MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2536578927 · doi:10.1115/ipc2000-274

Refurbishment of Rolls-Royce 501 Turbo-Generators for Oil Production in Ecuador

2000· article· en· W2536578927 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mike J. Ascherl, Bryan K. Kendig

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOil and Gas Production Techniques
Canadian institutionsRolls-Royce (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurbo generatorElectricityFactory (object-oriented programming)Generator (circuit theory)Electricity generationProduction (economics)EngineeringIdlePipeline (software)Marine engineeringAutomotive engineeringEnvironmental sciencePetroleum engineeringComputer scienceElectrical engineeringMechanical engineeringPower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During 1997–1999 an energy company based in Calgary, Alberta, Canada added approximately 17.5 megawatts of electrical generating capacity to its oil production facility in Ecuador. Reservoir pressure was insufficient to permit free flow into the transportation pipeline. Therefore, a series of motor driven, bottom hole pumps had been installed. As is typical with many remote well sites, an electricity source was not available to achieve reliable operation of the bottom hole pumps. Therefore, a decision was made to install seven (7) refurbished on-site turbo-generator sets. The turbo-generators are based on the Rolls-Royce 501K gas generator, were commissioned during the first half of 2000, and today provide electricity for the facility. This paper discusses the refurbishment of the turbo-generator sets. The refurbishment is a noteworthy achievement given the fact that the units sat idle for many years within the unprotected environment of the Venezuelan rain forest. The refurbishment methods and technologies are discussed. Factory test data are also presented.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Bench or experimentalhigh
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Other designhigh
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designBench or experimental · Other design
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

Citations0
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOil and Gas Production TechniquesFrench-language works237,207