Cementing Irregular Horizontal Wellbores
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this work, we study the effect of borehole irregularities during primary cementing of a horizontal section of well. We use a simplified 2D gap-averaged model to compute the displacement of a drilling mud by a spacer within an elliptical annulus that represents an oval irregularity. We also present a series of 3D numerical simulations using a Volume of Fluid method to capture the interface between the fluids. The 3D model allows us to study the effects of more local irregularities such as wall roughness that can be imported from a caliper log. The dynamics of the displacement of two fluids in a horizontal uniform circular annulus is governed by buoyancy, eccentricity and the rheology of the fluids. A positive density difference combined with a slow mean pumping speed promotes slumping of the second fluid towards the bottom of the annulus. Nevertheless, high eccentricity values (e = 1-standoff) are common due to the weight of the casing pulling downwards, opposing the buoyancy force. Finally, the rheology of the fluids is relevant to determine the presence of un-displaced layers of mud, e.g. at the walls. The same competition described above holds true in the elliptical annulus. Results from the 2D gap-averaged model suggest that the elliptical shape incorporates an additional way of altering the velocity field around it. The effect is more evident when orienting the largest radius of the elliptical annulus at different angles. Results from 3D simulations show that the interface follows irregularities and the local roughness can improve the displacement by inducing secondary flows. However, enlargements result in poor displacement.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".