MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2137539305 · doi:10.2118/87180-pa

Correlations and Analysis of Cuttings Transport With Aerated Fluids in Deviated Wells

2008· article· en· W2137539305 on OpenAlexaff
R. Avila, E. Pereira, Stefan Miska, Nicholas Takach, Arild Saasen

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Drilling & Completion · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDrilling and Well Engineering
Canadian institutionsConocoPhillips (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVolumetric flow rateCasingRotational speedMechanicsFlow (mathematics)Rotation (mathematics)Flow measurementPetroleum engineeringMaterials scienceGeotechnical engineeringEngineeringMechanical engineeringPhysicsMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary A study of cuttings transport at intermediate inclinations using aerated fluid, to determine the amount of solids that exist in the wellbore and minimum flow requirements for "clean-hole" condition, is presented. The experimental program included more than 300 tests, performed with a large-scale facility [100-ft-long flow loop with 8-in. outer diameter (OD) casing and 4.5-in.-OD drillpipe]. The angles of test section inclination were 30°, 45°, and 60° from vertical. Four pipe-rotational speeds (0, 40, 80, and 110 rpm) were used for different liquid-and gas-flow-rate combinations. New correlations were found to estimate the required critical-gas-flow rates for hole cleaning at specified liquid-flow rate and drillpipe-rotation combinations, and to predict volumetric cuttings concentration as a function of air and water flow rate, drillpipe-rotational speed, and inclination angle.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.171 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSPE Drilling & CompletionSame topicDrilling and Well EngineeringFrench-language works237,207