MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4240560846 · doi:10.2118/2004-279

Compaction Resistant Wellbore for Sand-Producing Wells

2004· article· en· W4240560846 sur OpenAlexaff
D.M. Shute, T.M.V. Kaiser, H. Munoz

Notice bibliographique

RevueCanadian International Petroleum Conference · 2004
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEngineering
ThématiqueDrilling and Well Engineering
Établissements canadiensHusky Energy (Canada)
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésCitationWellboreDownloadCompactionEngineeringGeologyMining engineeringLibrary sciencePetroleum engineeringGeotechnical engineeringComputer scienceWorld Wide Web

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract A common production strategy from heavy oil sands is to produce the sand with the oil to maintain, or even increase, the deliverability of the well. Where very high sand production is realized, the cumulative sand volume "mined" from the reservoir can be very large. This can result in large vertical deformations relative to the elastic strain limit of steel and associated deformation of the liner through the producing interval. A new completion system has been developed to address the deformation associated with very high sand production wells. The Compaction Resistant Wellbore (CRW) was designed to absorb the axial compaction and provide improved structural capacity. Strain-absorbing tools accommodate axial deformation and preserve the elastic characteristics of the pipe. A new type of completion tool through the producing interval provides substantially increased compression strength and buckling resistance to distribute deformation to the strain-absorbing tools. Although the system is novel it can be run with only slight modifications to conventional procedures. Introduction Cold heavy-oil production with sand has proven to be an effective strategy for increasing recovery rates to levels significantly beyond conventional practice. However, experience with this strategy also demonstrates that where the sand production strategy is most successful, well life is often reduced by deformations arising from sand production. Bent and buckled casing often compromises the function of the pump and prevents access to the well to facilitate repair. Tension failures in the cap rock above the reservoir compromise pressure integrity, which results in increased abandonment costs. While the improved productivity generally offsets the cost of such problems, there is substantial opportunity for improving the economic performance of the sand-producing strategy if the problems associated with reservoir compaction can be reduced or eliminated. Much attention has been focused on compaction-induced problems over the past 20 years in the oil industry. Many of the issues have been characterized, and a variety of solutions have been proposed. In this paper, deformation mechanisms are reviewed, considered in the context of a high sand production strategy, and a solution for extending the life of such wells is presented. A case study of a high sand-producing field is reviewed, showing a history of well operation and the implementation of this approach for increasing the well life. Background Many modern production strategies in the oil industry achieve very high recovery rates in reservoirs where the void space containing the oil can be reduced by production. Examples include North Sea chalk reservoirs like Valhall1 and Ekofisk2,3, where compaction drive produces superior recovery rates. While production associated with compaction is a significant benefit, the cost associated with compaction is also high. Subsidence, and casing deformation problems arising from compaction can be difficult and costly to characterize and mitigate. 3–6 Completion performance is also a challenge because of the high compaction strain relative to the completion limits, often exceeding ten times the yield limit of steel. One solution that has been proposed to solve this problem is to use slip joints in the casing or liner to absorb compaction strains so the well structure can accommodate axial deformation without exceeding tensile or compressive limits.

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 enseignants0,342
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,998

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 Opus0,014
Tête enseignante GPT0,212
Écart entre enseignants0,198 · 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
Publié2004
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueCanadian International Petroleum ConferenceMême sujetDrilling and Well EngineeringTravaux en français237 207