CEMENT BOND WELL LOGGING WITH A DIPOLE TOOL EMPLOYING DEPTH RELATED CUTOFF MODES

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATION

[0001]This application claims the benefit of and priority to U.S. Provisional Application No. 63/736,486, filed Dec. 19, 2024, which is incorporated by reference herein in its entirety.

BACKGROUND

[0002]In recent years, collection and use of oilfield data has become more commonplace and in depth than ever before. From initial well design, to drilling, installation, completions, production, maintenance and eventual shut down, operations are heavily reliant on, and guided by, the ever-increasing amount of available oilfield information. Logging data is one such source of information. This type of information is acquired by a logging tool that is deployed into and retrieved from a well to provide information about various well or surrounding oilfield formation conditions.

[0003]One particular type of logging application is referred to as a acoustic cement evaluation (ACE) application. An ACE application is run to obtain information regarding the integrity of well casing bonding at an interface between a well casing and the formation which defines the well. That is, for a cased well, a steel casing is generally cemented in place. In addition to providing structural integrity, cementing of the casing at the interface with the formation helps in terms of isolation. For example, one section of the well may be perforated to allow for fluid communication with a targeted location of the adjacent formation. That is, the wellbore at the interior of the casing and the targeted location of the formation may be placed in intentional communication, for example, to draw production fluid from the targeted location into the wellbore. In order for this targeted production to reliably take place, cementing between the casing and the formation may be provided as noted.

[0004]Unfortunately, in some instances, the intended cementing or bonding of the casing to the formation has not fully occurred. For example, cement may have unintentionally crept into unknown nearby formation fractures or mixed with mud from prior application steps and failed to properly set or bond. When this occurs, a void or fluid interface may be present between the casing and the formation. This means that the intended well isolation may be compromised. In other words, perforations targeting a particular formation location may unintentionally draw in fluids from outside of the targeted location due to leakage at the interface between the casing and the formation as a result of the failed cement bonding.

[0005]To help avoid this scenario, when a casing is installed, an ACE is generally run to make sure that the casing is fully cement bonded before perforating or producing from the well. An ACE logging application employs the use of an ultrasonic transmitter of a logging tool to emit and receive acoustic waves that are indicative of characteristics at the interface between the casing and the formation. In fact, conventional acoustic cement evaluation tools are particularly focused on obtaining information from about the first few hundred microns or less right outside of the external wall of the casing. So, for example, when the ACE tool traverses a given distance and obtains information indicative of a predetermined amount of cement bond failure, follow-on remedial action may take place. Of course, any remedial action undertaken may be both time consuming and tremendously expensive considering the potential well depths involved and nature of re-cementing but may still be worth the effort to ensure effective production later.

[0006]Unfortunately, an indication of cement bond failure based on information from the ACE tool is not always accurate. This is because the information obtained almost exclusively relates to bonding right at the casing and formation interface. As noted above, the information is indicative of cement bonding within less than a few hundred microns. However, due to the nature of casing installation and cementing it is quite common for a degree of “micro-debonding” to occur in locations right at the interface. Instances of micro-debonding may not actually compromise the overall integrity of the cement bonding or place follow-on isolation at risk. This micro-debonding may consist of no more than limited gaps, pockets or voids right at the interface, perhaps due to expansion and contraction of the casing during installation, and cementing. Nevertheless, an overall successful cement bonding with sufficient cement volume behind the casing may be in play that supports follow-on isolation with structural support afforded to the installed casing. Unfortunately, this is generally unknown based on information from the ACE tool because the lateral depth inspected by the tool in the direction of the adjacent formation is limited to within less than a few hundred microns as indicated (e.g. within a micro-annulus of between a few microns and the noted few hundred microns). Stated another way, the ACE tools are only looking in an area right at the outer surface of the casing when a fully intact and sufficient cement bond might still be present just beyond the outer surface skin of the casing. Unfortunately, this means that a reading of cement bonding failure may occur that is no more than a false positive. This, in turn can lead to an unnecessary amount of time and expense dedicated to remedial cement bonding repair that was never necessitated in the first place.

