Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Conventional Measurement While Drilling (MWD) systems and mud motors have been the preferred method used to drill horizontal and directional wells. Although this method has been proven on thousands of wells it has also shown inefficiencies. The process of slide drilling can lead to undesirable doglegs, hole cleaning problems, reduced weight to the bit, etc. Rotary steerable technology has undergone a significant transformation in recent years and is quickly becoming not only a viable alternative to mud motors but in some cases standard practice. Phoenix markets and services a rotary steerable system called the Well Director Automatic Directional Drilling System. This paper will discuss rotary steerable technology as a whole then focus in on the Well Director. The Well Director is in the final stages of becoming a commercially viable drilling tool. Mechanical, Hydraulic and Data Transmission methods for the tool will be included. A discussion of trials and tribulation will follow with an emphasis on going forward and the advantages the tool represents to operators namely faster, smoother and more accurate well bores drilled further than ever before. Introduction Directional drilling continues to be an essential tool for the oil and gas producer. Wells drilled either directionally or horizontally in Canada continue to represent a significant percentage of total wells drilled. Environmental issues depleted production zones and landowner conflicts are on the rise and therefore increase the need to drill directionally or horizontally. Percentage of Hz/Dir Wells vs. Total Wells vs. % of Wells Drills (Available in full paper) Steerable mud motors have been the preferred method used to drill horizontal and directional wells. Although this method has been proven on thousands of wells it has also shown inefficiencies. For example we can expect to see upwards of a 50% decrease in the rate of penetration (ROP) while sliding1 as opposed to rotary drilling. A relatively new technology has been developed to improve upon the inefficiencies associated with steerable mud motor drilling. Rotary Steerable Tool technology is quickly becoming an economically viable and technologically superior alternatives to steerable mud motor drilling. Rotary Steerable Tool Technology is the process of continually rotating the drill string while at the same time steering the bit toward a pre-determined target. This technology has been designed to combine both a mud motor and a MWD into one compact drilling system. Well Director ® Phoenix Technology Services LP (Phoenix) has entered into an agreement to market and service a Rotary Steerable Tool called the Well Director ®Automatic Directional Drilling System. This tool has been operated in over one hundred wells for the mining industry in Europe over the past fifteen years. Recent technical advancements have allowed this tool to become commercially viable for the oil and gas directional market. The Well Director consists of two main components, refer to figure 1. The first being the rotating mandrel, this runs through the center of the tool and is in constant rotation when the tool is operating.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.007 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".