MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4236080844 · doi:10.2118/2006-195

Effect of Sand Production on Casing Integrity

2006· article· en· W4236080844 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

affAu moins un auteur déclare une institution canadienne dans l'instantané OpenAlex épinglé.

Notice bibliographique

RevueCanadian International Petroleum Conference · 2006
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEngineering
ThématiqueMaterials Engineering and Processing
Établissements canadiensBitCan (Canada)
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésCasingProduction (economics)Petroleum engineeringEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceGeotechnical engineeringGeology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract This paper documents an engineering study on sand production and its aftermaths on casing damage. Many wells were converted from production to water injection to maintain reservoir pressure and dispose waste water. Formation of precipitates across the injection interval required frequent washing. Inadvertently, the well washing involved reducing the well pressure rapidly. Consequently, solids were released from the formation into the wells. The well washing and associated solid production went unnoticed for an unknown long time until significant casing deformation encountered during a recent working-over. The significant solid production caused casing buckling near the perforation interval. It also activated a weak plane in the overburden, causing further casing damage. This paper will present relevant field data and engineering analyses to support the above conclusions. Field measures to improve the casing's resistance against the buckling are also described. Introduction In the field, a casing is generally situated in a complicated geological environment. It is exposed to formation fluid that can be corrosive. It is mechanically loaded by in-situ stresses, fluid pressure, reservoir compaction or expansion. Along its path, it may traverse many complex geological structures such as faults, thin weak layers, weak bedding planes, weak 3-D bodies (salts), weak-strong interbeds, etc. The downhole temperature can be very high. Besides the natural factors as described in the above, casing integrity may be compromised by human factors. For example, casing failure may have its origin right from the very beginning of a petroleum exploitation program. Inability to drill and maintain a gauged and stable borehole, a poor selection of casing hardware, a poor cement placement, an inappropriate perforation and a non-optimized well placement can all impact the casing integrity. This is further compounded by non-optimized reservoir stimulation/production strategies during the production life span. The complex factors or processes described in the above, being it human or natural, can interact with each other. For example, chemical corrosion may create microcracks in the tubing. The microcracking process will accelerate upon stress loading. As another example, a deformed casing becomes oval. An ovalized casing causes stress concentration which makes the conventional design based on circular geometry invalid. Therefore, casing integrity design is an extremely complex issue. Nevertheless, from a practical point of view, it is always better to design or manage the complexities or uncertainties to prevent casing failures than to remedy a failed casing. This philosophy has repeatedly proven cost-effective in the worldwide industrial practices. Optimum casing integrity can be designed and/or managed if sufficient engineering conscience is executed. The appropriate engineering conscience starts with characterizing the reservoir including its mechanical and eservoir engineering properties. It must also attend the production strategies so that the casing integrity is maintained in accordance with considerations for the production targets. When casing damage happens in the field history, it is critical to analyze the circumstances around the damage and draw lessons from them. All these tasks are executed in this paper. Various fields in our assets experienced casing damage. Plan for increasing the production will accelerate the casing impairment trend.

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.

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: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,643
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,996

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 recherche0,0000,000
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 Opus0,008
Tête enseignante GPT0,214
Écart entre enseignants0,206 · 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