SUMMARY

[0007]An embodiment of the present disclosure described herein is directed at a method of performing a cement evaluation application in a cased well to obtain information regarding cement bonding at a casing interface in terms of cement volume in the annulus behind the casing. The method includes positioning a logging tool with a dipole transmitter within the well to emit lateral pressure pulses toward the casing. Dipole waveforms may be obtained back are informative about the cement bonding to at least one predetermined annular depth that is beyond an ultrasonic wave reach outside of the casing.

[0008]Another embodiment of the present disclosure described herein is an oilfield assembly for managing cement bonding of a well through a formation at an oilfield. The assembly includes a logging tool with an ultrasonic transmitter and a dipole transmitter along with a casing which defines the well. An interface is present to accommodate cementing of the casing through the formation. Further, the ultrasonic transmitter is directed at ascertaining bonding character of the cementing to within about 250 microns of an outer surface of the casing. At the same time, the dipole transmitter is directed at ascertaining bonding character of the cementing to a depth exceeding about 250 microns of the outer surface of the casing.

[0009]Another embodiment of the present disclosure described herein is a method of performing a cement bond logging application in a cased well to obtain information regarding cement bonding outside the casing. In this method, a logging tool is positioned within the well and includes an ultrasonic transmitter and a dipole transmitter. Ultrasonic waves may be emitted from the ultrasonic transmitter that are of a given ultrasonic wave reach. Ultrasonic waveforms may be obtained back from the interface at the logging tool which are informative about the cement bonding to a depth of the ultrasonic wave reach outside of the casing. For instances where it is determined that the obtained ultrasonic waveforms are indicative of at least micro-debonding, additional measures may be taken. Specifically, pressure pulses may be laterally emitted from the dipole transmitter toward the casing such that dipole waveforms may be obtained back and are informative about the cement bonding to at least one predetermined annular depth of beyond the ultrasonic wave reach outside of the casing.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0010]The appended figures illustrate only exemplary embodiments and are therefore not to be considered limiting of the scope of the disclosure, as the disclosure may admit to other equally effective embodiments.

[0011]FIG. 1 is a side view of an embodiment of a dipole cement bond logging tool with multiple depth cutoff functionality.

[0012]FIG. 2 is an overview depiction of an oilfield with a cased well traversing various formation layers and accommodating the logging tool of FIG. 1.

[0013]FIG. 3A is an enlarged view of the logging tool of FIG. 1 taken from 3-3A of FIG. 2.

[0014]FIG. 3B is an enlarged view of the logging tool of FIG. 1 taken from 3-3B of FIG. 2.

[0015]FIG. 3C is an enlarged view of the logging tool of FIG. 1 taken from 3-3C of FIG. 2.

[0016]FIG. 4A is a chart representing cement bond logging readings of different cutoff modes employed by the the logging tool of FIG. 2 directed at different cement bonding depths.

[0017]FIG. 4B is a chart representing the frequency of dipole acquisitions plotted against slowness in confirming the durable cementing results depicted in FIG. 4A.

[0018]FIG. 5 is a flow-chart summarizing an embodiment of employing a dipole cement bond logging tool with multiple depth cutoff functionality.

[0019]To facilitate understanding, identical reference numerals have been used, where possible, to designate identical elements that are common to the figures. It is contemplated that elements and features of one embodiment may be beneficially incorporated in other embodiments without further recitation.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0020]In the following description, numerous details are set forth to provide an understanding of the present disclosure. This includes description of the surrounding environment in which embodiments detailed herein may be utilized. Additionally, it will be understood by those skilled in the art that the embodiments described may be practiced without these and other particular details. Further, numerous variations or modifications may be employed which remain contemplated by the embodiments as specifically described.

[0021]Embodiments are described with reference to certain techniques for acquiring cement bond logging information for an interface of a well casing and a formation defining the well. The illustrative embodiments shown herein include a dipole transmitter equipped logging tool for lateral emitting of acoustic waves toward the interface and optionally in conjunction with an ultrasonic transmitter that is also directed at obtaining information from the interface. The tool may take advantage of ultrasonic information from the ultrasonic transmitter in running further dipole transmitter applications directed at different penetration depths. Of course, other modes of operation or types of dipole transmitter equipped logging tools may be employed. Regardless, so long as the logging tool employs a dipole mode of pulsed acoustic wave with depth sensitivity beyond that of an ultrasonic mode of operation, appreciable benefit may be realized. It is of note that, as utilized herein, the term “formation” may include additional tubulars, casings or other hardware defining other annuluses about the cased well, in addition to the natural below ground rock and underground earth formations. That is, description of an evaluated cement bond interface between a casing and a formation may also encompass an interface with other hardware external to the casing as part of the described “formation”.

