`
`EX. PGS 1001
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`US007080607B2
`
`(12) United States Patent
`Hillesund et al.
`
`(10) Patent No.:
`
`(45) Date of Patent:
`
`US 7,080,607 B2
`*Jul. 25, 2006
`
`(54) SEISMIC DATA ACQUISITON EQUIPMENT
`CONTROL SYSTEM
`
`(56)
`
`References Cited
`U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS
`
`................ .. 114/235
`4/1968 Cole et al.
`11/1968 Nesson ..... ..
`115/12
`3/1969 Cole ..... ..
`114/235
`4/1969 Chance ..... ..
`114/235
`2/1971 Spink et al.
`....... .. 340/3
`9/1971 Weese ......... ..
`.. 114/235 B
`3/1972 Fetrow et al.
`..
`.... .. 114/235
`11/1973 Pearson ................ .. 114/235 B
`
`
`
`3,375,800 A
`3,412,705 A
`3,434,446 A
`3,440,992 A
`3,560,912 A
`3,605,674 A
`3,648,642 A
`3,774,570 A
`
`(Continued)
`FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS
`
`AU
`
`199853305
`
`12/1997
`
`(Continued)
`
`Primary Examiner—Jesus D. Sotelo
`
`(74) Attorney, Agent, or Firm—WesternGeco, L.L.C.
`
`(57)
`
`ABSTRACT
`
`A method of controlling a streamer positioning device
`configured to be attached to a marine seismic streamer and
`towed by a seismic survey vessel and having a wing and a
`wing motor for changing the orientation of the wing. The
`method includes the steps of: obtaining an estimated veloc-
`ity of the streamer positioning device, calculating a desired
`change in the orientation of the wing using the estimated
`velocity of the streamer positioning device, and actuating
`the wing motor to produce the desired change in the orien-
`tation of the wing. The invention also involves an apparatus
`for controlling a streamer positioning device including
`means for obtaining an estimated velocity of the streamer
`positioning device, means for calculating a desired change
`in the orientation of the wing using the estimated velocity of
`the streamer positioning device, and means for actuating the
`wing motor to produce the desired change in the orientation
`of the wing.
`
`25 Claims, 3 Drawing Sheets
`
`(75)
`
`Inventors: Oyvind Hillesund, Histon (GB); Simon
`Hastings Bittleston, Bury St Edmunds
`(GB)
`
`(73) Assignee: WesternGeco, L.L.C., Houston, TX
`(US)
`
`( * ) Notice:
`
`Subject to any disclaimer, the term of this
`patent is extended or adjusted under 35
`U.S.C. 154(b) by 0 days.
`
`This patent is subject to a terminal dis-
`claimer.
`
`(21) Appl. No.: 11/070,614
`
`(22)
`
`Filed:
`
`Mar. 2, 2005
`
`(65)
`
`Prior Publication Data
`
`US 2005/0188908 A1
`
`Sep. 1, 2005
`
`Related U.S. Application Data
`
`(63) Continuation of application No. 09/787,723, filed as
`application No. PCT/IB99/01590 on Sep. 28, 1999,
`now Pat. No. 6,932,017.
`
`(30)
`
`Foreign Application Priority Data
`
`Oct. 1, 1998
`
`(GB)
`
`............................... .. 9821277.3
`
`(51)
`
`Int. Cl.
`(2006.01)
`B63B 21/66
`(2006.01)
`B63B 21/56
`(52) U.S. Cl.
`.................................................... .. 114/244
`(58) Field of Classification Search .............. .. 114/162,
`114/163, 242-246, 253
`See application file for complete search history.
`
`EX. PGS 1001
`
`
`
`18
`/
`
`Ex. PGS 1001
`
`
`
`US 7,080,607 B2
`Page 2
`
`4/1997 Kuche ....................... .. 367/17
`6/1997 Santopietro
`367/131
`$333
`aft 31‘
`33%:
`1/2000 Chien
`'
`367/21
`. """""""""""" “
`.
`1/2000 Olmer 9‘ 91‘
`~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~ 397/17
`11/2000 39401935 9131 ~~~~~~~~~~ ~~ 343/709
`10/2002 Kuche ....................... .. 367/17
`
`2/2003 01iViereta1~
`367/17
`............. .. 382/162
`4/2003 Osawa et a1.
