Patent Publication Number: US-2017352167-A1

Title: System and method for layered visualization of evaluation results

Description:
CLAIM OF PRIORITY 
     This patent application claims the benefit of priority, under 35 U.S.C. §119, to U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 62/344,545, filed Jun. 2, 2016 titled “ARTIFICIAL LIFT SELECTION LAYERED VISUALIZATION ELEMENT,” and to U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 62/344,581, filed Jun. 2, 2016 titled “METHOD FOR EVALUATING ARTIFICIAL LIFT FOR OIL WELLS.” The entire disclosures of both Provisional Application No. 62/344,545 and Provisional Application No. 62/344,581 are incorporated herein by reference. 
    
    
     BACKGROUND 
     This decision of determining the most suitable type of artificial lift to install in an oil/gas well can be a complex process involving many factors ranging from technical feasibility, operating costs, maintenance practices, reliability, target productions, engineering design, company preferences and other factors. These decisions are often made with limited analysis, often relying on individual knowledge and experience, leading to less than optimal solutions that can be based on an individual&#39;s bias and/or experience with lift types. As a result, a conventional lift type selection process incorporates a limited view of what is the most suitable overall solution. Often, the conventional process(es) do not include technical and lifecycle economic analysis for a wide spectrum of artificial lift types. 
     Determining the best type of artificial lift system to install in the well is a complex process involving many factors ranging from technical feasibility, operating costs, maintenance practices, reliability, target productions, engineering design, historical preferences, and expert hunches. 
     Conventional lift selector tools have gained limited industry acceptance. This lack of acceptance can be due to two reasons: a lack of sufficient validation across many wells, and a lack of an easy-to-use interface. Determining the best type of artificial lift system to install in the well is a complex process involving many factors ranging from technical feasibility, operating costs, maintenance practices, reliability, target productions, engineering design, historical preferences, and expert hunches. 
     There is a need for an expert-system based artificial lift selector tool that includes an ease-of-use output visualization having an intuitive and layered output visualization to present evaluation results in a manner for a user to quickly understand the best recommendation and its criteria. 
    
    
     
       BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS 
         FIG. 1  depicts an artificial lift evaluator system that includes a layered visualization element in accordance with embodiments; 
         FIG. 2  depicts a dynamic graphic user interface that includes a graphical representation of a layered visualization element in accordance with embodiments; and 
         FIG. 3  depicts a magnified view of the graphical representation of a layered visualization element of  FIG. 2  in accordance with embodiment. 
     
    
    
