MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164459735 · doi:10.2118/07-12-tn3

Effect of Sand Production on Casing Integrity

2007· article· en· W2164459735 on OpenAlexaff
X.Q. Li, Tian Zhu, Li Fang, Yanguang Yuan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Canadian Petroleum Technology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDrilling and Well Engineering
Canadian institutionsBitCan (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCasingWorkoverPetroleum engineeringOil fieldGeotechnical engineeringCorrosionCompletion (oil and gas wells)DrillingGeologyEngineeringMaterials scienceMetallurgyMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper documents a case study about the effect of sand production on casing damage. Many wells were converted from production to water injection. Formation of precipitates across the injection interval required frequent well washing which in-advertently involved reducing the well pressure rapidly. Consequently, solids were released from the formation into the wells. The well washing and associated solids production went unnoticed for an unknown length of time until significant casing deformation was encountered during a recent workover. The significant solids production caused casing buckling near the perforation interval. It also activated a weak plane in the overburden, causing further casing damage. This paper will present relevant field data and engineering analyses to support the above conclusions. Field measures to improve the casing's resistance against the buckling are also described. Introduction This paper is concerned with casing integrity in conventional onshore reservoir production in the Niuzhuang area of the Shengli Oilfield in China. Worldwide experience shows that origins of casing failure are complex. Reservoir geology, drilling and cement practices, production drawdown schemes and casing hardware can all influence casing integrity. Nevertheless, major casing damage mechanisms can be summarized as follows:chemical corrosion(1, 2);shear deformation along re-activated weak planes(3–8);significant reservoir compaction(9–11); and,excessive sand production(12–16). Chemical corrosion is a major casing damage mechanism in the NiuZhuang field. In a total of six wells being investigated, damage to five of those wells was caused by corrosion(17). However, this paper describes another casing failure mechanism; unintended excessive sand production. The following description will first present relevant field data. Mathematical analyses are then carried out to quantify the damage mechanisms. Finally, field measures are proposed to correct the problem. Reservoir Geology and Rock Mechanical Properties Production in the NiuZhuang field mainly comes from two sand bodies at a depth of approximately 3,200 m. The reservoir is struc-turally simple with only a small normal fault at an offset of 10 m. The original reservoir pressure is abnormally high at 1.68 SG. Av-erage reservoir permeability based on core analysis is 24.5 mD and porosity is 18.2%. Porosity is the major fluid conduit and storage. Natural fractures are not developed. Initial well production rate is very high, but the productivity decreases rapidly. Full production started in 1993. Water injection was needed in late 1994. The effect was seen at the production wells usually four to six months after water injection started at the surrounding wells. No rock mechanical tests were done on our target reservoir rocks. Instead, rock mechanical properties were calculated from well logs and petrophysical data using Baker Hughe's LMP (Log of Mechanical Properties)(11). Table 1 lists the average properties calculated at reservoir pressures equal to the peak injection pressure (70 MPa) or the minimum pressure reached during well washing (35 MPa). Table 1 also includes a set of lab-measured mechanical properties on a similar stratum in an adjacent oil field. Well History and Casing Damage Well N42 experienced significant casing deformation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.819
Threshold uncertainty score0.398

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations6
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Canadian Petroleum TechnologySame topicDrilling and Well EngineeringFrench-language works237,207