “i

too

2
J
I 50
z=L
upper pie (Pu)
I
1 x

I 2C
I!

=L
x

x
DISTANCE r (m)
1( , i
t 2 3 4 5
x

/
x
Imver pole (PL) x
— ABZ t x
J

“-l-
. LBIT x
x
,1 x
z = - LBIT x
bti pole (-PL)
x
x
, x
x
x
flG. 1
SKETCH OF MAGNETISED BOTTOMHOLE ASSEMBLY AND OF
EXTRANEOUS MAGNETIC FIELD (ABZ)
FIG. 01

OBSERVED AXIAL MAGNETIC FIELD (B - Bo]

dnlltcilars
&111ccJ0r5 nl!aucm ( 9 Y* “)
(7U) vcwbtj 6 ‘~”) — 34.26 m

.
stkitiir
-l— 2782m
—2ZSm
1.. tiatilwr
.-– W3 m

I
drill
dam
(94”1

2 NMOC 2 NNOC
117.9m)
i (19.27 m)

I s@’fi* - ““m
l165m

1-i- -—
.— 12.86 m
Swlliwr
—- 820m (2U)
NMOC stablllsef ~ m2r’jm
(973m) 1“ !0Z4m
.3E4)m
4.7Zm !-“ 11’lAnwdrdl
Dcmp@ ●atxliser

E!-
----—— 393m (L65m)
—-— 307m
DCn,pplr shaam~c — 284m

NB -
192m — 204m — 1.27 m WXbdl
stow!.?, N S stok *ilisw
Srahlisw —W2m
(lnm)
— — ;~m -Z.k Q~Tm M ——— 024m 8 —Om
Ml

‘i ZAND
43 LIR 43 BLIJA ETV .4

FIG. A+ BOTTOM- HOLE ASSEMBLIES

 NORTH

HORIZONTAL BN

I 130REHj~E DIRECTION
A Bz sin I I #ti~
I
1~~---
A 82 L EAST
r A9Z tin I sin A
VERTICAL
\ BOREHOLE

FIG. 3 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ABz

FIG. 2 AND AZIMUTH ERROR

90.0T-..
7---i7----

il
J
0’1

75”0- ----- ----

i
1’
/’
60*0 - ---” - +
I
/’
I

45”0 - ----+ ‘ -*
z I
o 1’
z
(
/
30”0 ----j .- .“
P
; f
II ‘

/’; ,

15”0 -“:./ ‘
%f\,
;If \
1’/, ;/
,1/
, I 1,’,~ ,
I/#; R.’ *
:%:. ~- - -- /
o
o
inclination EAST OR WEST

FiG.4

AUXILIARY GRAPH FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF NMDC SELECTION

CHARTS GIVING LINES OF dn 1* sin A= Ko(O*O

SK //3 f-Q
 ,
0+=-!- : !’ : : II 1 I I
, i90
o 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

INCLINATION EAST OR WEST

BHA BIT AND STABILISER

UPPER POLE STENGTH 900.000 AJWb

LOWER POLE STRENGTH 90.00 NWb

L bit 2.00 m

TOTAL MAGNETIC FIELD 50.000 AJT

MAGNETIC DIP 72.00 deg

ACCEPTABLE AZIMUTH ERROR 0“25 deg

COMPASS SPACING 30.00 ‘/0

FIG. 5

NON-MAGNETIC D.C. SELECTION CHART

//3.?4!