Correlating Sour Gas Testing with Successful Field Operations of High Strength Quenched and Tempered Coiled Tubing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Inhibition is considered critical to successful operations using high strength quenched and tempered coiled tubing in sour environments. Prior laboratory test results did not correlate well with initial field successes in Western Canada. The objective of this paper is to provide further testing that more closely matches real world applications and to provide additional field results from Western Canada. Similar to prior work in Elliott et al (2022), the overall approach to this paper is twofold. The first part focuses on C-ring testing of quenched and tempered tubing to provide confidence, coiled tubing will not fail due to sulfide stress cracking (SSC) when properly inhibited. Testing was performed with a limited exposure time to account for the short window for CT operations and a reasonable inhibition effectiveness period. The second portion of the paper discusses best practices for coiled tubing operations in sour wells. Laboratory C-Ring test results will be provided showing the effectiveness of the inhibition program as well as discussing the possible outcomes of utilizing coiled tubing in sour wells without inhibition based on the tests performed without inhibition. Discussion of the laboratory results will also describe the lessons learned in test plan development with respect to inhibitor effectiveness windows. Following the practical best practices for sour well CT operations, the paper will also discuss field history of quench and tempered coiled tubing building on the initial trials reported in Elliott et al (2022). The paper will conclude with a qualification for each grade of quenched and tempered coiled tubing when used with inhibition for sour operations. This paper expands upon the learnings of Elliott et al (2022) with testing program results that matches the field history of effective inhibition systems for high strength quenched and tempered coiled tubing in sour wells. This publication also explores the effects of sour exposure without the aid of inhibition, which serves to document the risks of forgoing inhibition in sour operations.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".