MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Bench Test and Field Test of Rotary Steering Motor (RSM) System

2012· article· en· W1763697420 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Guanghua Dong, Xinhua Liu, Guangtong Feng, jianghong Jia

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in petroleum exploration and development · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDrilling and Well Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTest benchEngineeringPower steeringDrillingField (mathematics)Blade (archaeology)Automotive engineeringMarine engineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rotary steering system may improve drilling speed, reduce downhole accidents and decrease drilling cost greatly when it is used to drill extended reach well and multilateral horizontal well. The feature and components of Rotary Steerable Motor (RSM)system are first briefly introduced in this paper : it consists of rotary steerable head, mud motor and flex sub and works in Push the Bit mode, steering or non-steering condition and each blade are controlled by using independent electromagnetic valves, mud motor provides power for bit and the hydraulic system by driving shaft; then the pre-test procedures, test set-up and procedures of bench test are described in detail: including blade sequence test, blade firing delay time test and acceptance test of RSM system, finally the note and analysis of the field tests of RSM system in ShengLi Oil Field are enumerated. The bench tests and field tests show that control method of this system is simply, reliable and easily realizable, with improvements this system will be used in practical application soon. Key words :Rotary Steering Motor (RSM) System; Mud motor; Bench test; Field test; Steering blade

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.192 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in petroleum exploration and developmentSame topicDrilling and Well EngineeringFrench-language works237,207