MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409984253 · doi:10.2118/0525-0022-jpt

Technology Focus: Cementing and Zonal Isolation (May 2025)

2025· article· en· W4409984253 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Paul Henderson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Petroleum Technology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining Techniques and Economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIsolation (microbiology)Focus (optics)Petroleum engineeringGeologyMining engineeringForensic engineeringEngineeringEnvironmental scienceBiologyPhysicsBioinformatics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

_ We continue to receive more paper submissions every year than the last, which is a good sign that cementing and zonal isolation remains an important topic to operators and service providers alike. Additionally, there is an increase in the number of papers with both academic and field‑driven content. This shows that there is no lack of initiative for operators to materially improve on existing methods and technology. Paper SPE/IADC 221446 outlines the evolution of managed pressure cementing within the well life cycle, now being used beyond its conventional primary cementing application and into the remedial stage. While managed pressure primary cementing mitigates the risk of losses in narrow-margin situations, it also can do so in remedial applications where similar challenges exist. This is a great example of evolving technology within the cementing and zonal isolation space. It is always exciting to see step-change technologies adapted to new applications beyond those for which they were originally intended. Paper SPE 220564 offers a robust discussion on casing-to-cement bond quality and introduces a new method of casing‑surface modification that not only enhances bond quality but also serves as a corrosion-resistant layer. This paper outlines a laboratory comparison of various casing-surface modifications, as well as a field validation of the new method. Specific stages of well construction or workover, such as isolating challenging intervals or scab liner deployment, surely can benefit from the implementation of this technique. Paper SPE 223263 shows how we can accurately simulate the effect of lost circulation either during the prejob phase or during post-job evaluation. Lost circulation can have a significant negative effect on primary cementing during well construction. Having the ability to simulate fluid loss prejob allows for adjustments to be made to the well design accordingly. Alternatively, when unexpected losses occur, being able to perform post-job simulations on the mechanism and severity of such losses allows for better remedial planning. Multiple in-depth case studies are outlined in this paper. The papers listed for additional reading are a good mix of follow-ups to last year’s primary selections, relevant laboratory testing, and field applications of novel technologies. Thank you to all of the operators and service companies who collaborate to generate such excellent content each year. Summarized Papers in This May 2025 Issue SPE 221446 - Managed Pressure Cementing in Deep Water Restores Production by Pier Alvarado, Sundar Ramasamy and Juan C. Valecillos, Weatherford, et al. SPE 220564 - Technique Improves Well Integrity by Mitigating Casing-to-Cement Debonding by Mohammed Alibrahim and Mahdy Jezany, Saudi Aramco, and Ahmed Sadeed, ENPRO, et al. SPE 223263 - Lost Circulation Simulated Accurately in Primary Cementing-Job Design by Martijn Bogaerts Nicolas Flamant, and Ahmed Abdulaal, SLB, et al. Recommended Additional Reading SPE 223667 - Experimental Investigation of Penetration and Plugging Performance of Cement Blends Used for Squeeze Cementing in Sub-150-Micron Gaps by Muhammad A. Thaika, University of Alberta, et al. OTC 34869 - Conquering Cement-Evaluation Challenges in Uncured or Microannulus Conditions—The Case for Advanced Shear and Flexural Measurements by Sebastien Kamgang, Baker Hughes, et al. SPE/IADC 219610 - Novel Downhole Annular Barrier Solution for Water Shutoff—Kuwait Case Study by Jonathan Koch, Shell, et al. SPE/IADC 223673 - Sealing and Durability Evaluation of Microannulus Treatment With a Resin-Based Material: Permeability and Tracer Measurements in a Full-Scale Test Section by K. Beltran Jimenez, NORCE Norwegian Research Center, et al. SPE/IADC 223690 - Laboratory Setups for Evaluation of Annulus Barrier Materials by N. Opedal, Sintef Industry, et al.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.485
Threshold uncertainty score0.505

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Petroleum TechnologySame topicMining Techniques and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207