MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4386953275 · doi:10.1115/omae2023-104587

Predicting the Rate of Cement Plug Failure

2023· article· en· W4386953275 on OpenAlexaffabout
Scott Charabin, I.A. Frigaard

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDrilling and Well Engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpark plugCementStress (linguistics)Geotechnical engineeringPetroleum engineeringYield (engineering)GeologyMaterials scienceMechanicsMechanical engineeringEngineeringComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Plugging is an essential part of decommissioning wells. Often cement plugs are set at various depths to isolate critical zones of interest. These zones can include production zones, aquifers and surfaces, ensuring the wellbore is isolated correctly. The cement plug should hydrate and form an impenetrable barrier between the subsurface and the surface. Since the cement slurry, containing a yield stress, is typically denser than the fluid below, there is a tendency to destabilize mechanically. Proper selection of cement properties, namely the yield stress, is therefore essential to the success of the abandonment process. If the cement does not set correctly, the well integrity is compromised and another cement plug will need to be placed. This motivates the study of this paper, we study the interface between the cement and lighter Newtonian fluid. Over the initial setting time, the interface can become unstable allowing light fluid to propagate upwards into the denser fluid. Experimental studies conducted with water under a denser yield stress fluid show that the interface usually takes the form of a long finger moving centrally upwards. If this finger can reach a critical height in the cement plug before it sets sufficiently, the plug will lose its integrity and fail. Therefore, being able to predict the velocity of the finger is of critical importance. We scale our experimental setup to give an accurate representation of a typical western Canadian well. We can then derive an analytical expression for the flow rate and mean velocity of both the viscous finger and the dense fluid flowing down. We then explore this finger propagation by varying the critical parameters of the heavier fluid, namely the density and yeild stress. Experiments show that the model accurately predicts the velocity of the finger for a range of rheological properties and densities. The speed of the finger is found to be governed by the yield stress, the density contrast, and the ratio of effective viscosities.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.084

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.176
Teacher spread0.169 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDrilling and Well Engineering→French-language works237,207→