In this paper, we present how precise deep learning algorithms can distinguish loss circulation severities in oil drilling operations. Lost circulation is one of the costliest downhole problem encountered during oil and gas well construction. Applying artificial intelligence can help drilling teams to be forewarned of pending lost circulation events and thereby mitigate their consequences. Data-driven methods are traditionally employed for fluid loss complexity quantification but are not able to achieve reliable predictions for field cases with large quantities of data. This paper attempts to investigate the performance of deep learning (DL) approach in classification the types of fluid loss from a very large field dataset. Three DL classification models are evaluated: Convolutional Neural Network (CNN), Gated Recurrent Unit (GRU) and Long-Short Term Memory (LSTM). Five fluid-loss classes are considered: No Loss, Seepage, Partial, Severe, and Complete Loss. 20 wells drilled into the giant Azadegan oil field (Iran) provide 65,376 data records are used to predict the fluid loss classes. The results obtained, based on multiple statistical performance measures, identify the CNN model as achieving superior performance (98% accuracy) compared to the LSTM and GRU models (94% accuracy). Confusion matrices provide further insight to the prediction accuracies achieved. The three DL models evaluated were all able to classify different types of lost circulation events with reasonable prediction accuracy. Future work is required to evaluate the performance of the DL approach proposed with additional large datasets. The proposed method helps drilling teams deal with lost circulation events efficiently. Article Highlights Three deep learning models classify fluid loss severity in an oil field carbonate reservoir. Deep learning algorithms advance machine learning a large resource dataset with 65,376 data records. Convolution neural network outperformed other deep learning methods.
Multiple machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) models are evaluated and their prediction performance compared in classifying five wellbore fluid-loss classes from a 20-well drilling dataset (Azadegan oil field, Iran). That dataset includes 65,376 data records with seventeen drilling variables. The dataset fluid-loss classes are heavily imbalanced (> 95% of data records belong to the less significant loss classes 1 and 2; only 0.05% of the data records belong to the complete-loss class 5). Class imbalance and the lack of high correlations between the drilling variables and fluid-loss classes pose challenges for ML/DL models. Tree-based and data matching ML algorithms outperform DL and regression-based ML algorithms in predicting the fluid-loss classes. Random forest (RF), after training and testing, makes only 35 prediction errors for all data records. Consideration of precision recall and F1-scores and expanded confusion matrices show that the RF model provides the best predictions for fluid-loss classes 1 to 3, but that for class 4 Adaboost (ADA) and class 5 decision tree (DT) outperform RF. This suggests that an ensemble of the fast to execute RF, ADA and DT models may be the best way to practically achieve reliable wellbore fluid-loss predictions. DL models underperform several ML models evaluated and are particularly poor at predicting the least represented classes 4 and 5. The DL models also require much longer execution times than the ML models, making them less attractive for field operations that require prompt information regarding rapid real-time decision responses to pending class-4 and class-5 fluid-loss events.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.