MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2559855912 · doi:10.2118/184130-ms

Low Cost Wells Manufacturing for Heavy Oil plays

2016· article· en· W2559855912 on OpenAlex
Yves Slagmulder, Jeanna Brown

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Heavy Oil Conference and Exhibition · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOil and Gas Production Techniques
Canadian institutionsShell (Canada)
FundersShell Canada
KeywordsBespokeManufacturing engineeringDrillingEngineeringFootprintDrillWell drillingComputer scienceMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Vertical Steam Flood Heavy Oil developments, such as Shell's Carmon Creek project, require a large number of wells. This high well count leads to the wells contributing a large part of the project cost and a large physical footprint. In the Carmon Creek project, the challenge for Shell was to safely drill and complete thousands of wells at the lowest possible cost while minimizing the footprint. The approach taken was that of a ‘Wells Manufacturing System’, using new technology, bespoke equipment and novel ways of working. The well construction operations were broken down in repeatable steps. This enabled fast learning and it provided the basis to engineer out ‘flat-time’ activities by designing fit-for-purpose equipment, such as BOP systems, wellheads and drilling rigs. Partnerships in low cost manufacturing locations were formed to build this equipment. A multi-disciplinary team designed wellpads, not only making them as small as possible, but also to enable the implementation of an assembly line philosophy. Three-dimensional well planning was crucial to establish the optimal well spacing at reservoir level. Drilling performance in similar developments was benchmarked extensively to be able to set challenging targets and to be able to measure performance. Given the application of the wells manufacturing system, using the same well design for both injector and producer wells was deemed most cost effective, since the key to the success of the manufacturing philosophy is repetition. This saves time and optimizes the supply chain. The resulting wellpad design has an unprecedented well count per pad of up to 49 wells, positioned in a single line. The well spacing was driven by how close beam pumps can physically be placed. The fit-for-purpose rigs have substructures that cover three wells simultaneously and function in essence as self-walking assembly halls, furnished with a super-single drilling mast. The rigs are equipped with double BOP's that can leapfrog. Work on three wells is performed simultaneously and activities such as BOP testing and waiting-on-cement are taken off the critical path. The rigs were built and operated by a Shell Joint Venture, blurring the boundaries between the traditional roles of operator, drilling contractor and Service Company, based on three principles: Build a Long-term relationship that allows Continuous Performance ImprovementTechnology that results in fit-for-purpose (FFP) equipmentVery attractive pricing that is not coupled to North American market volatility Drilling commenced in 2014 and performance has been excellent, particularly with learning by repetition exceeding expectations. The Project itself was cancelled due to political and economic reasons, but drilling on two pads was completed prior to the project halt. In total, 92 wells were drilled, with 65 wells achieving ‘Best in Class’ time and cost performance, and 77 Top Quartile wells. Well times and costs as a result decreased by up to 50%.

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.

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)0.000
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 score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score0.585

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.214 · 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