`4/2005 Soreau etal.
`............... .. 367/17
`
`
`
`5,619,474 A
`5,642,330 A
`§’3(1)"7‘g :
`6’011’753 A
`7
`7
`910191289 A
`5,144,342 A
`6,459,653 B1
`6,525,992 B1
`6,549,653 B1
`6,879,542 B1
`
`FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS
`
`CA
`
`DE
`EP
`EP
`
`EP
`EP
`EP
`EP
`EP
`EP
`GB
`GB
`GB
`G13
`No
`W0
`W0
`W0
`W0
`W0
`W0
`W0
`
`2270719
`
`69702673 T
`0193215
`0319716
`
`0321705
`0525391
`0390987
`613025 A1 *
`0581441
`0909701
`2093610
`2122562
`2331971
`2342081
`992701
`W095/31735
`W096/21163
`W097/11395
`W097/30361
`W097/45006
`W093/28636
`W099/04293
`
`12/1997
`
`4/2001
`1/1986
`6/1989
`
`9/1989
`2/1993
`12/1993
`8/1994
`8/1997
`1/2003
`9/1982
`1/1984
`6/1999
`4/2000
`5/1999
`11/1995
`7/1996
`3/1997
`8/1997
`12/1997
`7/1993
`1/1999
`
`* cited by examiner
`
`U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS
`
`....... .. 114/235 B
`7/1975 Pearson et a1.
`1/1976 Cole ........................... 367/17
`3/1976 Strange .................. .. 340/7 PC
`6/1976 Paitson
`367/17
`
`7/1977 Waters ..................... .. 114/245
`12/1977 Itria et a1. ................... .. 367/17
`5/1978 Ma et 31”
`N 367/17
`
`9/1980 Cole ........................ .. 114/245
`10/1980 Gelfleretal.
`............ .. 114/312
`9/1981
`,, 357/18
`2/1982 Guentheretal.
`......... .. 114/244
`4/1982 Huckabee et al.
`.......... .. 367/17
`
`
`
`............. .. 114/245
`8/1984 Pickett et a1.
`11/1984 Thillaye du Boullay
`114/244
`6/1987 Conboy .................... .. 114/245
`.
`9/1987 Magnevllle ................ .. 367/17
`............... .. 367/16
`11/1987 Woods et al.
`
`12/1987 Fowler ........ ..
`114/245
`....... .. 114/144 B
`2/1988 Hovden et a1.
`3/1988 Kirby etal.
`.............. .. 114/244
`
`5/1988 Motal
`. . . . . .
`. . . .. 367/18
`8/1988 Phillips .................... .. 343/709
`8/1988 Martin .................. .. 350/96.23
`7/1989 Darche ........ ..
`114/245
`
`............ .. 114/246
`1/1990 Dolengowski
`1/1990 Givens ..................... .. 114/349
`.. 367/76
`3/1990 Fowler ........... ..
`
`......... .. 367/19
`2/1991 Langeland et a1.
`8/1991 Benoit ...................... .. 114/244
`
`10/1991 Stubblefield
`367/15
`4/1995 Wood ....................... .. 114/244
`8/1995 Owsley et al.
`............ .. 114/244
`
`4/1996 Williams et al.
`114/245
`........................ .. 343/709
`5/1996 Patel
`5/1996 Hornbostel et al.
`......... .. 367/13
`6/1996 Williams, Jr.
`. 114/245
`
`7/1996 Elholm ...................... .. 367/16
`
`3,896,756 A
`3,931,608 A
`3,943,483 A
`3,961,303 A
`4,033,278 A
`4,063,213 A
`4,087,780 A
`4,222,340 A
`4,227,479 A
`4,290,124 A
`4,313,392 A
`4,323,989 A
`
`4,463,701 A
`4,484,534 A
`4,676,183 A *
`4,694,435 A
`4,709,355 A
`4,711,194 A
`4,723,501 A
`4,729,333 A
`4,745,583 A
`4,766,441 A
`4,767,183 A
`4,843,996 A
`4,890,568 A *
`4,890,569 A
`4,912,684 A
`4,992,990 A
`5,042,413 A
`5,052,814 A
`5,402,745 A
`5,443,027 A
`5,507,243 A
`5,517,202 A
`5,517,463 A
`5,529,011 A
`5,532,975 A
`
`EX. PGS 1001
`
`Ex. PGS 1001
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent
`
`Jul. 25, 2006
`
`Sheet 1 of 3
`
`US 7,080,607 B2
`
`Fig.1 .
