| Literature DB >> 30126138 |
Bo Dang1, Ling Yang2, Changzan Liu3, Yahong Zheng4, Hui Li5, Ruirong Dang6, Baoquan Sun7.
Abstract
Borehole transient electromagnetic (TEM) techniques have been proven to be efficient for nondestructive evaluations (NDEs) of metal casings using eddy-current properties. However, physical limitations and bad borehole conditions restrict the use of eddy-current sensors, which makes downhole casing inspections very different from those of conventional NDE systems. In this paper, we present a uniform linear multi-coil array-based borehole TEM system for NDEs of downhole casings. On the basis of the borehole TEM signal model, a numerical multi-coil array approach using the Gauss⁻Legendre quadrature is derived. The TEM response can be divided into two independent parts related to the transmitting-receiving distance (TRD) and the observation time and casing thickness. Using this property, the signal received by the multi-coil array is weighted to cancel the influence of the TRDs of the different array elements to obtain the optimal response according to the linearly constrained minimum variance criterion, which can be shown to be identical to that of achieving the maximum signal-to-noise ratio. The effectiveness of the proposed method was verified by applying the uniform linear multi-coil array to a borehole TEM system for NDEs of oil-well casings. Field experiments were conducted, and the results demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed method.Entities:
Keywords: borehole; multi-coil array; non-destructive evaluation; transient electromagnetic techniques
Year: 2018 PMID: 30126138 PMCID: PMC6111724 DOI: 10.3390/s18082707
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Linear multi-coil array-based borehole transient electromagnetic (TEM) system.
Figure 2The weighting structure of the linear multi-coil array output.
Figure 3Experimental metal casing structures with different types of thickness changes: (a) three types of thickness changes with spacings of 20 cm (marked with casing A) and (b) four types of thickness changes with spacings of 10 cm (marked with casing B).
Parameters of the multi-coil array sensor and the field experiment.
| Parameter | Symbol | Value |
|---|---|---|
| Radius of the multi-coil array sensor |
| 12 mm |
| Number of receiving coils |
| 8 |
| Inter-element spacing | Δ | 20 mm |
| Transmitting–receiving distances | z1–z | 20–160 mm |
| Number of transmitting coil turns |
| 19 |
| Number of receiving coil turns |
| 62 |
| Tool housing inner radius |
| 18.5 mm |
| Tool housing outer radius |
| 21.5 mm |
| Standardized casing inner radius |
| 62.13 mm |
| Standardized casing outer radius |
| 69.85 mm |
| Cement ring outer radius |
| 88.9 mm |
Figure 4Normalized induced electromagnetic forces (EMFs) of the eight receivers of the linear multi-coil array for casing A at (a) 20 ms and (b) 40 ms.
Figure 5Normalized induced electromagnetic forces (EMFs) of the eight receivers of the linear multi-coil array for casing B at (a) 20 ms and (b) 40 ms.
Figure 6Comparison of the normalized induced electromagnetic forces (EMFs) between the traditional receiver and the linear multi-coil array for casing A at (a) 20 ms and (b) 40 ms.
Figure 7Comparison of the normalized induced electromagnetic forces (EMFs) between the traditional receiver and the linear multi-coil array for casing B at (a) 20 ms and (b) 40 ms.
Figure 8Normalized root-mean-square error (RMSE) of different inter-element spacings.