[0022]Referring specifically now to FIG. 1, an embodiment of a dipole equipped logging tool 100 is illustrated. The tool 100 includes conventional features such as the illustrated centralizers 120, 125. However, more notably, a dipole transmitter 101 is included along with a host of dipole receivers 110 as part of a receiver segment 175. The receiver segment 175 may also include a host of ultrasonic receivers 160 corresponding to an ultrasonic transmitter 150 as discussed further below. While the ultrasonic transmitter 150 and receivers 160 may operate similar to conventional pulse-echo or pitch-catch ultrasonic tool features as described above, the dipole transmitter 101 and receivers 110 excites and measure multiple propagating cutoff modes that ultimately provide extended depth information as described below. Once more, when combining this multiple depth cutoff functionality with ultrasonic functionality, additional efficiencies may also be achieved.

[0023]As a preview, and with additional reference to FIG. 2, the ultrasonic configuration of transmitter 150 and receivers 160 may be utilized to assess cement bonding conditions right at the outer surface of a casing 285, perhaps to within 250 microns or less. This depth may be referred to herein as the ultrasonic wave reach. That is, in the present example, as with most conventional ultrasonic logging transmitters, the ultrasonic wave reach would likely fall within a range of about 250 microns or less, although in certain circumstances, an ultrasonic wave reach could potentially fall outside of this range to a degree. Regardless, continuing with the present illustrated embodiment, as the logging tool 100 is being moved through a well 280 ultrasonic readings may indicate an issue with the bonding at a certain location. However, in absence of additional information, it may remain uncertain whether a true bonding failure is presented or simply the presence of a limited micro-debonding, minor void or other potential false reading. Thus, the dipole transmitter 101 and receiver 110 functionality may be employed to uniquely obtain more detailed information from further investigation depth. In other words, the tool 100 is equipped with both ultrasonic and sonic functionality so that potential false positive indicators of bonding failure may be ruled out in advance of costly and time-consuming remedial action.

[0024]Continuing with reference to FIGS. 1 and 2, it is of note that the dipole transmitter 101 operates in a manner different from the more conventional ultrasonic transmitter 150. That is, an ultrasonic transmitter 150 is generally focused on reaching just beyond the casing 285 because of short wavelength operation with less than 1 mm and employing a typical firing frequency at or above 200 kHz. Thus, discrete reliable readings may be obtained even though they may be of some limited depth beyond the casing 285 as indicated above. However, the dipole transmitter 101 operates in a different manner. Instead of utilizing such ultrasonic transmissions, sonic transmissions of between about 100 Hz to about 20 kHz are employed. Furthermore, these transmissions are directional. More specifically, these transmissions would be emitted laterally from the tool 100 as illustrated so as to excite the casing-related waves 285 in a more targeted perpendicular displacement manner. In one embodiment this may be achieved with a piezoelectric component which induces a lateral or side movement. In another embodiment, this may include the use of two cooperating piezo components 115, so that a lateral, side to side effect from the transmitter 101 may be realized. In this manner, a pressure pulse may be directed through fluid of the well 280 to reach and penetrate the casing 285, and to excite cutoff propagation modes, highly sensitive to casing interface conditions as well as material properties beyond the casing. Thus, a more confined and targeted transmission may penetrate beyond the casing 285 to predetermined depths, perhaps to between about six inches and about seven feet. Of course, other depths of penetration may be targeted as well. Indeed, any depth beyond about 250 microns may be of value when employed with the described ultrasonic transmitter 150. Regardless, the particular depths targeted may be established based on selected frequencies within ranges such as those suggested above, tailored to present certain dispersion characteristics, slowness and waveguide properties (e.g. see the chart of FIG. 4B).