`
`Prior Art
`
`10
`
`‘
`
`22
`
`16
`
`12
`
`1
`
`14
`
`EX. PGS 1001
`
`Ex. PGS 1001
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent
`
`Jul. 25,2006
`
`Sheet 2 of 3
`
`US 7,080,607 B2
`
`Fig.2.
`
`EX. PGS 1001
`
`Ex. PGS 1001
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent
`
`MJ
`
`6
`
`hS
`
`03
`
`2B706:080:
`
`w89__>>
`
`f:o_«_mon_
`H3.2mo_uc_
`
`mm95>
`
`7ES_9mo_u:_U:o=_mon_
`
`WI2BmmcnowEdewh
`
`oo<
`
`_mEo~_.oI
`
`8.
`
`.3“.
`
`8
`
`\
`
`mm
`
`52....
`
`zomnmm
`
`mlm
`
`Bmwoooi
`
`EE3
`
`:o_.mo_::EEoo
`
`8ma.mm
`
`«N
`
`§| JBLIJBSJJS
`
`93
`
`Esmmwi
`
`Bmcmm
`
`fl
`
`EX. PGS 1001
`
`Ex. PGS 1001
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`US 7,080,607 B2
`
`1
`SEISMIC DATA ACQUISITON EQUIPMENT
`CONTROL SYSTEM
`
`Applicant claims priority and continuation under 35
`U.S.C. § 120 from parent application Ser. No. 09/787,723,
`filed Jul. 2, 2001, now U.S. Pat. No. 6,932,017, which was
`a 35 U.S.C. § 371 national stage filing from Patent Coop-
`eration Treaty application number PCT/IB99/01590, filed
`Sep. 28, 1999, which in turn claimed priority from Great
`Britain patent application number 9821277.3, filed Oct. 1,
`1998, from which Applicant has claimed foreign priority
`under 35 U.S.C. § 119.
`
`BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
`
`This invention relates generally to systems for controlling
`seismic data acquisition equipment and particularly to a
`system for controlling a marine seismic streamer positioning
`device.
`
`A marine seismic streamer is an elongate cable-like
`structure,
`typically up to several
`thousand meters long,
`which contains arrays of seismic sensors, known as hydro-
`phones, and associated electronic equipment along its
`length, and which is used in marine seismic surveying. In
`order to perform a 3D marine seismic survey, a plurality of
`such streamers are towed at about 5 knots behind a seismic
`
`survey vessel, which also tows one or more seismic sources,
`typically air guns. Acoustic signals produced by the seismic
`sources are directed down through the water into the earth
`beneath, where they are reflected from the various strata.
`The reflected signals are received by the hydrophones, and
`then digitized and processed to build up a representation of
`the subsurface geology.
`The horizontal positions of the streamers are typically
`controlled by a deflector, located at the front end or “head”
`of the streamer, and a tail buoy, located at the back end or
`“tail” of the streamer. These devices create tension forces on
`the streamer which constrain the movement of the streamer
`
`and cause it to assume a roughly linear shape. Cross currents
`and transient forces cause the streamer to bow and undulate,
`thereby introducing deviations into this desired linear shape.
`The streamers are typically towed at a constant depth of
`approximately ten meters, in order to facilitate the removal
`of undesired “ghost” reflections from the surface of the
`water. To keep the streamers at this constant depth, control
`devices known as “birds”, are typically attached at various
`points along each streamer between the deflector and the tail
`buoy, with the spacing between the birds generally varying
`between 200 and 400 meters. The birds have hydrodynamic
`deflecting surfaces, referred to as wings,
`that allow the
`position of the streamer to be controlled as it
`is towed
`through the water. When a bird is used for depth control
`purposes only, it is possible for the bird to regularly sense its
`depth using an integrated pressure sensor and for a local
`controller within the bird to adjust
`the wing angles to
`maintain the streamer near the desired depth using only a
`desired depth value received from a central control system.
