Experiments with Stand-Alone Sand-Screen Specimens for Thermal Projects
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Summary Most of the test protocols developed to evaluate sand-screen designs were based on scaled-screen test coupons. There have been discussions regarding the reliability of such tests on scaled test coupons. This paper presents the results of tests on wire-wrapped screen (WWS) and slotted liner (SL) test coupons for typical onshore Canada McMurray formation sand. A unique sand control evaluation apparatus has been designed and built to accommodate all common stand-alone screens that are 3.5 in. in diameter and 12 in. in height. This setup provides the capability to have a radial measurement of pressure across the sandpack and screen for three-phase flow. Certain challenges during testing such as establishing uniform radial flow and measuring the differential pressure are outlined. Produced sand is also measured during the test. The main outputs of the test are to assess the sand control performance and the mode of sanding in different flow directions, flow rates, and flow regimes. It was possible to establish uniform radial flow in both high- and low-permeability sandpacks. However, the establishment of radial flow in sandpacks with very high permeability was challenging. The pressure measurement at different points in the radial direction around the screen indicated a uniform radial flow. Results of the tests on a representative particle size distribution (PSD) from the McMurray Formation on the WWS and SL test coupons with commonly used specifications in the industry (aperture sizes of 0.012, 0.014, and 0.016 in. for WWS and 0.012, 0.016, 0.018, and 0.020 in. for SL) have shown similar sanding and flow performances. We also included aperture sizes smaller and larger than the common practice. Similar to previous tests, narrower apertures are proven to be less resistant to plugging than wider slots for both WWS and SL. Accumulation of fines close to the screen causes significant pore plugging when conservative aperture sizes were used for both WWS and SL. In contrast, using the test coupon with a larger aperture size than the industry practice resulted in excessive sanding. The experiments under linear flow seem more conservative because their results show more produced sand and smaller retained permeability in comparison to the testing under radial flow. This work discusses the significance, procedure, challenges, and early results of physical modeling of stand-alone screens in thermal operation. It also provides insight into the fluid flow, fines migration, clogging, and bridging in the vicinity of sand screens.
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».