Research Article

Casing Damage Prediction Model Based on the Data-Driven Method

Table 2

Data overview of 244 production layer samples.

SymbolInfluencing factorsUnitMinimumMaximumAverage

f0Wellhead abscissaM
f1Wellhead ordinateM
f2Perforation topM8271408.71067.1
f3Perforation bottomM833.81412.41071.1
f4Perforation thicknessM1.014.03.9
f5Perforation densityhole/m1032
f6Perforator phasingdegree90135
f7Casing wall thicknessmm6.29.17
f8Casing steel gradeJ55, K55, N80, P110
f9Sand layer topM826.91408.71066.6
f10Sand layer bottomM833.81412.41072.6
f11Sand layer thicknessM119.25.9
f12Reservoir groupMing II, Ming III
f13PermeabilitymD162.95431.11415.7
f14Porosity%20.272.134.4
f15Qlmaxm3/d1.2359.727.9
f16Max water cut%28.710090.9
f17Max fluid production intensitym3/m0.3167.367.82
f18Qlcumm319.62,123,57659,579
f19Qlmax/KH1000m3/(d·mD·m)0.14125.087.01
f20Qlmax/HNm3/d/hole0.025.180.55
f21Casing service timeAnnual0.4850.3415.16
f22Sand layer production timeAnnual0.1841.7910.7