`While the majority of birds used thus far have only
`controlled the depth of the streamers, additional benefits can
`be obtained by using properly controlled horizontally steer-
`able birds, particularly by using the types of horizontally and
`vertically steerable birds disclosed in our published PCT
`International Application No. WO 98/28636. The benefits
`that can be obtained by using properly controlled horizon-
`tally steerable birds can include reducing horizontal out-of-
`position conditions that necessitate reacquiring seismic data
`in a particular area (i.e. in-fill shooting), reducing the chance
`
`10
`
`15
`
`20
`
`25
`
`30
`
`35
`
`40
`
`45
`
`50
`
`55
`
`60
`
`65
`
`2
`
`of tangling adjacent streamers, and reducing the time
`required to turn the seismic acquisition vessel when ending
`one pass and beginning another pass during a 3D seismic
`survey.
`It is estimated that horizontal out-of-position conditions
`reduce the efficiency of current 3D seismic survey opera-
`tions by between 5 and 10%, depending on weather and
`current conditions. While incidents of tangling adjacent
`streamers are relatively rare, when they do occur they
`invariably result in prolonged vessel downtime. The loss of
`efficiency associated with turning the seismic survey vessel
`will depend in large part on the seismic survey layout, but
`typical estimates range from 5 to 10%. Simulations have
`concluded that properly controlled horizontally steerable
`birds can be expected to reduce these types of costs by
`approximately 30%.
`One system for controlling a horizontally steerable bird,
`as disclosed in UK Patent GB 2093610 B,
`is to utilize a
`manually-operated central control system to transmit the
`magnitudes and directions of any required wing angle
`changes to the birds. While this method greatly simplifies
`the circuitry needed within the bird itself,
`it is virtually
`impossible for this type of system to closely regulate the
`horizontal positions of the birds because it requires manual
`input and supervision. This becomes a particularly signifi-
`cant
`issue when a substantial number of streamers are
`
`deployed simultaneously and the number of birds that must
`be controlled goes up accordingly.
`Another system for controlling a horizontally steerable
`bird is disclosed in our published PCT International Appli-
`cation No. WO 98/28636. Using this type of control system,
`the desired horizontal positions and the actual horizontal
`positions are received from a remote control system and are
`then used by a local control system within the birds to adjust
`the wing angles. The actual horizontal positions of the birds
`may be determined every 5 to 10 seconds and there may be
`a 5 second delay between the taking of measurements and
`the determination of actual streamer positions. While this
`type of system allows for more automatic adjustment of the
`bird wing angles, the delay period and the relatively long
`cycle time between position measurements prevents this
`type of control system from rapidly and efficiently control-
`ling the horizontal position of the bird. A more deterministic
`system for controlling this type of streamer positioning
`device is therefore desired.
`
`It is therefore an object of the present invention to provide
`for an improved method and apparatus for controlling a
`streamer positioning device.
`An advantage of the present invention is that the position
`of the streamer may be better controlled, thereby reducing
`the need for in-fill shooting, reducing the chance of streamer
`tangling, and reducing the time needed to turn the seismic
`survey vessel.
`Another advantage of the present invention is that noise in
`marine seismic data associated with streamer position over-
`correction and streamer positioning errors can be signifi-
`cantly reduced.
`
`SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
`
`The present invention involves a method of controlling a
`streamer positioning device configured to be attached to a
`marine seismic streamer and towed by a seismic survey
`vessel and having a wing and a wing motor for changing the
`orientation of the wing. The method includes the steps of:
`obtaining an estimated velocity of the streamer positioning
`device, calculating a desired change in the orientation of the
`
`EX. PGS 1001
`
`Ex. PGS 1001
`
`
`
`US 7,080,607 B2
`
`3
`wing using the estimated velocity of the streamer position-
`ing device, and actuating the wing motor to produce the
`desired change in the orientation of the wing. The present
`invention also involves an apparatus for controlling a
`streamer positioning device. The apparatus includes means
`for obtaining an estimated velocity of the streamer position-
`ing device, means for calculating a desired change in the
`orientation of the wing using the estimated velocity of the
`streamer positioning device, and means for actuating the
`wing motor to effectuate the desired change in the orienta-
`tion of the wing. The invention and its benefits will be better
`understood with reference to the detailed description below
`and the accompanying figures.
