The Mechanical Earth Model Concept and Its Application to High-Risk Well Construction Projects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Mechanical Earth Model Concept and Its Application to High-Risk Well Construction Projects Richard Plumb; Richard Plumb Schlumberger Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Stephen Edwards; Stephen Edwards Schlumberger Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Gary Pidcock; Gary Pidcock Schlumberger Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Donald Lee; Donald Lee Schlumberger Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Brian Stacey Brian Stacey Schlumberger Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Paper presented at the IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, New Orleans, Louisiana, February 2000. Paper Number: SPE-59128-MS https://doi.org/10.2118/59128-MS Published: February 23 2000 Cite View This Citation Add to Citation Manager Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Get Permissions Search Site Citation Plumb, Richard, Edwards, Stephen, Pidcock, Gary, Lee, Donald, and Brian Stacey. "The Mechanical Earth Model Concept and Its Application to High-Risk Well Construction Projects." Paper presented at the IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, New Orleans, Louisiana, February 2000. doi: https://doi.org/10.2118/59128-MS Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex Search nav search search input Search input auto suggest search filter All ContentAll ProceedingsSociety of Petroleum Engineers (SPE)SPE/IADC Drilling Conference and Exhibition Search Advanced Search AbstractMany of today's well construction projects are technically and economically challenging. Examples include deepwater exploration wells in the Gulf of Mexico, offshore field development projects such as Hibernia, Newfoundland, Canada and onshore field development projects in tectonically active regions such as the Cusiana field in Colombia. Minimizing non-productive time associated with wellbore instability and unexpected pore pressure regimes reduces the risk of dangerous accidents and is required to complete the well on time and within budget. Minimizing non-productive time is a complex task that requires thorough pre-spud planning to identify drilling risks and geological hazards and to develop contingency plans for handling those risks. Building a mechanical earth model during the well planning phase and revising it in real time has proven to be extremely valuable in delivering complex wells safely while minimizing unplanned well construction costs. Monitoring and revising the model while drilling requires geomechanics expertise, teamwork, data management and excellent communications among service companies and their client.This paper defines a mechanical earth model, explains why it is important, how it is developed and how it is applied to well construction and field development. We will discuss sources of information and the multi-disciplinary team approach required to: generate, revise and maintain an earth model. Three examples of the application of the earth model concept are discussed.IntroductionMore of today's well construction and field development projects are both technically and economically challenging. Understanding the geomechanics of well construction is becoming increasing important in order to drill technically and economically challenging wells on budget.Wells with hostile pore pressure and fracture gradient profiles require a good pre-drill pore pressure and fracture gradient prediction in order to design a suitable casing program. A casing program designed on a profile significantly less hostile than that encountered may compromise the attainable TD of the well. The cost of materials and rig time spent running extra casing significantly adds to the cost of the well. The risk of taking kicks which can be both costly and dangerous can also be reduced by a more rigorous pre-drill pore pressure prediction coupled with real-time pore pressure analysis from LWD measurements. In the deepwater Gulf of Mexico there are examples of wells which require a good mechanical earth model (MEM) in order to be drilled at all.Despite decades of industry attention, wellbore instability is responsible for many costly stuck pipe incidents. Stuck pipe is responsible for lost BHAs and considerable NPT spent freeing pipe, performing additional wiper trips and hole cleaning. In cases where wellbore stability problems are severe, the economics of developing a field can become challenging, for example the Cusiana field in Colombia, S.A. Other fields where lesser wellbore stability problems may still challenge the field economics are found where the cost of drilling is very high, e.g. the Hibernia field offshore Canada and or fields in the North Sea. Keywords: wellbore design, reservoir geomechanics, iadc spe 59128, prediction, drilling, forecast, mechanical earth model concept, mem, mud weight, earth model Subjects: Wellbore Design, Reservoir Characterization, Wellbore integrity, Reservoir geomechanics This content is only available via PDF. 2000. IADC/SPE 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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".