MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965601718 · doi:10.2118/117845-ms

Cost Reducing Factors in Effective Pipeline Piling Structure Design and Construction in Alberta's Thermal SAGD Gathering Pipeline Systems

2008· article· en· W1965601718 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
M.A. Farrokhzad

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Thermal Operations and Heavy Oil Symposium · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersChildren's Healthcare of Atlanta
KeywordsPipeline transportPipeline (software)EngineeringSteam-assisted gravity drainagePetroleum engineeringBoiler (water heating)Civil engineeringProduction (economics)ThermalWaste managementMechanical engineeringAsphaltOil sands

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The piling design and construction cost is a major fraction of the total construction cost of an above-ground Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage (SAGD) gathering pipeline. Recently, there have been efforts to review the principle designs of the piling and possibly to reduce the associated costs. In most common design practices for pilings design, the engineers use the sum of the loads caused by steam and production lines. Using the sum value can be considered a good engineering practice; however this can cause unnecessarily large pile sizes and therefore increased cost. Some of the case studies presented in this paper show that the sum value may not be necessary and that it is possible to maintain a safe design within the acceptable criteria by using a fraction of the sum value. For this study, several stress analyses on pipeline cases were modeled including various thermal scenarios and gradient directions. In Alberta's SAGD projects, steam travels from the boiler source to the well heads through a trunk pipeline. It takes a few hours to a couple of days for steam to reach the well heads depending on the length of the pipeline. After this time period, the productions (bitumen and production gas) are extracted from the reservoir and travel to the production pads or interconnection pipelines. As the steam and production travel along the pipeline a thermal gradient is generated and travels along the pipeline as well. In a typical production process, the piles are subject to thermal loads caused by the traveling steam and by the time that the steam reaches to well heads, the loads are in the equilibrium state. After this, the hot productions (bitumen and associated produced gas) travel in reverse along a seperate pipeline. Due to the difference in period of traveling, the SAGD pipeline arrangement and pilings are not subject to receive the two maximum load waves caused by steam and production simultaneously and therefore it is possible to design the piles on a fraction of the total load amplitudes. These considerations have allowed us to review the design principles and conclude safe practice with respect to lowering the size and the cost of piles. This paper explains that the current design philosophy tends to neglect some design elements such as thermal gradient direction and loading sequence on the piles. It reviews these factors and identifies room for improvement in piling design and cost saving with respect to constant, startup, shutdown and upset operating load conditions.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.855

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Thermal Operations and Heavy Oil SymposiumSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground StructuresFrench-language works237,207