`
`BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
`
`FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram of a seismic survey vessel
`and associated seismic data acquisition equipment,
`FIG. 2 is a schematic horizontal cross-sectional view
`
`through a marine seismic streamer and an attached streamer
`positioning device;
`FIG. 3 is a schematic vertical cross-sectional view
`
`through the streamer positioning device from FIG. 2; and
`FIG. 4 is a schematic diagram of the local control system
`architecture of the streamer positioning device from FIG. 2.
`
`DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE
`INVENTION
`
`In FIG. 1, a seismic survey vessel 10 is shown towing
`eight marine seismic streamers 12 that may, for instance,
`each be 3000 meters in length. The outermost streamers 12
`in the array could be 700 meters apart, resulting in a
`horizontal separation between the streamers of 100 meters in
`the regular horizontal spacing configuration shown. A seis-
`mic source 14, typically an airgun or an array of airguns, is
`also shown being towed by the seismic survey vessel 10. At
`the front of each streamer 12 is shown a deflector 16 and at
`
`the rear of every streamer is shown a tail buoy 20. The
`deflector 16 is used to horizontally position the end of the
`streamer nearest the seismic survey vessel 10 and the tail
`buoy 20 creates drag at the end of the streamer farthest from
`the seismic survey vessel 10. The tension created on the
`seismic streamer by the deflector 16 and the tail buoy 20
`results in the roughly linear shape of the seismic streamer 12
`shown in FIG. 1.
`
`Located between the deflector 16 and the tail buoy 20 are
`a plurality of streamer positioning devices known as birds
`18. Preferably the birds 18 are both vertically and horizon-
`tally steerable. These birds 18 may, for instance, be located
`at regular intervals along the steamer, such as every 200 to
`400 meters. The vertically and horizontally steerable birds
`18 can be used to constrain the shape of the seismic streamer
`12 between the deflector 16 and the tail buoy 20 in both the
`vertical (depth) and horizontal directions.
`In the preferred embodiment of the present invention, the
`control system for the birds 18 is distributed between a
`global control system 22 located on or near the seismic
`survey vessel 10 and a local control system located within or
`near the birds 18. The global control system 22 is typically
`connected to the seismic survey vessel’s navigation system
`and obtains estimates of system wide parameters, such as the
`vessel’s towing direction and velocity and current direction
`and velocity, from the vessel’s navigation system.
`The most important requirement for the control system is
`to prevent the streamers 12 from tangling. This requirement
`becomes more and more important as the complexity and the
`
`10
`
`15
`
`20
`
`25
`
`30
`
`35
`
`40
`
`45
`
`50
`
`55
`
`60
`
`65
`
`4
`
`total value of the towed equipment increases. The trend in
`the industry is to put more streamers 12 on each seismic
`survey vessel 10 and to decrease the horizontal separation
`between them. To get better control of the streamers 12,
`horizontal steering becomes necessary. If the birds 18 are not
`properly controlled, horizontal steering can increase, rather
`than decrease, the likelihood of tangling adjacent streamers.
`Localized current fluctuations can dramatically influence the
`magnitude of the side control required to properly position
`the streamers. To compensate for these localized current
`fluctuations, the inventive control system utilizes a distrib-
`uted processing control architecture and behavior-predictive
`model-based control logic to properly control the streamer
`positioning devices.
`In the preferred embodiment of the present invention, the
`global control system 22 monitors the actual positions of
`each of the birds 18 and is programmed with the desired
`positions of or the desired minimum separations between the
`seismic steamers 12. The horizontal positions of the birds 18
`can be derived, for instance, using the types of acoustic
`positioning systems described in our U.S. Pat. No. 4,992,990
`or in our PCT International Patent Application No. WO
`98/21163. Alternatively, or additionally, satellite-based glo-
`bal positioning system equipment can be used to determine
`the positions of the equipment. The vertical positions of the
`birds 18 are typically monitored using pressure sensors
`attached to the birds, as discussed below.
