Use of Silicate Mud to Control Borehole Stability and Overpressured Gas Formations in Northeastern British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A freshwater silicate based drilling fluid, containing 20-30% sodium silicate by volume, was successfully used to drill a gas well in northeastern British Columbia. Major drilling issues in the area include borehole instability in 500 plus meters of highly dispersible Ft. Simpson shale, high pressure gas zones and potential moderate-severe lost circulation. Despite problems of severe lost circulation and high mud weights, the caliper log on the silicate well showed <1% hole enlargement over the Ft. Simpson shale and 12% enlargement over the entire intermediate section. Typical offset calipers with other water-based muds average 48% and 31% enlargement over the Ft. Simpson and entire well section, respectively. Rates of penetration with silicate mud were generally better than offset wells. Uphole formations drilled to 1060 meters with a low solids, lower density silicate fluid (1195 kg/m3 mud density) drilled at an average of 19.2 m/hr. Offsets drilled with gel-chemical or gel-PHPA systems over the same interval normally averaged 12.6 m/hr. This paper describes the planning and drilling of the first well with a drilling fluid containing silicates up to 30% concentration. Topics discussed include borehole stability, rates-of-penetration, motor performance, drilling fluid stability and properties, and environmental aspects of silicate disposal.
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".