MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4238108656 · doi:10.2523/86600-ms

Improved Safety of Rig Automation with Remote Monitoring and Diagnostics

2004· article· en· W4238108656 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.

aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueProceedings of SPE International Conference on Health, Safety, and Environment in Oil and Gas Exploration and Production · 2004
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEngineering
ThématiqueIndustrial Automation and Control Systems
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésAutomationSafety monitoringComputer scienceEngineeringMechanical engineeringBioinformatics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Improved Safety of Rig Automation with Remote Monitoring and Diagnostics Bryce Levett Bryce Levett Varco International Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Paper presented at the SPE International Conference on Health, Safety, and Environment in Oil and Gas Exploration and Production, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, March 2004. Paper Number: SPE-86600-MS https://doi.org/10.2118/86600-MS Published: March 29 2004 Cite View This Citation Add to Citation Manager Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Get Permissions Search Site Citation Levett, Bryce. "Improved Safety of Rig Automation with Remote Monitoring and Diagnostics." Paper presented at the SPE International Conference on Health, Safety, and Environment in Oil and Gas Exploration and Production, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, March 2004. doi: https://doi.org/10.2118/86600-MS Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex Search Dropdown Menu nav search search input Search input auto suggest search filter All ContentAll ProceedingsSociety of Petroleum Engineers (SPE)SPE International Conference and Exhibition on Health, Safety, Environment, and Sustainability Search Advanced Search AbstractRig automation has focused on improving safety with equipment designed to reduce manpower/human interaction and assume repetitive tasks and operations. As more parts of a drilling rig become automated, there has been a change in how rig personnel interact with equipment. A system of remote monitoring, diagnostics and technical support has been developed to make this interaction more seamless and expand the focus of rig automation. Case studies are presented in this paper of actual field conditions where the remote monitoring system eliminated hazardous operations, discovered operational 'bad habits', and identified areas requiring additional training. Use of the remote diagnostic system prevented the need for physical contact between human and machine in order to solve problems. Documented field incidents have shown benefits of increased safety in many areas when using remote monitoring and management compared to operations without.IntroductionRig automation (as pertains to discussion in this paper) is defined as equipment designed to automate repetitive tasks, reduce human intervention and error. These repetitive tasks are associated with pipe handling operations on the drill floor. Operations can include racking pipe in the derrick, bringing drill pipe to well center, make-up or breakout of connections and pick-up or lay-down of pipe from the derrick to a conveyer.One of the key drivers for the development of this rig automation has been improved safety. The reduction of human presence and physical interaction by humans has been a major goal behind the design of automated equipment. The equipment has evolved into complex robotic designs. Sophisticated sensor technology is employed to determine position relative to other equipment. The optimal path/movement necessary to complete an operation is determined with collision avoidance as a prime factor. Joysticks and touch screens are utilized as control interfaces, requiring only one person to operate the equipment.The sophistication of the control technology has simplified the interaction of the operator and the equipment, but has also added a degree of complexity to troubleshooting when something does not function quite right. Specialized personnel from the equipment manufacturing companies are sometimes dispatched to the rig to assist in troubleshooting. Data about a failed operation is often sparse and personnel have to rely on verbal data, which can be in error. Troubleshooting techniques may require the use of manual overrides to automated control sequences. Equipment can be fully functioned in this mode, however the collision avoidance systems are disabled or bypassed thereby increasing the risk of operation. Even during normal (non-troubleshooting) operations, manual override mode is available and if used can increase the risk of operation.The system discussed in this paper was developed and designed to remotely monitor drilling equipment. Using remote diagnostics, the system helps eliminate the need to dispatch specialized personnel (both onboard rig personnel and onshore specialists) and reduces the use of manual override during both operation and troubleshooting. Keywords: rig automation, artificial intelligence, monitoring, safety, operation, drilling equipment, manual override mode, controller, collision, upstream oil & gas Subjects: Drilling Equipment, Information Management and Systems This content is only available via PDF. 2004. Society of Petroleum Engineers You can access this article if you purchase or spend a download.

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: Autre devis · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,981
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,419

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 Opus0,026
Tête enseignante GPT0,234
Écart entre enseignants0,208 · 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