     DETAILED DESCRIPTION 
     Embodying devices and methods provide a layered visualization output element that presents artificial lift evaluation results. In some implementations there can be three layers, but embodiments are not so limited and other numbers of layers is within the scope of this disclosure. Embodying layered visualization output elements provides a user with a first layer of information that indicate (at a high-level) the feasibility score of each artificial lift type; a second layer that presents reasons on considerations determining the feasibility score of each lift type by category; and a third layer that indicates specific results to evaluation rules triggered by the combination of the artificial lift type and the particular well undergoing evaluation. 
     In accordance with embodiments, rules are applied in category groups that are commonly considered when selecting among lift types. However, the subcategories could represent whichever level of detail is of interest to the user. 
     These embodying visualization layers present the complex options and/or recommendations technical assessment from an artificial lift evaluation algorithm in an intuitive and layered manner. Presenting these technical assessments in this manner provides a user with better access to a well&#39;s options and/or recommendations so that a more informed decision can be made then the presentation provided by prior artificial lift selector tools. Embodying layered visualization elements provide a user with more than the prior art “black box” recommendation of a single artificial lift type. Rather, an embodying layered visualization output provides a user with better access to the recommendations. This layered visualization output provides a user with guidance and transparency into the evaluation result rationale, with the final decision being left to the user. 
       FIG. 1  depicts artificial lift evaluator system  100  including an embodying layered visualization element processor  135 , and evaluation data flow (depicted in a semantic model for purposes of discussion). In  FIG. 1 , dashed lines indicate referencing concepts defined in the model, whereas, solid-lines represent actual use for inference. System  100  includes lift evaluator model  170 , central controller  150 , data store  160 , and communication/data bus  155 . In the lift evaluator model, an embodying semantic model  105  can capture the subject matter expert knowledge, concepts, and paradigms. Rules  110  (contained in a data store) allow inference of additional knowledge from the model. Templates  115  guide data ingestion  120  (e.g., mapping) of input data  125  to the subject matter expert (SME) knowledge, concepts, and paradigms in semantic model  110  resulting in linked data  130 . The linked data retains connections between different pieces of information and can be viewed graphically and/or tabular in layered visualization element processor  135 . Queries  140  allow extracting relevant data from the model, and any rules that need to be applied on the ingested data for decision making are applied at the time of query execution. 
     Central controller  150  may be a processing unit, a field programmable gate array, discrete analog circuitry, digital circuitry, an application specific integrated circuit, a digital signal processor, a reduced instruction set computer processor, etc. The central controller can include internal memory (e.g., volatile and/or non-volatile memory devices). The central controller may access a computer application program stored in non-volatile internal memory, or stored in an external memory that can be connected to the central controller via an input/output (I/O) port. The computer program application may include code or executable instructions  365  that when executed may instruct or cause the central controller and other components to perform embodying methods 
     Central controller  150  can control artificial lift evaluator system  100  including layered visualization element processor  135  via communication/data bus  155 . Coupled to communication bus  155  is data store  160 . Data store  160  can contain the semantic model, rules, templates, evaluation results, and computer executable instructions. 
     In some embodiments, data store  160  is implemented in Random Access Memory (e.g., cache memory for storing recently-used data) and one or more fixed disks (e.g., persistent memory for storing the full database). Alternatively, data store  160  may implement an “in-memory” database, in which volatile (e.g., non-disk-based) memory (e.g., Random Access Memory) is used both for cache memory and for storing the full database. 
     In accordance with embodiments, results of the artificial lift evaluation can be presented by layered visualization element processor  135  on graphics display device  180 . The evaluation results can include a determination of different lift types being allowed or not allowed for a given well; any needed warning(s) for the allowed artificial lifts; and for artificial lifts that are allowed, a display of one or more scores that are assigned based on the number and severity of each of the warnings. These decisions can be based on analyzing one or more of three different types of rules—disallow rules, warning rules, and depth vs. volume rules. 
     In accordance with embodiments, the lift evaluator output can have three different categories of results: Disallowed, Warnings, and String Notes (a string format result for allowed lift types providing descriptions of further considerations for the operator). The disallowed, warnings, and string note outputs can be provided in a three column format. In an embodiment, the following columns can be included in the output: Lift Name (indicating the name of the lift with this output result); Rule Name (the rule that generated the output), and Reason (description of why this warning or disallow is issued for this lift). Other output format and presentation schemes are within the contemplation of this disclosure. 
     Based on the rule results from the semantic model, the score of each artificial lift is calculated. The score can be quantified as a relative metric. For purposes of this discussion, that relative metric is expressed as a percent fitness. Any artificial lifts that are disallowed are automatically assigned a disallowance score. For the lifts that are not disallowed, the initial score of 100% percent can be assigned. Then a predetermined amount is subtracted from the 100% depending on which warning(s) is issued for that lift, and the penalty associated with that warning. If the score of a lift goes below 0, then it is assigned a 0% fit. 
       FIG. 2  depicts dynamic graphic user interface  200  that includes layered visualization element graphical representation  260  in accordance with embodiments. Layered visualization element  260  displays comparison results of the artificial lift types with dynamic elements in a multi-layered functionality that aids in the rapid comprehension of these results to lead to a technical assessment by the user. 
       FIG. 3  depicts a magnified view of layered visualization element  260  in accordance with embodiments. An embodying layered visualization element presents results in multiple layers. In accordance with embodiments, as depicted in  FIGS. 2-3  results can be depicted in results matrix  205 . Rows  210  represent the artificial lift types under consideration (e.g., rod lift, ESP, PCP, etc.). Columns  215  represent categories of well technical details (e.g., wellbore geometry, fluid properties, production, infrastructure, environment, etc.). The categories of well technical details helps to differentiate among the lift types being considered. Each rule of the rules engine fits into one of the well technical detail categories. Score column  220  presents a feasibility score for each artificial lift type. By way of example, the score is displayed as a percentage of total fit. However, other rankings, representations, relative portrayals, and/or quantifications of the score is within the scope of this disclosure. 
     For purposes of this discussion, results matrix  205  is depicted as a rectangular table with shading in the cells. It should be readily understood that other depictions imparting the same comparison results in a layered visualization element (i.e., any shape, color scheme, and/or implementation) are within the scope of this disclosure. 
     Each cell of results matrix  205  visually depicts a first level of the comparison result by using row shading and/or coloring. A second level representing subcategories of the comparison is shown within the cell itself. A third level of the comparison for a highlighted cell of results matrix  205  can be shown in detailed text box  240 . 
     As an example, results matrix  205  indicates that artificial lift type ESP received a total fit score of 100%. In each of the five well technical detail category columns, the cells of the ESP row are completely filled with the same crosshatching (or, in other implementations, shading, coloring). By comparison, artificial lift type Rod Lift received a total fit score of 93%. In four of the five well technical detail category columns, the Rod Lift cells are completely filled with the same crosshatching (or shading, coloring). However, Rod Lift cell  225  is not uniformly filled. Rod lift cell  225  has three distinct fills—fill_ 1   230 , fill_ 2   232 , and fill_ 3   234 . From a quick visual inspection of results matrix  205  a user can discern based on the fill uniformity of each cell in the results matrix which artificial lift types are best suitable for a particular technical detail category of the well. In this manner, an embodying layered visualization element provides a quick identification as to which are the best, or worst, lift types for the well. For example, in the depicted illustration, a user can discern that the diagonal fill indicates the better lift types, and the solid grey indicates the worst lift types. Thus, a user can quickly identify their options in selecting a lift type for that well. 
     For example, with regard to highlighted Rod Lift cell  225 , within the wellbore geometry category there are two warnings (fill_ 2   232  and fill_ 3   234 ). The remaining rules for the wellbore geometry category were not violated by the Rod Lift artificial type lift (as indicated by the 100% ranking represented by diagonal fill_ 1   230 ). 
     In accordance with embodiments, the crosshatching (or shading, coloring) scheme can be selected to represent predetermined thresholds of rule results. For example, a fit of about greater than 80% can result in a diagonal hatching for that rule; a fit of about 20-80% can result in a horizontal crosshatching; and a fit of about less than 20% can result in a grey fill (denoting a disallow status) for that rule. In accordance with implementations, any disallow status can result in a 0% total fit rating for that artificial lift type for that well. 
     In accordance with embodiments, hovering a pointing device (e.g., mouse, touch screen pen, tablet stylus, user finger, cursor, etc.) over a cell can induce the display of a dynamic text and/or graphic element. This dynamic graphic element can display more information of relevance regarding the content of the data and results associated with that cell—e.g., configuration details regarding that well technical details, the lift type parameters, financial data (well production, operating costs), etc. 
     Embodying systems and methods of layered visualization element  260  provide the user with an interactive display of data from which the user can readily and rapidly determine rankings of available options along with the reasoning of the rankings. In accordance with embodiments, other visual presentation cues can be used in the layered visualization element. For example, the intensity of a cell&#39;s fill color could equate to the score ranking (lighter being less, darker being more). The visual presentation cues are selected so that a user can quickly identify problem areas for each lift type, and help to identify which sub-category is the problem area. 
     In accordance with some implementations, a shading scheme can be used as the visual presentation cues—darkest representing rules that passed; less dark representing rules that passed with minor penalty points; lighter representing rules that passed with a moderate penalty; lightest shading representing rules that passed with severe penalty; and white representing rules that failed resulting in a disallowance of that lift type. With such visual presentation cues, a user can rapidly scan for light/white cell fill(s) to quickly identify problem categories. Each cell can have multiple visual presentation cues representing results for respective rules. 
     In accordance with some implementations, instead of a shading scheme representing the counts of the number of rules passed with different levels of severity, the shading can be related to the percent score within the sub-category. Instead of multiple shades per cell, in accordance with this implementation there can be one shade. If a subcategory has a total of ten possible points, and the rules for the subcategory achieved nine points, the cell would have a dark shade. If only one point is achieved, the cell would have the light shade. Any table cell shading scheme (or visual representation cue) can be adopted and tied to quantifiable data. 
     With reference to  FIG. 3 , the selection of a cell can result in that cell being highlighted (e.g., color shift, border enhancement, or other visual cue) indicating its selection. The selection of a cell results in the display of text box  240  that provides a display of the analysis associated with the results of the selected cell. 
     For purposes of discussion, the depicted text box  240  is associated with Rod Lift/wellbore geometry cell  225 . The text box can dynamically update as additional analysis results are provided. The detailed analysis displayed in text box  240  provides details into why that particular category and lift type received the assigned score. Within the text box are shown the specific rules that received less than full score. Allows user to dive deep into the underlying technical assessment. 
     Once user identifies which row and sub-category is of interest, the user can select the cell to provide more details explaining why the sub-category is the problem. In accordance with embodiments, selecting a cell can update a table presented below the layered visualization element that provides (per row) every rule that was triggered and the amount of penalty points that were deducted for that rule. This allows the user to drill-down to the deepest level of the tool to understand why a subcategory (consequently a lift type) received the score it did. The user may agree or disagree with the detailed rules being triggered—so the purpose is for the user to have visibility into the underlying logic. 
     Additionally, selecting a cell can update metadata for that subcategory which is also dynamically updated above the detailed table (for example, artificial lift type, the category, the number of rules in that category, the number of warning rules triggered, and number of disallow rules triggered). 
     Although for purposes of discussion layered visualization element  260  is depicted in a rectangular table format, other formats and presentation schemes are within the contemplation of this disclosure. For example, the layered visualization element can be a pie-chart, a stacked-chart, a histogram, a bubble chart, or any other kind of representation. In accordance with some embodiments, the layered visualization element can be implemented as a hover box (a/k/a hover card), where a popup window can appear when a pointing device hovers over an icon. 
     In accordance with some embodiments, a computer program application stored in non-volatile memory or computer-readable medium (e.g., register memory, processor cache, RAM, ROM, hard drive, flash memory, CD ROM, magnetic media, etc.) may include code or executable instructions that when executed may instruct and/or cause a controller or processor to perform methods discussed herein such as a method for providing a layered visualization of evaluation results of disparate artificial lift types, as described above. 
     The computer-readable medium may be a non-transitory computer-readable media including all forms and types of memory and all computer-readable media except for a transitory, propagating signal. In one implementation, the non-volatile memory or computer-readable medium may be external memory. 
     Although specific hardware and methods have been described herein, note that any number of other configurations may be provided in accordance with embodiments of the invention. Thus, while there have been shown, described, and pointed out fundamental novel features of the invention, it will be understood that various omissions, substitutions, and changes in the form and details of the illustrated embodiments, and in their operation, may be made by those skilled in the art without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention. Substitutions of elements from one embodiment to another are also fully intended and contemplated. The invention is defined solely with regard to the claims appended hereto, and equivalents of the recitations therein.