MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2993607976 · doi:10.1109/ojia.2019.2956987

Shaft Failure Analysis in Soft-Starter Fed Electrical Submersible Pump Systems

2019· article· en· W2993607976 on OpenAlexafffund
S. F. Rabbi, Jalal Taheri Kahnamouei, Xiaodong Liang, Jianming Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Open Journal of Industry Applications · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOil and Gas Production Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMotor soft starterStarterEngineeringTorsion (gastropod)Submersible pumpMechanical engineeringAutomotive engineeringStatorRoot causeStructural engineeringMarine engineeringInduction motorVoltageElectrical engineeringReliability engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electric submersible pumps (ESPs) are widely used for high volumetric oil and gas recovery from downhole wells. ESPs in oil fields can be equipped with multiple ac motors in tandem. To assist a motor start-up, a solid-state soft-starter can be deployed in such ESP wells. ESP shafts have a long axial length, and thus experience significant dynamic torsion when started from reduced voltage soft-starters. Premature shaft breakdowns had occurred in the field during the motor start-up for soft-starter fed ESPs. This paper investigates the shaft breakdown phenomenon in a 750-HP ESP system using a real-world case scenario. A lumped parameter electro-mechanical model for the ESP system is developed to observe its dynamics. The effects of static as well as fluctuating torsional stress on the interconnected pump shafts are analyzed to determine the root cause of the shaft breakdown. Criteria for successful start-up for soft-starter driven ESP systems are also presented to increase the equipment's operational life.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.258
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations17
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Open Journal of Industry ApplicationsSame topicOil and Gas Production TechniquesFrench-language works237,207