MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2896783001 · doi:10.2118/191797-ms

Adopting Physical Models in Real-Time Drilling Application: Wellbore Hydraulics

2018· article· en· W2896783001 on OpenAlexaff
Mojtaba P. Shahri, Bahri Kutlu, Taylor Thetford, Brian Nelson, Timothy Wilson, Michael Behounek, Adrian Ambrus, Pradeepkumar Ashok

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Liquids-Rich Basins Conference - North America · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDrilling and Well Engineering
Canadian institutionsApache (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDrill stringDrillMeasurement while drillingAutomationDrillingDrilling engineeringComputer scienceEngineeringSimulationMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The first step towards drilling optimization and automation is a reliable data acquisition and handling system. This includes receiving and processing different frequency data across multiple platforms and ensuring proper data quality. Once we implement such a platform, we can build different advisory solutions to improve drilling efficiency and move towards drilling automation. The developed Drilling Intelligence Guide (DIG) already enabled us to achieve the aforementioned goal and access different data (from contextual to high frequency) in real-time. In the next phase, different models (physical or data analytics) can be built in to optimize various stages of drilling operations. The drilling industry has made significant progress on different physical models that can be run offline (either for pre-job design or post-job analysis) in the previous decades. Given the developed data platform, we can now adopt and run these models in real-time for optimization and automation purposes. As an example, a real-time, computationally efficient hydraulic model that can account for drill string rotation and eccentricity would enable us to monitor ECD (to be used for wellbore stability, kick and lost circulation mitigation) and calculate pump pressure corresponding to different operational conditions (to be used for drill string washout/pump failure prediction and sensor calibration). The aim of this paper is to show the application of the hydraulic model for real-time monitoring and optimization purposes. An analytical hydraulic model including drill pipe rotation and eccentricity effects is used and compared against transient numerical simulations. In the next step, Pressure While Drilling (PWD) data are used to verify the accuracy of the model for real-time applications. After the verification steps, we explain the process to couple real-time data (e.g., flow rate, RPM), contextual data (e.g., mud properties, BHA and wellbore geometry) and the physical model using field examples. In addition to ECD monitoring at the bit and casing shoe, the real-time hydraulic model can also be used to monitor washout and pump failure events. The application of the model is shown using field examples.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.456
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.206 · 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.

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

Citations13
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSPE Liquids-Rich Basins Conference - North AmericaSame topicDrilling and Well EngineeringFrench-language works237,207