Optimising Depth Selection on Section Milling Operation to Secure Sustained Casing Pressure During Plug and Abandonment Operation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract D-01 was an exploration well requiring a Plug-and-Abandonment (P&A) procedure with sustained casing pressure up to 2,000 psi on the B annulus. The presence of Sustained Casing Pressure (SCP) is one of the major technical challenges to decommission and abandon the well safely. Several attempts to secure the well using the perforation-and-squeeze method were performed – but failed. It was decided to perform section milling operations to create a viable rock-to-rock barrier. In this operation, the key factor in determining success, is selecting the correct depth to mill safely and secure the annular pressure source. A comprehensive approach was taken to determine the optimum depth for the section milling by evaluating existing open-hole and cased-hole data. Additionally, triple-detector Pulsed Neutron Log (PNL) was also performed prior to the section milling operation. The triple-detector PNL tool offered not only behind casing porosity (TPHI) and sigma (SIGM) measurement, but also a relatively new measurement in the oil and gas industry called Fast Neutron Cross Section (FNXS), which were expected to provide more accurate gas detection and gauge the condition near the borehole. By combining all the logs and reservoir data, the milling interval was selected and the section milling and subsequent cement plug operations were performed. Evaluation of existing open-hole and cased-hole logs provided geological and petrophysical insights which were useful in determining the hydrocarbon source charging the B-annulus. Further analysis on PNL data provided indication of possible gas pockets in the B-annulus. This information was used to distinguish between shallower formation sources or gas pockets that were not yet bled off. The operation on D-01 successfully resolved the B-annulus issue and the well was properly abandoned per regulatory requirements. Considering the complexity and high cost of section milling operations, a thorough review of data and pre-job logging increases the probability of selecting the optimum intervals needed to successfully complete P&A operations on SCP wellbores.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".