MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2025868667 · doi:10.4043/18268-ms

Installing Jackups in Punch-Through-Sensitive Clays

2006· article· en· W2025868667 on OpenAlexaff
R. Brennan, H. Diana, R.W.P. Stonor, M.J.R. Hoyle, Charlene Cheng, Richard. Roper

Bibliographic record

VenueOffshore Technology Conference · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDesign Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsConocoPhillips (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInstallationComputer scienceGeologyOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The paper describes some of the problems of installing a jackup adjacent to a fixed platform in an area with difficult geotechnical conditions. An account is presented of the initial problems experienced at a location that resulted in a punchthrough and consequent structural damage to the legs of a modern jackup. The geotechnical conditions and available geotechnical surveys are described as are the subsequent additional geotechnical surveys required to identify whether a similar jackup could be safely re-instated at the location. The analyses indicated that geotechnical remediation would be required and the adopted method of ‘swiss-cheesing’ is discussed. Comments are made on the subsequent successful installation and eventual removal of the second jackup. The paper is directed towards owners and operators wishing to install jackups at locations where punch-through sensitive clays are present. It provides conclusions on the requirements from geotechnical surveys at such locations and on the benefits and implications of undertaking geotechnical remedial programs. Punch-through represents a major risk in the operations of jackup platforms in certain geotechnical conditions and the avoidance of such risks by the techniques described has a considerable economic value. SUMMARY AND INTRODUCTION In August 2004 a new jackup was installed at the Belida B wellhead platform (WHP) offshore Indonesia in the Natuna Sea in order to drill over a conventional steel jacket. The water depth at the location was 249ft (75.9m). The jackup was positioned on the south face of the jacket with a heading of 210 degrees. The unit was successfully located in the desired position (despite some sliding problems encountered due to spudcan craters left by a previous unit) and elevated out of the water in order to apply full preload. The preload had been held for just over 2.3 hours when additional penetration of the starboard leg was observed. Despite attempts to maintain the unit in a level condition the situation grew rapidly worse and the hull swayed and yawed to starboard until it stabilized in an afloat condition with its legs broken just below the hull. The unit was successfully removed for repairs. The legs which had broken off and were embedded in the seabed were then recovered by a floating sheer-leg crane. The operators of the field were anxious to complete their drilling program and during the following year arrangements were made to examine whether a jack-up could be safely installed at the same location. The jackup selected was of the same design as that which had been damaged during the earlier installation attempt. New geotechnical survey data was obtained from the disturbed soil locations where the legs had been removed and this indicated that the risk of a punchthrough was still present. Means of remediating the seabed were examined and as a result of these studies it was decided that a process known as ‘swiss-cheesing’ should be adopted in order to ensure that the jackup spudcans would be driven safely through the layer of stiff material found to be overlying a weaker layer..

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)0.003
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations45
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOffshore Technology ConferenceSame topicDesign Education and PracticeFrench-language works237,207