Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract An innovative proven new tool, the "Fluid Hammer", provides axial percussive force and effective weight transfer to the bit which increases the rate of penetration (ROP) from 30-50% with no impact to bit life. BBJ Tool's patent pending Fluid Hammer together with Suncor Energy Inc. of Calgary, Alberta, Canada has applied the Fluid Hammer in several wellbores with excellent results. The tool is positioned between the bit and the mud motor with an antiback off connection. The relatively simple mechanical design delivers effective agitation to the bottomhole assembly (BHA) and reduces issues in deviated wellbores, such as hole drag and proper weight transfer to the bit. It has been successful in improving ROP in vertical/deviated and horizontal hole sections. The Fluid Hammer has been successful on >80 bit runs in vertical/deviated/horizontal wellbores with water, oil base and nitrified drilling fluid systems. Direct comparisons of formations with and without the Fluid Hammer have been completed. The study compares geological formations, compressive rock strength, mud weight and BHA parameters such as weight on bit, rpm, hole drag and ROP. Resulting sliding ROP matches rotating ROP in horizontal wellbores with the downhole agitation at the bit. Tool design improvements will be further enhanced with the use of an Axial Dynamic Simulator. The Fluid Hammer increases ROP, has no effect on telemetry tools, causes no restriction to pump rate and can be used with any mud system. This tool can be run in conjunction with conventional adjustable housings or rotary steerable tools. No special percussion bits are required and it has been run with a wide variety of conventional bit types and sizes. An additional feature of the Fluid Hammer has been in extended reach horizontal hole sections in which the BHA has been simplified with the removal of conventional agitation tools.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.043 | 0.005 |
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".