MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021048263 · doi:10.2118/117486-ms

Mechanical Evaluation of a New Sand Control Screen for SAGD Applications

2008· article· en· W2021048263 on OpenAlex
Glenn Woiceshyn, E. P. Toffanin, Jueren Xie, Brian Wagg, Chengye Fan

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Thermal Operations and Heavy Oil Symposium · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDrilling and Well Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSteam-assisted gravity drainageDrillingTorsion (gastropod)Directional drillingCompression (physics)Flow (mathematics)Tension (geology)Geotechnical engineeringEngineeringStructural engineeringGeologyMaterials scienceComposite materialMechanical engineeringMechanicsOil sands

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Steam assisted gravity drainage (SAGD) wells typically require the deployment of an open hole completion combining sand control with adequate mechanical strength to withstand: 1) aggressive installation loads—compression, torque, bending—that are characteristic of shallow horizontal wells, and 2) severe operational loads—tension, compression, collapse, burst—caused by a combination of high temperature steam injection and formation collapse around the completion. Historically, slotted liners have been used in Western Canada, primarily because of low cost relative to wire-wrapped screen (WWS) or premium mesh screens. However, slotting base pipe can significantly weaken its mechanical strength, particularly in torsion and collapse, and the slot width can change as the liner deforms under certain load conditions. Reported incidents of mechanical failure and loss of sand control of slotted liners in SAGD wells have generated interest among operators to investigate alternative technologies. A new sand screen has been developed that involves flush-mounting and securing 25.4 mm diameter fusion bonded metal laminate (FBML) cartridges/discs directly into the base pipe wall. The open flow area of the screen, which can be as high as 20% (versus 2.5% for slotted liner), is dictated by the number of inserted discs (holes) per foot. For an equivalent open flow area, drilling holes in the base pipe is less detrimental to the mechanical strength of the liner than cutting slots. This new geometry results in a sand screen that is cost competitive to slotted liner on a same-open-flow-area basis, significantly stronger, and comparable to a premium mesh screen in terms of sand retention performance. To independently quantify the mechanical strength and integrity of this new screen for SAGD, an extensive Finite Element Analysis study was performed on 177.8 mm (7"), 38.7 kg/m (26 lb/ft), L80 base pipe for two different hole densities and various single loads, combined loads and thermal cycling. The results, as presented herein, demonstrate that inserting FBML discs into base pipes does not significantly weaken it compared to cutting slots. A stand alone screen (SAS) with almost four times the open flow area of a slotted liner has significantly more torsion and collapse strengths.

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.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.826
Threshold uncertainty score0.381

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.237 · 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