Determination of Effective Drag Forces and Torques for Jam Release During Drilling and Workover Operations in Directional Wells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Excessive frictions in directional wells lead to various downhole problems such as pipe stuck that requires frequent workover operations, during which it is very challenging to accurately determine the effective drag (axial) forces and torques for releasing a jam at a stuck position due to the complex downhole situations. In this study, mathematical models have been formulated, validated, and applied to accurately determine such forces and torques in directional wells by taking the frictions caused by string-stiffness into account. The stiffness-based contact (normal) force is correlated with the deflection of a string segment by treating the bending segment as a simple beam that has both continuous and point contacts with the wellbore wall. Subsequently, the conventional soft-string model proposed by Johancsik et al. in 1984 is modified through coupling such a contact-force term into the original equations. Both the original soft-string model and the modified model are employed to perform the force and torque calculations for two field wells, based on which the effect of string-stiffness and the associated sensitivities are analyzed. Comparing the modified model with the conventional model, it has been found from their field applications that effective drag forces and torques for releasing a jam at a stuck point can be determined with an averaged relative deviation of 23.35% and 37.59%, respectively, indicating a considerable effect of string-stiffness that cannot be neglected for an accurate and efficient operation of jam release.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".