MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2017231692 · doi:10.4043/17459-ms

Drilling Underbalanced From A Floating Unit In A 1,500-m Of Water Depth Exploratory Well: Planning, Equipment, And Rig Modifications

2005· article· en· W2017231692 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Antonio Lage, E.F. Nogueira, Guilherme Vanni, L.H.S. Vitullo, Evandro Fartes

Bibliographic record

VenueOffshore Technology Conference · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDrilling and Well Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPetrobrasDepartment of Science and Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology, India
KeywordsDrillingPetroleum engineeringUnit (ring theory)Marine engineeringComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceGeologyEngineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The present study describes the steps taken to drill the final section of an exploratory well in Santos Basin in the underbalanced (UB) condition, in 1,500-m (4921-ft) of water depth. The first well in the area reached a fractured carbonate reservoir in which massive losses of circulation caused so many operational difficulties that the formation evaluation was not conclusive. As consequence, in the third quarter of 2005, another well will be drilled, reaching the same reservoir in the UB condition. Pre-planning and planning activities, additional required equipment, riser modifications, and new procedures are presented and discussed. Introduction Despite the fact that underbalanced drilling (UBD) has been applied for many years in the oil industry, implementing this technique from floating units is still a challenge. Several thousands of wells have been drilled underbalanced on world basis and more than 4,000 wells in Canada alone1, but almost exclusively restricted to onshore fields. Literature reports some offshore experiences that are limited to fixed platforms or jack-up rigs1–4. Operational difficulties associated to safety, logistics, and equipment placement have been keeping UBD aside from floating rigs. At the end of 2000, Petrobras, leading a JIP with other operators, service providers and consultants, overcame an important barrier with a well in Albacora Field (297-m or 974-ft of water depth) being drilled with aerated mud from the semi-submersible rig Petrobras 17. In spite of not drilling underbalanced, the principles of operation were close because a two-phase mixture composed of nitrogen and water based mud was pumped down through the drillstring and returned to surface under pressure using a rotating control head on the top of the riser, which was decoupled from the diverter assembly, and the return taken through hoses back to a typical UBD surface system5. After reaching that milestone, Petrobras started the development of technology to achieve the dual gradient drilling (DGD) condition by pumping gas at the bottom of marine riser in ultra-deep water. Differently from the mechanical lifting systems6, the use of gas consists of diluting the mud returns at the seafloor. From the point of the gas injection upward to the surface, the density of the drilling fluid is lighter than the effective mud density below the seafloor7. In ultra deep-water, the DGD condition provides an effective approach for managing the challenges associated with the narrow operational margin between the curves of pore pressure and formation fracture. For illustrating this capability, Fig. 1 presents two distinct curves of equivalent circulating density (ECD). The red curve represents the conventional single gradient drilling (SGD) method and the blue one stands for the DGD. In this example, which is based on an exploratory case from Capos Basin, in Brazil, the conventional SGD method needs a 9.2 lbm/gal water based mud (WBM) for reaching the final depth of the 12–1/4" section of the well at 4,200 m. Because of the friction pressure losses, the bottom hole ECD is slightly lower than 9.4 lbm/gal.

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 score0.130
Threshold uncertainty score0.717

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations2
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOffshore Technology ConferenceSame topicDrilling and Well EngineeringFrench-language works237,207