井眼避碰分离因素评价

IF 1.3 4区 工程技术 Q3 ENGINEERING, PETROLEUM
Jon Bang, Erik Nyrnes, H. Wilson
{"title":"井眼避碰分离因素评价","authors":"Jon Bang, Erik Nyrnes, H. Wilson","doi":"10.2118/200475-pa","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Separation factor (SF) is a widely used parameter for specifying the safe distance between two wells, and for monitoring safe distance while drilling. A variety of SF formulas is commonly applied in the industry. This paper demonstrates that different SF formulas may give significantly different results when applied to the same scenarios. This may create confusion about the interpretation and validity of the various SF definitions. More worryingly, the application of an incorrect SF formula may lead to wrong decisions with respect to well placement.\n A valid SF formula must adhere to fundamental principles of mathematical statistics, as elucidated in this paper. The paper further reviews commonly used SF formulas against these principles. The evaluation shows that several SF formulas may give either overly optimistic or unnecessarily pessimistic results, and, therefore, should not be used. These conclusions are supported by numeric examples.\n SF formulas in common use apply to a point-to-point model. However, an important application of the SF parameter is the monitoring of changes in SF along a wellbore. This implies the calculation of SF for successive point pairs, resulting in an SF listing or graph. Notable conclusions of the study are that none of the currently used formulas produces both intuitive and correct SF graphs, and that the validity of an SF graph cannot in general be assessed from its visual appearance alone. Furthermore, the current common practice of selecting the point pairs by solely geometric-distance criteria should be changed, because it frequently leads to optimistic SF values. All these findings should be of major concern to the industry.","PeriodicalId":51165,"journal":{"name":"SPE Drilling & Completion","volume":"35 1","pages":"382-401"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2118/200475-pa","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of Separation Factors Used in Wellbore Collision Avoidance\",\"authors\":\"Jon Bang, Erik Nyrnes, H. Wilson\",\"doi\":\"10.2118/200475-pa\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Separation factor (SF) is a widely used parameter for specifying the safe distance between two wells, and for monitoring safe distance while drilling. A variety of SF formulas is commonly applied in the industry. This paper demonstrates that different SF formulas may give significantly different results when applied to the same scenarios. This may create confusion about the interpretation and validity of the various SF definitions. More worryingly, the application of an incorrect SF formula may lead to wrong decisions with respect to well placement.\\n A valid SF formula must adhere to fundamental principles of mathematical statistics, as elucidated in this paper. The paper further reviews commonly used SF formulas against these principles. The evaluation shows that several SF formulas may give either overly optimistic or unnecessarily pessimistic results, and, therefore, should not be used. These conclusions are supported by numeric examples.\\n SF formulas in common use apply to a point-to-point model. However, an important application of the SF parameter is the monitoring of changes in SF along a wellbore. This implies the calculation of SF for successive point pairs, resulting in an SF listing or graph. Notable conclusions of the study are that none of the currently used formulas produces both intuitive and correct SF graphs, and that the validity of an SF graph cannot in general be assessed from its visual appearance alone. Furthermore, the current common practice of selecting the point pairs by solely geometric-distance criteria should be changed, because it frequently leads to optimistic SF values. All these findings should be of major concern to the industry.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51165,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"SPE Drilling & Completion\",\"volume\":\"35 1\",\"pages\":\"382-401\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2118/200475-pa\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"SPE Drilling & Completion\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2118/200475-pa\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, PETROLEUM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SPE Drilling & Completion","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2118/200475-pa","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, PETROLEUM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

分离系数(SF)是一种广泛使用的参数,用于确定两井之间的安全距离,以及在钻井过程中监测安全距离。工业上常用的SF配方多种多样。本文论证了不同的顺势计算公式在相同的情况下可能会得到显著不同的结果。这可能会造成对各种科幻小说定义的解释和有效性的混淆。更令人担忧的是,应用不正确的SF公式可能会导致错误的井位决策。正如本文所阐明的,一个有效的SF公式必须遵循数理统计的基本原则。根据这些原则,本文进一步回顾了常用的顺丰公式。评估表明,一些SF公式可能会给出过于乐观或不必要的悲观结果,因此不应使用。这些结论得到了数值算例的支持。常用的SF公式适用于点对点模型。然而,SF参数的一个重要应用是监测沿井筒的SF变化。这意味着计算连续点对的SF,从而得到SF列表或图。值得注意的结论是,目前使用的公式都不能产生直观和正确的SF图,并且SF图的有效性通常不能仅从其视觉外观来评估。此外,目前仅通过几何距离标准选择点对的常见做法应该改变,因为它经常导致乐观的SF值。所有这些发现都应该引起业界的高度关注。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluation of Separation Factors Used in Wellbore Collision Avoidance
Separation factor (SF) is a widely used parameter for specifying the safe distance between two wells, and for monitoring safe distance while drilling. A variety of SF formulas is commonly applied in the industry. This paper demonstrates that different SF formulas may give significantly different results when applied to the same scenarios. This may create confusion about the interpretation and validity of the various SF definitions. More worryingly, the application of an incorrect SF formula may lead to wrong decisions with respect to well placement. A valid SF formula must adhere to fundamental principles of mathematical statistics, as elucidated in this paper. The paper further reviews commonly used SF formulas against these principles. The evaluation shows that several SF formulas may give either overly optimistic or unnecessarily pessimistic results, and, therefore, should not be used. These conclusions are supported by numeric examples. SF formulas in common use apply to a point-to-point model. However, an important application of the SF parameter is the monitoring of changes in SF along a wellbore. This implies the calculation of SF for successive point pairs, resulting in an SF listing or graph. Notable conclusions of the study are that none of the currently used formulas produces both intuitive and correct SF graphs, and that the validity of an SF graph cannot in general be assessed from its visual appearance alone. Furthermore, the current common practice of selecting the point pairs by solely geometric-distance criteria should be changed, because it frequently leads to optimistic SF values. All these findings should be of major concern to the industry.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
SPE Drilling & Completion
SPE Drilling & Completion 工程技术-工程:石油
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
7.10%
发文量
29
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Covers horizontal and directional drilling, drilling fluids, bit technology, sand control, perforating, cementing, well control, completions and drilling operations.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信