`The global control system 22 preferably maintains a
`dynamic model of each of the seismic streamers 12 and
`utilizes the desired and actual positions of the birds 18 to
`regularly calculate updated desired vertical and horizontal
`forces the birds should impart on the seismic streamers 12 to
`move them from their actual positions to their desired
`positions. Because the movement of the seismic streamer 12
`causes acoustic noise (both from seawater flow past the bird
`wing structures as well as cross current flow across the
`streamer skin itself), it is important that the streamer move-
`ments be restrained and kept to the minimum correction
`required to properly position the streamers. Any streamer
`positioning device control system that consistently overes-
`timates the type of correction required and causes the bird to
`overshoot its intended position introduces undesirable noise
`into the seismic data being acquired by the streamer. In
`current systems, this type of over-correction noise is often
`balanced against the “noise” or “smearing” caused when the
`seismic sensors in the streamers 12 are displaced from their
`desired positions.
`The global control system 22 preferably calculates the
`desired vertical and horizontal forces based on the behavior
`of each streamer and also takes into account the behavior of
`
`the complete streamer array. Due to the relatively low
`sample rate and time delay associated with the horizontal
`position determination system, the global control system 22
`runs position predictor software to estimate the actual loca-
`tions of each of the birds 18. The global control system 22
`also checks the data received from the vessel’s navigation
`system and the data will be filled in if it is missing. The
`interface between the global control system 22 and the local
`control system will typically operate with a sampling fre-
`quency of at least 0.1 Hz. The global control system 22 will
`typically acquire the following parameters from the vessel’s
`navigation system: vessel speed (n1/s), vessel heading (de-
`grees), current speed (n1/s), current heading (degrees), and
`the location of each of the birds in the horizontal plane in a
`vessel fixed coordinate system. Current speed and heading
`can also be estimated based on the average forces acting on
`the streamers 12 by the birds 18. The global control system
`
`EX. PGS 1001
`
`Ex. PGS 1001
`
`
`
`US 7,080,607 B2
`
`5
`22 will preferably send the following values to the local bird
`controller: demanded vertical force, demanded horizontal
`force, towing velocity, and crosscurrent velocity.
`The towing velocity and crosscurrent velocity are prefer-
`ably “water-referenced” values that are calculated from the
`vessel speed and heading values and the current speed and
`heading values, as well as any relative movement between
`the seismic survey vessel 10 and the bird 18 (such as while
`the vessel is turning), to produce relative velocities of the
`bird 18 with respect to the water in both the “in-line” and the
`“cross-line” directions. Alternatively, the global control sys-
`tem 22 could provide the local control system with the
`horizontal velocity and water in-flow angle. The force and
`velocity values are delivered by the global control system 22
`as separate values for each bird 18 on each streamer 12
`continuously during operation of the control system.
`The “water-referenced” towing velocity and crosscurrent
`velocity could alternatively be determined using flowmeters
`or other types of water velocity sensors attached directly to
`the birds 18. Although these types of sensors are typically
`quite expensive, one advantage of this type of velocity
`determination system is that the sensed in-line and cross-line
`velocities will be inherently compensated for the speed and
`heading of marine currents acting on said streamer position-
`ing device and for relative movements between vessel 10
`and the bird 18.
`
`is capable of
`FIG. 2 shows a type of bird 18 that
`controlling the position of seismic streamers 12 in both the
`vertical and horizontal directions. A bird 18 of this type is
`also disclosed in our PCT International Application No. WO
`98/28636. While a number of alternative designs for the
`vertically and horizontally steerable birds 18 are possible,
`including those utilizing one full-moving wing with aile-
`rons, three full-moving wings, and four full-moving wings,
`the independent two-wing principal
`is, conceptually,
`the
`simplest and most robust design.
