Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract To recover heavy oil and bitumen from the highly unconsolidated reservoirs of the Western Canada oilsands fields using the horizontal well method, and in particular the thermal in situ method of Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage (SAGD), some forms of sand control, such as slotted liners and wire-wrapped screens (WWS), are generally required to limit sand production and maintain well productivity. Over the past two decades, a number experimental and analytical studies have been performed for developing industry guidelines and best practices for the structural and hydraulic design and evaluation of sand control liners under the challenging conditions of SAGD steam injection and production wells. The vast majority of SAGD applications, estimated at about 90% (RPS 2009), employ slotted liners as the sand control method. Design efforts to address the structural and serviceability requirements, however, often oppose one other, presenting significant challenges to the design of slotted liners. For example, in order to maintain sufficient torque, collapse and strain-absorbing capacities, traditional slotted liners are often designed to have low Open Flow Areas (OFA) around 1%, although a larger OFA is desired for production efficiency. This paper reviews current design requirements for SAGD wells, as well as puts forward a new slotted liner design consideration for the optimized performance under installation and operational loads. Using Finite Element Analysis (FEA) modeling, the effect of key design parameters, such as slot length and slot pattern, are studied. This paper focuses on the feasibility study of achieving higher OFA than the currently-used limit, while maintaining sufficient torque, collapse and strain-absorbing capacities under thermal well load conditions.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".