Numerical Modeling of Cuttings Transport With Foam in Vertical Wells
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract In this study, a 1-D unsteady-state two-phase mechanistic model of cuttings transport with foam in vertical wells has been developed. The model is solved numerically to predict the optimum foam flow rate and rheological properties to maximize the cuttings transport efficiency in vertical wells. The numerical solution allows analyzing the effects of borehole geometry, drilling rate, foam rheological properties, gas and liquid flowing rates and reservoir fluid influx on the cuttings transport efficiency when drilling vertical wells. Results of sensitivity analysis study are presented. Comparisons of model predictions with the field test data have shown that model predictions are in close agreement with the field test results. A discussion of the deficiencies of an existing foam drilling models is also provided. Introduction The Alberta Energy and Utilities Board defines underbalanced drilling (UBD) as "when the hydrostatic head of a drilling fluid is intentionally designed to be lower than the pressure of the formation being drilled, the operation will be considered underbalanced drilling"1. The benefits of UBD include increased productivity by reducing formation damage, increased rate of drilling bit penetration, minimization or elimination of lost circulation, improved formation evaluation while drilling, reduction or elimination of differential pipe sticking, reduced stimulation requirements, and earlier production. Four drilling methods are referred to as UBD:air drilling: air, nitrogen and some hydrocarbon gases can be used as circulating medium;flow drilling: fluid with density below the formation's hydrostatic gradient is used as circulating fluid;gas/liquid drilling: A gas-liquid two-phase drilling fluid is used in the drilling operation;foam drilling: stable foams are used as cuttings transport media. Because of its variable density and good cuttings transport ability, foam is favorably used in UBD operations. Applications of foam as a drilling fluid in many drilling operations and the results from various field cases were well documented in the literature 2–15. Field application of the foamed drilling fluids is very often complicated because of the difficulties encountered in controlling their hydraulic properties. In general, comparing to conventional (incompressible) drilling fluids, much less is known about the hydraulic and rheological properties of foamed drilling fluids, and even less is known about their cuttings transport capabilities. The complex flow mechanism involving in compressible drilling fluid circulation makes determination of the optimum combination of liquid and gas injection rates very difficult. Other questions also exist, such as how to predict the bottom-hole pressure and how to combine different controllable variables in order to obtain optimum cuttings transport performance and bit hydraulics. In order to simulate the hydraulics of the foam drilling realistically, factors including foam rheological properties, drag coefficient of cuttings in foam, formation fluid influx, drillpipe eccentricity, and drilling rate, need to be considered in any modeling study. An example of such a modeling study is presented in this article. Literature Review Following sections provide a review of literature on cuttings transport in general, rheology of foam and cuttings transport with foam.
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 ».