MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2731257980 · doi:10.2118/0617-0073-jpt

What Vacuum-Insulated Tubings and Casings Bring to Thermal Wells

2017· article· en· W2731257980 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Chris Carpenter

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Petroleum Technology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReservoir Engineering and Simulation Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCasingPetroleum engineeringInjectorThermalCompletion (oil and gas wells)Steam injectionHeat exchangerOil viscosityEnvironmental scienceMaterials scienceMechanical engineeringViscosityEngineeringComposite materialThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article, written by JPT Technology Editor Chris Carpenter, contains highlights of paper SPE 182515, “What Vacuum-Insulated Tubings (or Vacuum-Insulated Casings) Bring to Thermal Wells,” by J. Damour and D. Johannson, Majus, prepared for the 2016 SPE Thermal Well Integrity and Design Symposium, Banff, Canada, 29 November–1 December. The paper has not been peer reviewed. This paper describes both design and economic considerations that lead to the selection of vacuum-insulated tubing (VIT) or vacuum-insulated casing (VIC) for the completion of thermal wells. The results shared in this paper are some of the parameters considered during thermal-well design: temperature on the casing and the tubing, and heat loss. Knowing these parameters, well integrity can be studied and the overall efficiency of the process estimated. Introduction The most common thermal enhanced-recovery methods are cyclic steam stimulation, steamflooding, and steam-assisted gravity drainage, which is widely used in Canada. The role of these thermal-recovery methods is to convey heat into the reservoir, mainly by convection. The temperature of the oil increases and its viscosity decreases significantly in the reservoir. These methods can substantially increase the oil production of a field, increase the recovery factor, or unlock some heavy-oil assets. Typical steam-injection temperature is between 250 and 310°C; in a few cases, it could be greater than 310°C. This high-temperature application requires adapting the design of the injector wells to avoid any mechanical failure of the well or to mitigate heat loss through the well. VIT or VIC are solutions to some of these issues. VIT technologies have evolved significantly since their first application. Different materials are used as insulation material, and several designs are proposed by the industry to achieve the best thermal-performance-vs.-cost equation. A model was developed to assess the temperature of the different components of a well—tubing, casing, cementation, and ground—and to provide the heat loss occurring during the steam injection. The results show that the wide range of VIT thermal performance provides a range of casing temperatures. Thus, the casing thermal expansion or thermal loads resulting from this temperature increase range significantly.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score0.536

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Petroleum TechnologySame topicReservoir Engineering and Simulation MethodsFrench-language works237,207