MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3177988231 · doi:10.1007/s13202-021-01229-8

Quantifying the partial penetration skin factor for evaluating the completion efficiency of vertical oil wells

2021· article· en· W3177988231 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Petroleum Exploration and Production Technology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersQatar National Research FundFonds National de la Recherche LuxembourgQatar Foundation
KeywordsPenetration (warfare)Petroleum engineeringOffshore geotechnical engineeringSkin effectPressure dropDrop (telecommunication)Oil wellComputer scienceMechanicsGeologyEngineeringGeotechnical engineeringMechanical engineeringOperations research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract An oil well's productivity is generally considered the standard measure of the well's performance. However, productivity depends on several factors, including fluid characteristics, formation damage, the reservoir's formation, and the kind of completion the well undergoes. How a partial completion can affect a well's performance will be investigated in detail in this study, as nearly every vertical well is only partially completed as a result of gas cap or water coning issues. Partially penetrated wells typically experience a larger pressure drop of fluid flow caused by restricted regions, thus increasing the skin factor. A major challenge for engineers when developing completion designs or optimizing skin factor variables is devising and testing suitable partial penetration skin and comparing completion options. Several researchers have studied and calculated a partial penetration skin factor, but some of their results tend to be inaccurate and cause excessive errors. The present work proposes experimental work and a numerical simulation model for accurate estimation of the pseudo-skin factor for partially penetrated wells. The work developed a simple correlation for predicting the partial penetration skin factor for perforated vertical wells. The work also compared the results from available models that are widely accepted by the industry as a basis for gauging the accuracy of the new correlation in estimating the skin factor. Compared to other approaches, the novel correlation performs well by providing estimates for the partial penetration skin factor that are relatively close to those obtained by the tested models. This work's main contribution is the presentation of a novel correlation that simplifies the estimation of the partial penetration skin factor in partially completed vertical 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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.374
Threshold uncertainty score0.182

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.253 · 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