Vibration analysis of drillstrings with string—borehole interaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Drillstring vibration is one of the major causes for a deteriorated drilling performance, and if left untreated may result in a complete failure of the drilling process. Although the variations in the drilling load, stick-slip, and whirling are known to be the primary causes of severe vibrations, they often give rise to excessive flexural deformations and subsequent string—borehole interaction. Drillstring contact-impact interaction with borehole results in high-frequency excitations, which further deteriorate the drilling performance, and may cause damage to the bottomhole assembly. Modelling of impact is crucial to understanding the associated dynamic response, and to providing means for controlling the collision phenomenon. A continuous force—displacement law is introduced to model the impulsive force during the short-lived interval of impact, wherein the material compliance and damping coefficients are determined from energy balance relations. The impact model is integrated to the dynamic model of the whole drillstring; including drillpipes and drillcollars. The dynamic model of the rotating drillstring is formulated using a Lagrangean approach in conjunction with the finite-element method. The model accounts for the torsional-bending inertia coupling and the axial-bending geometric non-linear coupling. In addition, the model accounts for the gyroscopic effect and the effect of the gravitational force field. The generalized eigenvalue problem is solved to determine modal transformations, which are invoked to obtain the reduced-order modal form of the dynamic equations. The developed model is integrated into a computational scheme to calculate time-response of the drillstring system in the presence of string—borehole collisions.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".