Successful Utilisation of Conventional Cement System to Mitigate Shallow Water Flow Risk in Deepwater Block M11, Myanmar
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In 2013, PTTEP drilled a deepwater well in the Gulf of Martaban, Myanmar. The water depth was 1003m with riserless drilling over 1000m below seabed. Being exploration well without any reliable offset well, shallow hazards risk was high. Shallow hazards analysis was performed, showing the high risk of shallow water flow. Shallow water flow causes many incidents, including surface casing cement failure. It can happen during cementing, cement phase transitioning, and after the cement has set. Cementing with the shallow water flow presence is, therefore, the critical operation to achieve the well integrity. Using special cement systems, foam or ultra-lightweight, is expensive, logistically challenging, and operationally complicated. After thorough risk analysis and mitigation, conventional class G cement system was selected. Information from 12-1/4″ pilot hole and actual 26″ hole were analysed for cementing plan. Shallow water flow occurred at 1819m in pilot hole. Pump and dump was started from 1760m in 26″ hole to prevent the flow. However, drilling to 2005m encountered another strong flow. So, the critical zone was identified from 2005m downward. For operational success, the critical zone was covered by gas tight tail slurry with API fluid loss control less than 50 mL/30 min, a SGSA transition timer shorter than 30 minutes and a short thickening time to prevent formation fluid migration. Lead slurry was designed for sufficient density and long thickening time to provide enough hydrostatic pressure, preventing fluid migration while tail slurry was setting. Not being ultra-lightweight cement, slurries were pumped with high excess and contain fibrous LCM to mitigate losses risk. Centralisation also contributed to the cementing success. During the cement job, good returns had been observed. No shallow water flow occurred during and after cementing. Operation was continued without subsidence issue. This paper summarises the process of assessing the risks and designing the economical cement operation to mitigate the risks, resulting in safe operation from shallow hazards.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".