MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2978997404 · doi:10.2118/195618-pa

The Effect of Production-Logging-Tool Data on Scale-Squeeze Lifetime and Management of Scale Risk in Norwegian Subsea Production Wells: A Case Study

2019· article· en· W2978997404 on OpenAlex
M. M. Jordan

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Production & Operations · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDrilling and Well Engineering
Canadian institutionsNalco (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubseaLoggingPetroleum engineeringPermeability (electromagnetism)Environmental scienceScale (ratio)Production (economics)Well loggingEngineeringMarine engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Because of the higher cost of scale management for subsea (SS) operations compared with platform or onshore fields, and because of the more limited opportunities for interventions, it is becoming increasingly important to obtain and use real production data from wells rather than estimated zone flow contribution from simple permeability (k) and height (h) models for scale-squeeze-treatment design. In this paper I discuss how scale-squeeze treatments were designed (coreflood evaluation of inhibitor retention/release) and deployed for three SS heterogeneous production wells. A permeability model and a layer-height model were initially developed for each well using detailed geological log data, estimated water/oil-production rates, and the predicted water-ingress location within the wells. Two wells were each treated three times using bullhead scale-squeeze treatments, with effective scale control being reported over the designed lifetime. A production log was acquired before the fourth squeeze campaign of these two wells. This information was incorporated into the squeeze simulation to allow review of the ongoing third squeeze and enhance design accuracy for the upcoming fourth squeezes. A third well was treated twice before production-logging data became available, and the performance of treatments to this well is also assessed. The production-logging-tool (PLT) data proved very important in changing the understanding of fluid placement and the water-ingress location during production, resulting in changes to the isotherm values used to achieve effective history match to the inhibitor returns (with PLT data incorporated in all three wells), and most significantly affecting the squeeze lifetimes. It was possible to significantly extend the treatment lifetime of two of the wells (cumulative produced water to minimum inhibitor concentration), while the treatment life of one well was greatly reduced because of the PLT-data-modified model predictions. In this paper I outline the process of reservoir/near-wellbore modeling that is used for most initial squeeze-treatment service companies deployed in the North Sea. I will highlight in detail the value that PLT data can provide to improve the effectiveness of squeeze treatments in terms of understanding of fluid placement during squeeze deployment and water-ingress location within heterogenous production wells. The intention of this paper is to highlight the value that these types of data can provide to improve scale management (squeeze treatment and water shutoff) such that the value created more than offsets the cost of acquiring such information for SS production wells.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.186
Threshold uncertainty score0.676

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.225 · 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