Experimental Investigation of Cuttings Transport in Horizontal Wells Using Aerated Drilling Fluids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract An experimental study has been conducted to investigate the cuttings transport in horizontal wellbores using aerated drilling fluids. An advanced flow loop system with 21 ft. long annular test section composed of 2.91-in. ID transparent casing and 1.85 in. OD inner drill pipe has been used for the experiments. Aerated fluids were composed of air/water and air/drag reducing polymer fluid mixtures. Partially hydrolyzed polyacrylamide (PHPA) copolymer was used as a drag reducing agent. Drag reducing polymer fluids (i.e. water-polymer mixtures)were prepared usingPHPA concentrations of0.05% V/V, 0.07%V/V, and 0.10% V/V. The optimum PHPA concentrationwas found to be 0.07%V/Vresulting maximum drag reduction of 41.88%. Four different flow regimes were identified along with the flow of aerated fluids as bubble, elongated bubble, slug and wavy annular regimes. Adding PHPA polymers in water delayedthe transition from slug to annular wavy flow regime (i.e. for a given liquid flow rate the transition from slug to wavy annular flow regime was observed at higher gas flow rates). The annular area occupied by the cuttings decreased with the increasing liquid(both water and polymer fluid) and gas flow rates. However, increasing the liquid flow rate was more effective in terms reducing the cuttings bed deposition. On average, the use of 0.07% PHPA polymer fluid with air for cuttings transport caused 23.90% drag reduction while reducing the annular area occupied by the cuttings by 4% and cuttings bed height by 13.78%. Though cuttings transport performance of the various flow regimes did not show significant difference, Wavy Annular flow regime seemed to be the most effective flow regime in terms of cuttings transport among the others.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".