[0025]Referring specifically now to FIG. 2, an overview depiction of an oilfield 215 is shown with a well 280 defined by a casing 285 and emerging from a wellhead 275. The well 280 traverses various formation layers 290, 295, 297 and is evaluated for cement bonding between the casing 285 and these surrounding formation layers 290, 295, 297. Thus, in the embodiment shown, a logging application is being run in the well 280 with a cement bond logging tool 100 as described above. Specifically, the tool 100 is deployed by wireline 255 from a spool 252 and mobile unit 250 in the form of a wireline truck 251, although other conveyance types and platforms may be utilized. Of course, cement bond logging information may be obtained in conjunction with a host of other logging information and the tool 100 need not be solely dedicated to cement bond logging. Once more, the cement bond logging application may be performed in conjunction with other applications. For example, pressure testing or further installation applications may be in process while cement bond logging is also being performed.

[0026]Continuing with reference to FIG. 2, a control unit 254 is accommodated at the truck 251. The control unit 254 may be employed to direct the logging application as illustrated, and includes a processor and database for managing data from the logging application. So, for example, as detailed further below, readings from the ultrasonic transmitter 150 that are indicative of potential cement bonding issues or potential failures at a given well location, may be followed with particular focus on readings from the dipole transmitter 101 at the same location. Thus, the control unit 254 may be utilized to guide the logging application to help determine if follow-on remedial intervention is indeed called for.

[0027]Referring now to FIGS. 3A-3C, enlarged views of the logging tool 100 of FIG. 1 are shown as the tool 100 enters different well locations. Specifically, FIG. 3A is an enlarged view of the tool 100 taken from 3-3A of FIG. 2, FIG. 3B is taken from 3-3B of FIG. 2 and FIG. 3C is taken from 3-3C of FIG. 2. Of course, for any of these locations, which happen to be at different formation layers 297, 295, 290, the potential for a degree of debonding is present. More specifically, notice the cement 325 at the interface of the casing 285 and each given formation layer 297, 295, 290. Also notice that for FIGS. 3A and 3C, any separation between the cement 325 and the casing 285 is visually imperceptible. However, at the location of FIG. 3B, a substantial debonding separation 300 is apparent, perhaps constituting a wet or fluidly communicative annulus at the interface. While this is apparent visually in FIG. 3C, recall that the detection of such a cement bonding failure is a matter of information obtained from the tool 100, for example, as the detected information is analyzed by the control unit 245.

[0028]With the above in mind, added reference is now made to FIG. 4A. FIG. 4A is a chart representing cement bond logging results from dispersive processing employing different indexes 460, 480, 400 computed for each of three different dipole cutoff modes. The information relates to detections from the dipole transmissions of the tool 100 as described above. So, for example, note the rows of information in FIG. 4A (A, B and C) representing three different bonding conditions in the well. Notice that at a high-frequency cutoff mode of processing 460, the rows A, B and C indicate a variation of debonding conditions and this mode 460 shows the highest sensitivity to the outside of the casing 285 of FIGS. 3A, 3B and 3C. This would also correspond to ultrasonic monopole or directive detections from the transmitter 150 of the tool 100 of FIG. 1 as well, which would similarly indicate a potential issue within a couple hundred microns. Indeed, these initial ultrasonic detections may serve as an indicator for further analysis as represented in FIG. 4A.

[0029]Returning to FIGS. 3A, 3B and 3C, and with the above in mind, the tool 100 initially traverses a first portion of the well 280 adjacent a first formation layer 297 for cement bond logging (see FIG. 3A). While not visually perceptible in the illustration of FIG. 3A, a degree of micro-debonding may be present. With added reference to FIG. 1, this may first be ascertained through the ultrasonic transmissions and detections of other tool components (150, 160). Thus, further detections with other tool components (e.g. 101, 110) may be in order. So, for example, as shown in any row or mode (A, B and/or C) at FIG. 4A, dipole transmissions and detections using one cutoff mode 460 with dispersive processing may confirm the potential for a cement bonding issue. Further examination with a lower frequency cutoff mode of processing 480 may thus be of value. In this instance, the detections may again show a potential debonding issue (see rows A and B for two of the modes of FIG. 4A). It is apparent that there is a stronger variation of the for one cutoff mode response (e.g. 480) than for that of another (e.g. 460). This indicates a wider depth of sensitivity for lower frequency signals. However, once a lowest frequency cutoff mode of processing is applied at 400 for each well condition (e.g. rows A, B and C), notice that the 400 column magnitude indicates only the lower values of response (see FIG. 4A). This shows sensitivity to the cement presence far beyond the casing. That is, in this example, three different cutoff modes (460, 480 and 400) are employed which together confirm variation of the bonding conditions for the well scenarios A, B, C as well as presence of the cement behind the casing.

