MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2897537101 · doi:10.2118/191780-18erm-ms

Field Validation of a New BHA Model and Practical Case Studies in Unconventional Shale Plays, with a Framework for Automated Analysis for Operations Support

2018· article· en· W2897537101 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
J. K. Wilson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDrilling and Well Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDrillingOil shaleField (mathematics)Directional drillingComputer scienceBending momentNatural frequencyMoment (physics)Petroleum engineeringMechanical engineeringEngineeringStructural engineeringAcousticsMathematicsVibration

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A new three-dimensional drillstring model has been developed that determines the static and dynamic behavior of bottom hole assemblies (BHAs) in realistic wellbores. The analysis approach has been validated with field data, and shows a strong agreement between observed and calculated BHA behavior. Several case studies are presented that show the practical use and benefit of the advanced model for, among other applications, unconventional horizontal drilling. A framework is also provided to show how the model can be incorporated into automated engineering processes for operations support. Validation tests were conducted using high-frequency down-hole data measured within a motor- assisted rotary-steerable BHA. The gathered data was used to verify the calculated mechanical loads, predicted lateral natural frequencies of the BHA, estimated directional performance of the down-hole assembly, as well as torsional resonance resulting from High-Frequency Torsional Oscillations (HFTO). Using the validated model, various analyses have been conducted for operators around the globe, in a multitude of different drilling environments, to aid in identifying drilling dysfunctions and optimizing BHA performance. Several case studies are presented that highlight the benefit of the modeling techniques in US unconventional shale plays as well as in the Canadian heavy-oil sands, with noticeable improvements in drilling efficiencies, tool design, and reduced non-productive time (NPT). Results from the field tests show a strong correlation between measured and calculated bending moment values, as well as lateral natural frequencies of the BHA with an average of 3% error across all data sets. The primary source of error is thought to be borehole spiraling, which is quantified through analysis of the down-hole bending moment data. In addition, the model is shown to provide close estimates to actual directional performance of both steerable mud motor and Rotary-Steerable BHAs. However, the directional calculation-measurement comparison does reveal a need to incorporate an ROP-dependency within the directional prediction algorithms. Nevertheless, even with these sources of discrepancy, the modeling approach provides a sensible prediction of the BHA's mechanical and dynamic behavior and, as shown through case studies, can be used as a planning tool for BHA design, an investigative tool for root-cause analysis, or potentially as a real-time optimization tool for avoiding harmful operating conditions.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations4
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDrilling and Well EngineeringFrench-language works237,207