Decaying Swirl Flow and Particle Behavior through the Hole Cleaning Device for Horizontal Drilling of Fossil Fuel
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The hole cleaning device is a powerful application which can effectively slow down the deposition of cuttings during drilling. However, in this complicated swirl flow created by the device, the decay of the swirl flow and the particle behavior are not evident yet. In this paper, the decay of the swirl flow and the particle behavior in the swirl flow field are studied by the Eulerian–Eulerian two-fluid model (TFM) coupled with the kinetic theory of granular flows (KTGF), and sliding mesh (SM) technique for simulating the fluid flow. The results show that the swirl intensity decays exponentially along the flow direction under laminar flow conditions. The swirl flow has a longer acting distance at a higher rotational speed, which can effectively slow down the deposition of cutting particles. The initial swirl intensity of swirl flow induced by the blades increases significantly with the increase of blade height and the decrease of the blade angle. The tangential velocity of the cutting particles in the annulus is more significant near the central region, gradually decreases toward the wall in the radial direction, and rapidly decreases to 0 at the wall surface. The decay rate is negatively correlated with the initial swirl intensity. The results presented here may provide a useful reference for the design of the hole cleaning device.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".