MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2779311326 · doi:10.2118/0118-0065-jpt

Design and Surveillance Tools Help Lower Integrity Risks for High-Temperature Wells

2017· article· en· W2779311326 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Adam Wilson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Petroleum Technology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDrilling and Well Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCasingPetroleum engineeringEnvironmental scienceMechanical engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article, written by Special Publications Editor Adam Wilson, contains highlights of paper SPE 184159, “Use of Technical Design and Surveillance Tools To Minimize Operating Integrity Risk in High-Temperature Wells,” by Mirko Zatka, SPE, Shell Canada Energy, prepared for the 2016 SPE International Heavy Oil Conference and Exhibition, Mangaf, Kuwait, 6–8 December. The paper has not been peer reviewed. Thermal-well operations come with significant additional complexity in regard to maintaining wellbore integrity and hydraulic isolation from other formations. This is because of the extreme loads that may be placed on the well casing and liners, caused by the wide set of operating temperatures and pressures the wellbores may experience. To ensure that the wellbores can fulfill their anticipated operating need safely, careful design of the casing, liners, connections, and cement during the project-development phase is an absolute requirement. Background Wells designed for heavy-oil thermal-recovery projects will be exposed to a potentially wide range of operating temperatures. These can exceed 340°C for the deepest heavy-oil-bearing formations and can be as low as 5°C during well workovers. Such a range of operating conditions will cause the casing to yield under compressive conditions, and most likely under tensile conditions also, as it undergoes thermal cycling from the heating and cooling requirements of well operations. A thermal cycle is defined here as the confined casing material being heated to the point that it yields and plastically deforms under a compressive load, followed at some later time by sufficient cooling to force it to yield and plastically deform under a tensile load. This is an operating requirement for which casing and liners are not normally designed in conventional applications but is frequently unavoidable in thermal operations. As a result, consideration of material properties of the tubulars requires a much deeper understanding of the chemistry, manufacturing, and heat-treating processes in order to select the optimal material. Similarly, casing connections play a key role in well integrity, based on their ability to withstand stress cycles in the casing or liner string. Casing-cement composition and placement procedures are also key design parameters because thermal cycling of the casing will expose the cement to very large stresses across the metal/cement bond and potentially can alter the cement properties themselves. In turn, the operating practices applied to wellbores and the operating envelopes used to determine safe limits become keys to long-term integrity and safety.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Petroleum TechnologySame topicDrilling and Well EngineeringFrench-language works237,207