[0030]Returning with reference to FIG. 3A, to the extent that any cement bonding issues are present, they are limited to micro-debonding and do not call for any costly or time-consuming remedial action. It is this type of information that is confirmed by the chart of FIG. 4A as described above. Notice that, the combination of cutoff modes 460, 480 and 400, when looked at together, indicate that once a depth sensitivity far beyond micro-annulus width is reached, no substantial debonding is presented by the readings obtained due to the dipole capabilities of the tool 100. This may be due to the fact that during casing installation, cementing and testing a certain natural degree of casing expansion and contraction has taken place that has left some micro-debonding that does not rise to the level of a true cement debonding concern.

[0031]On the other hand, returning specifically now to the illustration of FIG. 3B, an instance of cement debonding that is worth remedial action is illustrated. That is, the illustrated substantial debonding separation 300 that is shown at FIG. 3B for the bonding taking place at the middle formation layer 295 is visually apparent. However, for an operator at an oilfield 215 relying on readings witnessed at a control unit 254, dipole tool detections using multiple cutoff mode signals at every well interval, would be of importance. So, for example, where the chart of FIG. 4A indicates issues at lower frequency signals 400 or 460, the operator may be informed of the condition illustrated at FIG. 3B. Thus, remedial action may be called for.

[0032]Of course, what constitutes substantial debonding worthy of remedial action may be predetermined and set as a matter of operator preference. Indeed, this may vary from oilfield to oilfield and be dependent on factors such as formation or hardware characteristics, types of isolations which may be sought, where they are to be located or a host of other factors. By the same token, for the chart of FIG. 4A, the cutoff modes columns 460, 480 and 400 are illustratively shown and correspond to growing sensitivity depths. This too is also only illustrative in terms of the examined cutoff depths for analysis of dipole readings which may be set anywhere between about 250 microns and several feet. However, other embodiments may combine information from multiple cutoff modes (e.g. from multiple columns 460, 480, 400) for establishing whether remedial action is in order. For example, information from one cutoff mode may be compared and contrasted against another for similarities or differences to help determine whether remedial action may be in order. Furthermore, other types readings from the tool 100 or other prior information may also be factored into determining the need for remedial action. This may include the use of nuclear magnetic resonance information, prior CBL information, impulse echo bond information, electromagnetic interference tool information and more.

[0033]Referring specifically now to FIG. 4B, a chart representing the frequency of dipole acquisitions plotted against slowness in confirming the durable cementing results depicted in FIG. 4A is shown. More specifically, the plot shown may correspond to the well conditions C that are depicted in FIG. 4A in terms of the frequency and slowness parameters employed. Thus, from an operator's perspective, a durable cementing may be confirmed that appears consistent across each mode (480, 460 and 400) once compared.

[0034]Referring now to FIG. 5, a flow-chart summarizing an embodiment of employing a dipole cement bond logging tool with multiple depth cutoff functionality is shown. As indicated at 510, the cement bond logging tool is deployed through a well, initially obtaining ultrasonic logging data that is informative to within about 250 microns of lateral depth beyond the exterior of the casing defining the well. For any given section of the well, this ultrasonic logging may confirm sufficient cement bonding at the interface between the casing and the formation as noted at 530. However, in other circumstances, such as where micro-debonding or more important issues of concern might be present, a dipole log may be performed in order to investigate depths of beyond 250 microns (see 550). This level of investigation may be directed by using various cutoff modes in addition to simply anything beyond 250 microns. Indeed, examining the cement conditions far beyond the micro-annulus size may be particularly beneficial in determining the cement presence in annulus and overall integrity of the cement bonding. As used herein, the term “integrity” refers to the structural integrity or potential fluid character of the cement bonding but also to other characteristics such as potential overall annular cement volume concerns such as illustrated at FIG. 3B (see 300). Regardless, this further investigation to one or more additional dipole modes may help to confirm sufficient cement bonding, for example, in spite of initial presentation of micro-debonding as indicated at 570. Alternatively, as noted at 590, the follow-on dipole logging may dictate that a more interventional remediation may be in order to address potentially true cement bonding failure. However, due to the combined usage of logging types with a confirming dipole log employed in advance of any remediation, a substantial amount of time and cost savings may be realized due to the substantial avoidance of any unnecessary remediation.