`In FIG. 2, a portion of the seismic streamer 12 is shown
`with an attached bird 18. A communication line 24, which
`may consist of a bundle of fiber optic data transmission
`cables and power transmission wires, passes along the
`length of the seismic streamer 12 and is connected to the
`seismic sensors, hydrophones 26, that are distributed along
`the length of the streamer, and to the bird 18. The bird 18
`preferably has a pair of independently moveable wings 28
`that are connected to rotatable shafts 32 that are rotated by
`wing motors 34 and that allow the orientation of the wings
`28 with respect to the bird body 30 to be changed. When the
`shafts 32 of the bird 18 are not horizontal, this rotation
`causes the horizontal orientation of the wings 28 to change
`and thereby changes the horizontal forces that are applied to
`the streamer 12 by the bird.
`The motors 34 can consist of any type of device that is
`capable of changing the orientation of the wings 28, and they
`are preferably either electric motors or hydraulic actuators.
`The local control system 36 controls the movement of the
`wings 28 by calculating a desired change in the angle of the
`wings and then selectively driving the motors 34 to effec-
`tuate this change. While the preferred embodiment depicted
`utilizes a separate motor 34 for each wing 28, it would be
`also be possible to independently move the wings 28 using
`a single motor 34 and a selectively actuatable transmission
`mechanism.
`
`When the bird 18 uses two wings 28 to produce the
`horizontal and vertical
`forces on the streamer 12,
`the
`required outputs of the local control system 36 are relatively
`simple, the directions and magnitudes of the wing move-
`ments required for each of the wings 28, or equivalently the
`
`10
`
`15
`
`20
`
`25
`
`30
`
`35
`
`40
`
`45
`
`50
`
`55
`
`60
`
`65
`
`6
`magnitude and direction the motors 34 need to be driven to
`produce this wing movement. While the required outputs of
`the local control system 36 for such a two full moving wing
`design is quite simple, the structure and operation of the
`overall system required to coordinate control of the device
`is relatively complicated.
`FIG. 3 shows a schematic vertical cross-sectional view
`
`through the streamer positioning device shown in FIG. 2 that
`will allow the operation of the inventive control system to be
`described in more detail. The components of the bird 18
`shown in FIG. 3 include the wings 28 and the body 30. Also
`shown in FIG. 3 are a horizontal coordinate axis 38 and a
`
`vertical coordinate axis 40. During operation of the streamer
`positioning control system, the global control system 22
`preferably transmits, at regular intervals (such as every five
`seconds) a desired horizontal force 42 and a desired vertical
`force 44 to the local control system 36.
`The desired horizontal force 42 and the desired vertical
`
`force 44 are combined within the local control system 36 to
`calculate the magnitude and direction of the desired total
`force 46 that the global control system 22 has instructed the
`local control system to apply to the streamer 12. The global
`control system 22 could alternatively provide the magnitude
`and direction of the desired total force 46 to the local control
`
`system 36 instead of the desired horizontal force 42 and the
`desired vertical force 44.
`While the desired horizontal force 42 and the desired
`
`vertical force 44 are preferably calculated by the global
`control system 22, it is also possible for the local control
`system 36 in the inventive control system to calculate one or
`both of these forces using a localized displacement/force
`conversion program. This type of localized conversion pro-
`gram may, for instance, use a look-up table or conversion
`routine that associates certain magnitudes and directions of
`vertical or horizontal displacements with certain magnitudes
`and directions of changes in the vertical or horizontal forces
`required. Using this type of embodiment, the global control
`system 22 can transmit location information to the local
`control system 36 instead of force information. Instead of
`the desired vertical force 44, the global control system 22
`can transmit a desired vertical depth and the local control
`system 36 can calculate the magnitude and direction of the
`deviation between the desired depth and the actual depth.
`Similarly, instead of transmitting a desired horizontal force
`42, the global control system 22 can transmit the magnitude
`and direction of the displacement between the actual hori-
`zontal position and the desired horizontal position of the bird
`18. One advantage to this alternative type of system is that
`the required vertical force can be rapidly updated as the local
`control system receives updated depth information from the
`integrated pressure sensor. Other advantages of this type of
`alternative system include reducing communication traffic
`on the communication line 24 and simplifying the program-
`ming needed to convert the measured vertical and/or hori-
`zontal displacements into corresponding forces to be applied
`by the birds 18.
