MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3095640596 · doi:10.2118/201167-ms

Wellhead Penetrator Problems and Best Practices in ESP Thermal – SAGD Applications

2020· article· en· W3095640596 on OpenAlexaffabout
Pat Keough, Jesús Chacín, Kyle Ehman

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOil and Gas Production Techniques
Canadian institutionsConocoPhillips (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWellheadWorkoverEngineeringLead (geology)Petroleum engineeringMarine engineeringEnvironmental scienceGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Wellhead penetrators are a critical component in the ESP electrical system. The harsh SAGD environment and conditions impose an even higher level of stress on penetrators (high temperature, H2S, water vapor production). Recently, a sudden increase in wellhead penetrator failures in the Surmont SAGD ESP operation, near Fort McMurray, Canada, lead to an enhanced field-wide root cause analysis (RCA) effort. This paper is a field-case study that describes the findings of this RCA and the mitigation measures taken. Among the actions taken, a feasibility study was fast-tracked to determine the potential for success of the Time Domain Reflectometry (TDR) method to discriminate if what was perceived as a potential "downhole electrical failure" was indeed a much shallower penetrator failure. Being able to identify a penetrator failure can yield significant savings in rig-time and workover efficiency while avoiding unnecessary transportation and replacement of non-failed downhole equipment such as the ESP and cable. TDR usage is common in other industries, but their use in ESP operations has been limited to expensive and complex systems such as offshore or deep installations. An ensuing field-wide trial was promptly commissioned in order to validate the effectiveness of the TDR method. In a complex environment, the importance of an empirical study with real-world conditions is critical to determining success. This paper describes the basic principle of the TDR method, and focuses on the TDR signal interpretation experience gained in Surmont in 43 failures as of May 2020, during the field-wide trial. Results presented are promising and support the accuracy of this method to detect failure location. While the TDR readings were implemented under challenging SAGD conditions, authors believe that its implementation could be considered in most, if not all ESP installations. The paper will also describe any challenges and limitations that have been discovered.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOil and Gas Production TechniquesFrench-language works237,207