MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2587068410 · doi:10.2118/185042-ms

Evaluation of Downhole Multi-Cycle Sleeve Technology for Re-Frac Completions in Southwest Manitoba

2017· article· en· W2587068410 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Unconventional Resources Conference · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOil and Gas Production Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompletion (oil and gas wells)Section (typography)Interval (graph theory)Operator (biology)PhysicsGeometryEngineeringCombinatoricsComputer scienceMathematicsMechanical engineeringChemistryOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A new down hole multi-cycle sleeve completion system that was run in a well allowed the operator to re-frac all previously stimulated zones along the horizontal section of a wellbore with relative ease. The technology utilizes sleeves that can be closed and opened for the life of the well and re-defines the way re-frac completions can be done. Risks are significantly reduced and efficiencies improved compared to other re-completion techniques Coiled tubing (CT) equipped with a resettable frac plug bottom hole assembly (BHA) was deployed in a well that was originally fractured from the toe interval back to the heel. Unlike conventional completion systems where the frac sleeves are left open after each stage, these particular sleeves were closed immediately after each frac was complete. Once all the stages were stimulated, CT was then moved back down the well to re-open all the sleeves from the toe to the heel and allow the well to produce. This method is described as the Shift-Frac Close (SFC) sequence and is discussed in more detail in the paper. Both the original and re-completion were done in this nature. Well details along with original and re-frac designs will also be discussed in the paper The subject well consisted of 25 stages along the HZ section. The original completion from start to finish took ~ 56 hours to complete where each interval was fractured successfully with fairly small tonnages and low rates. After poor production results the operator decided to re-frac all intervals with a more aggressive frac design placing more sand in each interval at faster rates and higher bottom hole sand concentrations. It was estimated that the re-frac completion took ~38 operating hours. This represents significant improvement when compared to other systems where trying to re-complete a well may require drilling out ball seats, re-perforating and/or using risky isolation or diversion techniques. In addition, being able to close the sleeves after each frac has shown added benefits in the prevention of proppant flow back. This was noted in both the original stimulation and re-completion performed on this particular well that in turn saved money in potential sand cleanouts and possibly eliminated the use for resin coated sands. The paper documents this first ever application of executing re-fracs through re-closeable sleeves, and discusses the importance of sleeve reliability and longevity. Having the flexibility with this completion system also allows customers the option to frac intervals out of sequence, which has been hypothesized to reduce effective fracture spacing and effectively tap into a natural fractured network (Sharma et al 2013).

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.744
Threshold uncertainty score0.519

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.235 · 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