MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045673995 · doi:10.2118/87842-jpt

Prediction and Evaluation of Sanding and Casing Deformation in a GOM-Shelf Well

2005· article· en· W2045673995 on OpenAlex
Ion Ispas, Alexander Bray, I. D. Palmer, N. G. Higgs

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

VenueJournal of Petroleum Technology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDrilling and Well Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCasingPetroleum engineeringDeformation (meteorology)CompactionWork (physics)GeologyHammerGeotechnical engineeringEngineeringMining engineeringForensic engineeringMechanical engineeringOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Technology Today Series articles are general, descriptive representations that summarize the state of the art in an area of technology by describing recent developments for readers who are not specialists in the topics discussed. Written by individuals recognized as experts in the area, these articles provide key references to more definitive work and present specific details only to illustrate the technology. Purpose: to inform the general readership of recent advances in various areas of petroleum engineering. Sand production is an important well-completion issue affecting well economics and, possibly, casing stability. This study compares predictions of sanding and casing deformation for a well in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico (GOM) shelf prepared before completion of the well with the results of a post-sanding event for this well. The sanding event was predicted adequately considering the uncertainty of the data entered into the model. The casing deformation monitored by the post-sanding survey also was consistent with the prediction of helical buckling caused by depletion of fluids only when cavities of vertical extent greater than 7 ft exist (e.g., because of sand production) around the wellbore. This study supports the use of these predictive methods in well-completion design. Introduction The driver for this study is a concern that sand production from GOM wells in weak sands may lead to casing failure. In Ekofisk, for example, casing failures caused by compaction have been studied, but these failures were not caused by solids production. There have been surprisingly few papers written about casing failures correlated with sand production. One is the Canadian heavy-oil-sands work, although it addresses massive amounts of sand produced (thousands of barrels). For this paper, we found an opportunity to assemble different aspects that had been studied separately into a more complete technical analysis. The subject has gained importance recently because of a renewed interest in managing sand production from wells rather than installing costly gravel packs. Oil and/or gas production in weakly consolidated sandstone formations can lead to sand production when the reservoir pressure is depleted to the point at which the effective stress on the near-wellbore region exceeds the formation disaggregation strength. Sand production can lead to costly wellbore-cleanup operations, erosion damage to tubing and surface equipment, and significant sand-handling expenses. Thus, the prediction of sanding is an important design consideration when deciding whether a well should be completed with sand-control measures. This Technology Today Series paper is based on paper 78236 prepared for the 2002 SPE/ISRM Rock Mechanics Conference.

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)0.001
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 score0.093
Threshold uncertainty score0.243

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.204 · 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