[0035]Embodiments of techniques are detailed herein that allow for the determination of cement bonding failure to a level of specificity beyond that available from a conventional ACE tool. This is because information from a conventional ACE tool might present the same whether the information is indicative of a potentially non-concerning micro-debonding or a potentially catastrophic bonding failure. Once more, the additional distinctive capacity may be provided by way of the same logging tool and trip into the well by simply including dipole transmitting and receiving components working in conjunction with other components of the more traditional CBL tool.

Additional Considerations

[0036]The preceding description has been presented with reference to presently preferred embodiments. Persons skilled in the art and technology to which these embodiments pertain will appreciate that alterations and changes in the described structures and methods of operation may be practiced without meaningfully departing from the principle, and scope of these embodiments. Regardless, the foregoing description should not be read as pertaining only to the precise structures described and shown in the accompanying drawings but rather should be read as consistent with and as support for the following claims, which are to have their fullest and fairest scope.

[0037]The various illustrative logical blocks, modules and circuits described in connection with the present disclosure may be implemented or performed with a general purpose processor, a digital signal processor (DSP), an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC), a field programmable gate array (FPGA) or other programmable logic device (PLD), discrete gate or transistor logic, discrete hardware components, or any combination thereof designed to perform the functions described herein. A general-purpose processor may be a microprocessor, but in the alternative, the processor may be any commercially available processor, controller, microcontroller, or state machine. A processor may also be implemented as a combination of computing devices, e.g., a combination of a DSP and a microprocessor, a plurality of microprocessors, one or more microprocessors in conjunction with a DSP core, a system on a chip (SoC), or any other such configuration.

[0038]As used herein, a phrase referring to “at least one of” a list of items refers to any combination of those items, including single members. As an example, “at least one of: a, b, or c” is intended to cover a, b, c, a-b, a-c, b-c, and a-b-c, as well as any combination with multiples of the same element (e.g., a-a, a-a-a, a-a-b, a-a-c, a-b-b, a-c-c, b-b, b-b-b, b-b-c, c-c, and c-c-c or any other ordering of a, b, and c).

[0039]As used herein, “a processor,” “at least one processor,” or “one or more processors” generally refer to a single processor configured to perform one or multiple operations or multiple processors configured to collectively perform one or more operations. In the case of multiple processors, performance of the one or more operations could be divided amongst different processors, though one processor may perform multiple operations, and multiple processors could collectively perform a single operation. Similarly, “a memory,” “at least one memory,” or “one or more memories” generally refer to a single memory configured to store data and/or instructions or multiple memories configured to collectively store data and/or instructions.

[0040]As used herein, the term “determining” encompasses a wide variety of actions. For example, “determining” may include calculating, computing, processing, deriving, investigating, looking up (e.g., looking up in a table, a database or another data structure), ascertaining and the like. Also, “determining” may include receiving (e.g., receiving information), accessing (e.g., accessing data in a memory) and the like. Also, “determining” may include resolving, selecting, choosing, establishing and the like.

[0041]The methods disclosed herein comprise one or more actions for achieving the methods. The method actions may be interchanged with one another without departing from the scope of the claims. In other words, unless a specific order of actions is specified, the order and/or use of specific actions may be modified without departing from the scope of the claims. Further, the various operations of methods described above may be performed by any suitable means capable of performing the corresponding functions. The means may include various hardware and/or software component(s) and/or module(s), including, but not limited to a circuit, an ASIC, or processor.

[0042]The following claims are not intended to be limited to the aspects shown herein, but are to be accorded the full scope consistent with the language of the claims. Within a claim, reference to an element in the singular is not intended to mean “one and only one” unless specifically so stated, but rather “one or more.” Unless specifically stated otherwise, the term “some” refers to one or more. No claim element is to be construed under the provisions of 35 U.S.C. § 112(f) unless the element is expressly recited using the phrase “means for”. All structural and functional equivalents to the elements of the various aspects described throughout this disclosure that are known or later come to be known to those of ordinary skill in the art are expressly incorporated herein by reference and are intended to be encompassed by the claims. Moreover, nothing disclosed herein is intended to be dedicated to the public regardless of whether such disclosure is explicitly recited in the claims.