MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4246064280 · doi:10.2118/03-11-ge

Economical Multilateral Well Technology For Canadian Heavy Oil

2003· article· en· W4246064280 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Steven Fipke

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Canadian Petroleum Technology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDrilling and Well Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCasingPaceCapital costProcess (computing)EngineeringOperations managementComputer sciencePetroleum engineeringGeologyElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In the last several years there has been a dramatic increase in the pace of the evolution of multilateral systems. Many systems with new features and improved functionality have been introduced that have enhanced the application of multilateral technology. Few of these systems, however, have been designed with the needs of the Canadian heavy oil producer in mind. Canadian energy producers face a different set of economical variables than do internationally based companies. As a result, very few of the multilateral systems that are presently commercially available can add value to a heavy oil development project. Very often the extra capital cost, the lengthy installation process, or the perceived operational risk will defeat a multilateral well proposal based on a NPV comparison with the obvious alternative: drilling two wells to capture the same reserves. With the Canadian operator's economical and functional parameters in mind, a system was developed as a practical solution Alberta's multilateral equation. The multilateral system was developed in response to need for:A junction that does not require cementing of the lateral LinerA lateral liner that is mechanically tied-back to the main casing StringMinimal casing restrictions for re-entry access of the lateral and mainboreA reduced number of operational steps to complete the JunctionA lower up-front capital cost of a multilateral installation.Optional sand-control for the lateral wellbore near the junction. This solution lends itself to a TAML level 3 junction for a variety of practical reasons. This system can be installed faster and more economically than a level 4 system, while lending more structural strength to the junction than a level 2. A level 3 system is particularly applicable to heavy oil reservoirs where the wells are drilled horizontally through the reservoir because it provides mechanical integrity to the junction without requiring cementing of the lateral liners. Most importantly, the system must be designed to minimize the additional capital cost of constructing a multilateral junction. The cost of drilling a shallow heavy oil well in Alberta is relatively low compared to many other places in the world. Rig costs are lower and drilling operations are extremely efficient. Therefore operators require an affordable junction construction system that can be installed with minimal additional rig time. It was with these challenges in mind that Halliburton/Sperry- Sun went towards designing the MACH-3 ™ system. It is an innovative, hybrid system capitalizing on the proven commercial success of the RMLS ™ (Retrievable Multi-Lateral System) which is responsible for over 217 junctions globally. MACH-3 Sequence of Operations Step 1–9 (available in full paper) As can be seen from the preceding operations sequence, the system can be used to create a complete level 3 junction with only three additional rig trips and minimal operational steps. Installation could be further simplified by eliminating the lateral ACP, which is an optional feature included to prevent the flow of formation solids through the casing-wellbore annulus and then into the junction itself.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.792
Threshold uncertainty score0.413

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.173
Teacher spread0.168 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Canadian Petroleum TechnologySame topicDrilling and Well EngineeringFrench-language works237,207