Prediction of Liquid Accumulation Height in Gas-Well Tubing Using a Data-Driven Method

Résumé fourni par la source

Reliable estimation of liquid accumulation in gas-well tubing is important for characterizing liquid-loading conditions and supporting engineering assessment. Traditional mechanistic approaches commonly depend on an extensive set of wellbore descriptors and empirical parameters, while also requiring complicated solution procedures. This work addresses these constraints through a data-driven predictive framework that couples ensemble feature selection with ant-colony-optimized support vector regression (ACO-SVR). A majority-voting scheme was applied to 107 production-test records collected from a gas field. The scheme combined linear regression, grey relational analysis, random-forest mean decrease in impurity, the Pearson correlation coefficient, and SHAP attribution, and selected seven dominant factors from 11 candidate variables: casing pressure, tubing pressure, tubing depth, reservoir mid-depth, daily gas production, daily water production, and wellhead temperature. Ant colony optimization subsequently determined the SVR hyperparameters. Evaluation with 32 held-out well samples produced a root-mean-square error of 165.73 m, a mean absolute error of 103.26 m, a coefficient of determination of 0.94, and a mean relative error of 2.11%. Repeated five-fold cross-validation further yielded an average R2 of 0.91±0.04 and an RMSE of 181.6±24.8 m, indicating moderate variability across alternative data partitions. Relative to the untuned SVR, ACO-SVR lowered the root-mean-square error and mean absolute error by approximately 27.0% and 31.1%, respectively. Its mean relative error was also 3.66 percentage points below that of the PLATA model. The resulting framework provides accurate prediction of tubing liquid accumulation height from a small sample and offers quantitative information for liquid-loading assessment under the investigated operating conditions.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.