Applications of cavitating jets to radioactive scale cleaning in pipes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deposition of scale inside wellbores is causing millions of dollars in damage every year. Any water production or injection in the gas or oil well is creating a possibility of scale formation. It can reduce formation porosity and permeability, it can block flow in the pipes, and it can damage downhole completion equipment. Some mineral scales such as calcium carbonate (CaCO3) can be dissolved with acids but common hard scales such as barium sulfate (BaSO4) are extremely resistant to both chemical and mechanical removal. Another scale problem is natural radionuclides which are contained in rocks and are carried out on the surface during oil production. The cleaning of radioactive scale, is a very complicated and expensive process. In some cases, it is even easier to replace the pipes than to clean depositions of radioactive barium sulfate which generates accumulation of radioactive materials in storage fields. In the current study cavitating jets were used to remove barium sulfate scale from pipes and detailed experimental procedures for cavitating nozzles design and testing were shown. Optimal combination of hydrodynamic nozzles was defined and tested in the field. It was shown that designed combination of hydrodynamic nozzles significantly improved scale removal process.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".