`When the local control system 36 has a new desired
`horizontal force 42 and desired vertical force 44 to be
`
`applied, the wings 28 will typically not be in the proper
`orientation to provide the direction of the desired total force
`46 required. As can be seen in FIG. 3, the wings 28 introduce
`a force into the streamer 12 along an axis perpendicular to
`the rotational axis of the wings 28 and perpendicular to the
`streamer. This force axis 48 is typically not properly aligned
`with the desired total force 46 when new desired horizontal
`
`and vertical force values are received from the global control
`system 22 or determined by the local control system 36 and
`
`EX. PGS 1001
`
`Ex. PGS 1001
`
`
`
`US 7,080,607 B2
`
`7
`some rotation of the bird 18 is required before the bird can
`produce this desired total force 46. As can be seen, the force
`axis 48 is directly related to the bird roll angle, designated
`in FIG. 3 as q).
`The local control system 36 optimizes the control process
`by projecting the desired total force 46 onto the force axis 48
`(i.e. multiplying the magnitude of the desired total force by
`the cosine of the deviation angle 50) to produce an inter-
`mediate desired force 52 and then adjusting the wing com-
`mon angle (X (the angle of the wings with respect to the bird
`body 30, or the average angle if there is a non-zero splay
`angle) to produce this magnitude of force along the force
`axis. The calculated desired common wing angle is com-
`pared to the current common wing angle to calculate a
`desired change in the common wing angle and the wing
`motors 34 are actuated to produce this desired change in the
`orientation of the wings.
`A splay angle is then introduced into the wings 28 to
`produce a rotational movement in the bird body 30 (i.e. to
`rotate the force axis 48 to be aligned with the desired total
`force 46). The splay angle is the difference between the
`angles of the wings 28 with respect to the bird body 30. As
`the bird body 30 rotates and the force axis 48 becomes more
`closely aligned with the desired total force 46, the bird roll
`angle and the bird roll angular velocity are monitored, the
`splay angle is incrementally reduced, and the common angle
`is incrementally increased until
`the intermediate desired
`force 52 is in the same direction and of the same magnitude
`as the desired total force. The local control system 36
`carefully regulates the splay angle to ensure that
`the
`streamer is stable in roll degree of freedom. The calculated
`common wing angle and the splay angle are also regulated
`by the local control system 36 to prevent the wings 28 from
`stalling and to ensure that the splay angle is prioritized.
`When using the type of birds described in our published
`PCT International Application No. WO 98/28636, where the
`bird 18 is rigidly attached, and cannot rotate with respect, to
`the streamer 12, it is important for the control system to take
`the streamer twist into account. If this is not taken into
`
`account, the bird 18 can use all of its available splay angle
`to counter the twist in the streamer 12. The bird 18 will then
`
`be unable to reach the demanded roll angle and the generated
`force will decrease. The inventive control system incorpo-
`rates two functions for addressing this situation; the anti-
`twist function and the untwist function.
`
`In the anti-twist function, the streamer twist is estimated
`by weightfunction filtering the splay angle measurements
`instead of simply averaging the splay angle measurements to
`improve the bandwidth of the estimation. The anti-twist
`function engages when the estimated twist has reached a
`critical value and it then overrides the normal shortest path
`control of the calculated roll angle. The anti-twist function
`forces the bird 18 to rotate in the opposite direction of the
`twist by adding +/-180 degrees to the demanded roll angle.
`Once the twist has been reduced to an acceptable value, the
`anti-twist function disengages and the normal shortest path
`calculation is continued.
`
`The untwist function is implemented by the global control
`system 22 which monitors the splay angle for all of the birds
`18 in each streamer 12. At regular intervals or when the
`splay angle has reached a critical value, the global control
`system 22 instructs each local control system 36 to rotate
`each bird 18 in the opposite direction of the twist. The
`number of revolutions done by each bird 18 is monitored and
`the untwist function is disengaged once the twist has reached
`an acceptable level.
`
`10
`
`15
`
`20
`
`25
`
`30
`
`35
`
`40
`
`45
`
`50
`
`55
`
`60
`
`65
`
`8
`FIG. 4 is a schemati