MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4252453712 · doi:10.2523/105413-ms

Cementing Considerations for Casing While Drilling Operations: CaseHistory

2007· article· en· W4252453712 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

VenueProceedings of SPE/IADC Drilling Conference · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDrilling and Well Engineering
Canadian institutionsConocoPhillips (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCasingDrillingCitationComputer scienceEngineeringGeologyMining engineeringPetroleum engineeringLibrary scienceMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cementing Considerations for Casing While Drilling: Case History Robert D. Strickler; Robert D. Strickler ConocoPhillips Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Pablo Solano Pablo Solano ConocoPhillips Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Paper presented at the SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, February 2007. Paper Number: SPE-105413-MS https://doi.org/10.2118/105413-MS Published: February 20 2007 Cite View This Citation Add to Citation Manager Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Get Permissions Search Site Citation Strickler, Robert D., and Pablo Solano. "Cementing Considerations for Casing While Drilling: Case History." Paper presented at the SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, February 2007. doi: https://doi.org/10.2118/105413-MS Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentAll ProceedingsSociety of Petroleum Engineers (SPE)SPE/IADC Drilling Conference and Exhibition Search Advanced Search Abstract Casing while drilling (CWD) is an emerging technology being introduced in different areas around the world This new configuration, where the casing is used as a drillstring, presents new challenges for primary casing cementing operations compared to the conventional cementing operations.A full understanding of the required changes of the cementing methodology from conventional drillpipe drilling operations can contribute to the success of any CWD campaign. CWD cementing differs from conventional cementing practices because it is impossible to use standard centralizers attached to the casing while drilling because of extended and faster casing rotation.When more than one bit is required to reach the next casing point, CWD requires full-bore casing access to pull and run bottomhole assemblies (BHA) through the casing. In these instances, conventional floating equipment cannot be used.Wireline logging is normally conducted in cased hole after the cementing job. The cement volumes are calculated with a cement excess factor instead of a caliper log.This paper describes the methodology developed to successfully cement surface, intermediate, and production casings in more than 125 wells in south Texas where CWD was used. These same techniques can be applied in CWD operations elsewhere. Keywords: drilling operation, drilling fluid, setting casing, Upstream Oil & Gas, fluid loss, casing design, South Texas, standard centralizer, CwD operation, operation Subjects: Drilling Operations, Casing and Cementing, Formation Evaluation & Management, Running and setting casing, Casing design, Open hole/cased hole log analysis Copyright 2007, SPE/IADC Drilling Conference You can access this article if you purchase or spend a download.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.587
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.197 · 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