Evaluation and Remediation of Data Quality for Drilling-Fluid Property Online Monitoring

Missing values, outliers, out-of-order timestamps, unit inconsistencies and baseline drift degrade online monitoring data on drilling-fluid properties in deep wells. We validate an evaluation–marking–remediation–validation workflow on a multi-source database of about 500,000 business records and on 150,000 instrument and replay records that are registered separately by source and are not summed, from five wells. Six metrics describe data quality: missing rate, out-of-order rate, outlier rate, unit consistency, baseline drift and noise. Missing values are treated in tiers: short gaps are interpolated, medium gaps are interpolated as last-observation-carried-forward with a mask, and long gaps invalidate the window. Offline filling uses forward filling, linear interpolation or random forest prediction. MAD/Hampel detection with operating-condition matching separates sensor artefacts, operational transients and genuine anomalies. Signal enhancement combines robust denoising, multi-scale fusion and a trend-confidence threshold. On the same replay dataset, the missing rate fell from 6.8% to 0.7%, the outlier rate decreased from 3.6% to 0.8%, the baseline-drift index fell from 1.47 to 0.61, the noise level decreased by 40.8%, and the usable-record ratio rose from 77.0% to 98.0%. On a fixed judgement set of 55 genuine events and 164 negative exposure intervals, the operator that retains operations and multi-metric co-movement recovered 55 of 55 genuine events at a negative-interval false alarm rate of 25.61%, against 0% recall for the 3-sigma rule and 54.55% recall for Hampel alone; this comparison covers simplified cleaning operators and is not equivalent to the complete remediation chain. Warning models trained on the remediated data reached an F1 of 93.0–94.0% and lead times of 1.8–2.8 h on the replay test dataset. The raw data replay and the field application are two different data sources and are not compared as an effect of remediation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Sensors
Published
2026-11-05
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/s26217009
Primary Topic
Drilling and Well Engineering
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
article

Evaluation and Remediation of Data Quality for Drilling-Fluid Property Online Monitoring

Dongxiao Pang, Qi Lü, Zhilin Li
Sensors
Drilling and Well Engineering
article

Evaluation and Remediation of Data Quality for Drilling-Fluid Property Online Monitoring

Dongxiao Pang, Qi Lü, Zhilin Li
article en

Abstract

Missing values, outliers, out-of-order timestamps, unit inconsistencies and baseline drift degrade online monitoring data on drilling-fluid properties in deep wells. We validate an evaluation–marking–remediation–validation workflow on a multi-source database of about 500,000 business records and on 150,000 instrument and replay records that are registered separately by source and are not summed, from five wells. Six metrics describe data quality: missing rate, out-of-order rate, outlier rate, unit consistency, baseline drift and noise. Missing values are treated in tiers: short gaps are interpolated, medium gaps are interpolated as last-observation-carried-forward with a mask, and long gaps invalidate the window. Offline filling uses forward filling, linear interpolation or random forest prediction. MAD/Hampel detection with operating-condition matching separates sensor artefacts, operational transients and genuine anomalies. Signal enhancement combines robust denoising, multi-scale fusion and a trend-confidence threshold. On the same replay dataset, the missing rate fell from 6.8% to 0.7%, the outlier rate decreased from 3.6% to 0.8%, the baseline-drift index fell from 1.47 to 0.61, the noise level decreased by 40.8%, and the usable-record ratio rose from 77.0% to 98.0%. On a fixed judgement set of 55 genuine events and 164 negative exposure intervals, the operator that retains operations and multi-metric co-movement recovered 55 of 55 genuine events at a negative-interval false alarm rate of 25.61%, against 0% recall for the 3-sigma rule and 54.55% recall for Hampel alone; this comparison covers simplified cleaning operators and is not equivalent to the complete remediation chain. Warning models trained on the remediated data reached an F1 of 93.0–94.0% and lead times of 1.8–2.8 h on the replay test dataset. The raw data replay and the field application are two different data sources and are not compared as an effect of remediation.

SensorsVol. 26(21)
CNPC Chuanqing Drilling Engineering Company Limited (China) (CN), China National Petroleum Corporation (China) (CN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 26%
Drilling and Well Engineering
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon