Multimodal Jarring Assembly for Stuck Tool Relief

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Conventional methods for removing stuck tools in wellbore operations often require excessive force, leading to damage and increased costs due to the need for replacing damaged tool strings, as they primarily deliver impacts parallel to the tool axis, failing to effectively address forces normal to the borehole axis.

Innovation Solution

A jarring assembly with a plurality of impact surfaces is used to impart both axial and normal impact loads, inducing translational and rotational motions to alleviate stuck conditions by colliding these surfaces, allowing for multimodal jarring that overcomes forces normal to the borehole axis without causing damage.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If conventional single-axis jarring methods are used to free stuck tools, then the tool can be released from stuck conditions, but excessive force is applied causing damage to the tool string and requiring replacement

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetool string integrityVSAvoidimpact force
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSForce

Solution Approach 1:

The patent transitions from single-axis (axial) jarring to multi-axis jarring by incorporating lateral impact surfaces that can be activated to deliver impact forces in directions normal to the longitudinal axis. This dimensional expansion allows the jarring system to address stuck conditions caused by lateral forces without requiring excessive axial force that would damage the tool string.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #17Another dimension (Dimensionality change)

Solution Approach 2:

The jarring assembly is segmented into multiple independent impact mechanisms: axial impact surfaces for longitudinal force delivery and lateral impact surfaces for normal force delivery. This segmentation allows selective activation of appropriate impact directions based on the specific stuck condition, optimizing force application and minimizing tool damage.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

2Reliability

If conventional axial-only jarring is applied to overcome stuck conditions, then the tool may be freed, but forces normal to the borehole axis are not effectively addressed

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvestuck condition reliefVSAvoidjarring direction capability
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The jarring assembly is designed with universal applicability to handle various stuck condition mechanisms by providing both axial and lateral impact capabilities. The system can adapt to different sticking scenarios (e.g., key seating, bridge plugging, differential sticking) by selecting the appropriate impact direction, making it a versatile solution for diverse downhole challenges.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Solution Approach 2:

The invention adds lateral impact dimensions to the traditional axial jarring approach. Lateral impact surfaces positioned at angles to the longitudinal axis enable force application in multiple directions, allowing the system to effectively address stuck conditions caused by forces normal to the borehole axis that cannot be resolved by axial jarring alone.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #17Another dimension (Dimensionality change)

3Productivity

If high impact forces are used to free stuck tools, then the tool can be released, but tool string damage occurs requiring costly replacements and time-consuming interventions

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveoperation completion efficiencyVSAvoidtool string damage
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The patent changes the parameters of force application by introducing lateral impact components in addition to axial impact. This parameter modification allows the system to deliver effective jarring forces through combined multi-directional impacts rather than relying solely on high-magnitude axial forces, thereby freeing stuck tools while minimizing damage to the tool string and improving operational efficiency.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Applied Scientific Principles

This section explains which scientific principles are used to turn an abstract innovation direction into a practical engineering solution.

Function Achieved in This Case

This approach enables the successful release of stuck tools with reduced force, minimizing damage and allowing for efficient completion of operations by generating motion in multiple degrees of freedom, thereby reducing the need for costly tool replacements and time-consuming interventions.

Implementation Method 1

using a jarring assembly comprising a plurality of impact surfaces internal to the tool to impart at least one impact load to the stuck tool string by colliding the plurality of impact surfaces together

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectImpact force: Impact Force

Implementation Method 2

The at least one impact load results in at least a shock wave inducing i) translational motion along the longitudinal axis of the tool string, and ii) motion in at least one other degree of freedom

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectShock wave: Shock Wave

Data Source

PatentUS10655415B2Multimodal tool jar
Publication Date: 2020.05.19 BAKER HUGHES CO
  • US10655415B2 patent drawing
  • US10655415B2 patent drawing
  • US10655415B2 patent drawing

AI summary

Methods and apparatus for alleviating a stuck condition of a tool string, including using a jarring assembly to collide a plurality of impact surfaces together. The collision results in at least a shock wave inducing i) translational motion along the longitudinal axis of the tool string, and ii) motion in at least one other degree of freedom sufficient to alleviate the stuck condition of the tool string, which may be at least one of: i) translational motion along an axis substantially normal to the longitudinal axis, and ii) rotational motion. Methods may include generating at least one test impact load using a jarring assembly; generating movement information from a sensor responsive to the at least one test impact load; and generating further impact loads using the jarring assembly in dependence upon the movement information.