First Field-Testing Of A New Rotary Steerable Drilling Liner Technology On Alaska North Slope
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Conventional drilling through lower intermediate intervals in the southern portion of the Alpine field on Alaska's North Slope (ANS) has posed significant challenges, resulting in longer than planned well delivery timing, and additional costs due to accumulated drilling complications. While unstable shale sections can be drilled without significant issues, hole collapse has caused difficulties while tripping out of hole and running casings. The need to overcome these challenges for long term economical access to develop the Alpine sands reservoir section beneath the shale layers led to numerous project initiatives and operational changes. These actions all produced incremental advances to mitigate wellbore stability issues, but never provided a guarantee that a liner would be successfully run to total depth of the open hole section after the trips required to complete this task conventionally. In 2011, a new Steerable Drilling Liner system was proposed as a possible solution for drilling these wellbores while sealing off the troublesome shales. An extensive feasibility study was conducted to ascertain the technical possibility of deploying this technology safely within the Alpine field. Candidate wells were identified and a phased implementation approach was adopted to conduct field trials in order of increasing complexity of well trajectory and open hole and liner section lengths. This paper provides insights into the new technology and the field trial program. We cover the lessons learned and further improvement opportunities applicable to future deployments in this area. Based on the success of the Steerable Drilling Liner technology in this application, further deployments are scheduled to take advantage of developing Alpine reservoir sands in an economical and safe manner.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".