MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2892950075 · doi:10.1115/omae2018-78101

CFD Numerical Simulation for Downhole Thruster Performance Evaluation

2018· article· en· W2892950075 on OpenAlexaff
Bashir Mohamed, Abdelsalam Abugharara, Mohammad Azizur Rahman, Stephen Butt

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDrilling and Well Engineering
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRate of penetrationFluentPressure dropDrillingComputational fluid dynamicsMechanical engineeringComputer simulationDrill pipeEngineeringDynamic pressureImpact pressureVolume of fluid methodMarine engineeringMechanicsSimulationFlow (mathematics)Aerospace engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study focuses on numerical simulation and evaluation of a hydraulically powered downhole Thruster. This device is numerically simulated and evaluated using ANSYS Fluent 17.2 to show its generation of pressure pulses that can induce downhole forces that magnify the downhole dynamic weight on bit (DWOB) using drilling mud. Such magnification of the DWOB can produce axial motion of the Thruster. Such axial motions, as proved by many publications can improve the drilling rate of penetration (ROP), release stuck pipes, and reduce frictions in non-vertical wells. The special inner design of the Thruster creates pressure pulses that can provide load impact on the drill bit leading to the increase of WOB that can enhance the drilling performance. The current stage of the study of the Thruster involves a mechanical design of the Thruster by the SolidWorks and an evaluation of the tool function and performance through pressure effect simulation by ANSYS Fluent 17.2. Initially, water is used as the fluid and the main parameters involved in the analysis are pressure and velocity. However, power-law as a non-Newtonian fluid is also used for comparison study in the section of pressure drop analysis. The results are analyzed based on velocity pressure profiles, pressure drops, pressure effects with applications of various back pressures at several planes using water and power-law fluids.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDrilling and Well Engineering→French-language works237,207→