MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2013028192 · doi:10.2118/1010-0066-jpt

Exception-Based Surveillance

2010· article· en· W2013028192 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dennis Denney

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of Petroleum Technology · 2010
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEngineering
ThématiqueReservoir Engineering and Simulation Methods
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésProduction (economics)Variety (cybernetics)Upstream (networking)Work (physics)Lean manufacturingValue stream mappingComputer scienceBusinessOperations managementEngineeringTelecommunicationsMechanical engineering

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

This article, written by Senior Technology Editor Dennis Denney, contains highlights of paper SPE 127860, ’Exception- Based Surveillance,’ by Jorge Yero and Thomas A. Moroney, SPE, Shell Exploration and Production Company, prepared for the 2010 SPE Intelligent Energy Conference and Exhibition, Utrecht, Netherlands, 23-25 March. The paper has not been peer reviewed. With ever-increasing amounts of data available to surveillance engineers, Lean concepts can be used to eliminate waste, allowing engineers to concentrate on the highest-value tasks by removing unnecessary analysis. An exception-based-surveillance (EBS) tool and integration of the tool into a collaborative work environment improved reservoir and facility surveillance and led to efficiencies in procedures, engineering performance, and production. Introduction Shell Upstream America’s business unit has producing assets onshore in the USA and Canada and offshore in the Gulf of Mexico and Brazil. These assets include very complex production facilities that use some of the most advanced technology available. With the complexity of these assets and the high cost of equipment and/or well failures, combined with the potential cost of lost production, it becomes necessary to monitor a wide variety of measurement points continuously on the surface and subsurface of these assets. The problem becomes more complex when external factors are considered. With increasing demand and a low-cost environment that often forces lower staff counts, companies are compelled to use the same staff resources that are required to monitor production, perform surveillance activities, and proactively determine failures to additionally participate in more-strategic and longer-term initiatives. Unfortunately, these individuals no longer have time to perform the tasks required to optimize uptime and maximize efficiency and productivity in the assets. With the lack of a shared understanding of the method, process, or procedure for surveillance or monitoring and a lack of experience with the well or equipment being analyzed, each person can miss opportunities because of a simple lack of common practices. Optimizing people’s time, standardizing their work, capturing knowledge, and establishing the ability to automate surveillance activities have become imperative. Shell developed a framework based on Lean practices that encompasses collaborative work environments, standardized analytical tools and procedures, a sophisticated event engine, automated workflows, and a knowledge-capture system. Lean Basis Several process-improvement initiatives were implemented that are based on the Lean principles of waste elimination, value-stream mapping, continuous flow, pull, and continuous improvement. The Lean concept mandated that a set of standard operating procedures (SOPs) follow each exception generated by the EBS system. Work that was performed was role based, and people executed against the highest-value work at each step. Another Lean principle was to make information visible. Andon boards, similar to call-center dashboards, enabled supervisors to load balance the work no matter where an individual was originally assigned. “Signals” were monitored for improvement opportunities when the frequency of the event was significantly higher than that of other comparable events. Finally, signals followed an assigned workflow so that when assigned work was completed by the signal recipient, the signal was passed on to a person in the appropriate role for the next level of analysis.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Simulation ou modélisation · Signal consensuel: Simulation ou modélisation
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,185
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,332

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,005
Tête enseignante GPT0,239
Écart entre enseignants0,234 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSimulation ou modélisation
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations2
Publié2010
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of Petroleum TechnologyMême sujetReservoir Engineering and Simulation MethodsTravaux en français237 207