MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2997144324 · doi:10.2118/0120-0026-jpt

An Unconventional Challenge Can Casing Failures During Hydraulic Fracturing Be Stopped?

2019· article· en· W2997144324 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Trent Jacobs

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Petroleum Technology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOil and Gas Production Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHydraulic fracturingCasingGeologyGeomechanicsPetroleum engineeringOil shaleDirectional drillingWorkoverGeotechnical engineeringMining engineeringEngineeringDrillingMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Shale producers around the world have learned in recent years that they cannot take wellbore integrity for granted. During pressure-pumping treatments, the interplay of hydraulic fracturing and formation geomechanics is deforming and even shearing steel casing. In the worst of cases, this means that some operators have lost access to long sections of a wellbore before it produces a single barrel of oil. This is largely not viewed as an inter-well challenge similar to frac hits. Rather, it is considered to be intrawell phenomena. The problem can take several forms and has no universal driver. George King, an independent consultant and leading technical voice on hydraulic fracturing, points out that not every unconventional asset is affected—indicating that geology and understanding of the rock fabric matter. However, information he has collected from client operators shows that in certain US shale and tight oil fields, between 20%–30% of horizontal wells are impacted to some degree. “Sometimes it is with the cement support, and sometimes it is with the casing itself,” said King, listing two of the problem’s general root causes. He added that the casing deformation is “an artifact of some damage that we are seeing right now in the realm of fracturing, and [during] the time period of fracturing.” A commonly reported version of the problem emerges after just a few stages at the toe-end of a horizontal well have been fractured. As another plug is pumped downhole to continue the completion, it suddenly stops 1,000 ft to 5,000 ft short of its target. This could happen in the bend, or it could be somewhere deep in the lateral. Often the deformation is described as ovalling. If a restriction consumes much more than a tenth of an inch of the pipe’s original internal diameter, there is the potential that unstimulated stages beyond the stopping point are lost to conventional plug-and-perf methods. This fate can sometimes be avoided by running slim-profile perforating guns, but then other isolation technologies are still needed to replace conventional plugs. Unconventional operators in China, Argentina, Canada, and the US have all faced the issue. In response, the technical community has recently stepped up collaboration efforts at industry conferences to find answers. In China, the issue appears to be more widespread on a per-well basis. National oil companies working the Sichuan Basin, the country’s most active unconventional area, have reported that more than 40% of gas wells have experienced casing deformation or failures. Like their US counterparts, Chinese operators typically realize the problem during a post-fracturing tool run. Argentina’s Vaca Muerta is not immune either. A 2015 technical paper coauthored by researchers at Chevron and YPF (URTeC 178620) casts casing shear and restrictions as common and “extremely detrimental to the performance of the well.” When explaining why the issue is cropping up today, more than a decade into the shale revolution, experts are quick to point out that a lot has changed since the first horizontally drilled and hydraulically fractured 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.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.048
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.048
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.009
Scholarly communication0.0080.015
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0140.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.009

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations26
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Petroleum TechnologySame topicOil and Gas Production TechniquesFrench-language works237,207