MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1991607862 · doi:10.2118/2003-021

Evaluation of Gas Saturation During Water Imbibition Experiments

2003· article· en· W1991607862 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Meng Ding, Apostolos Kantzas, D. Lastockin

Notice bibliographique

RevueCanadian International Petroleum Conference · 2003
Typearticle
Langueen
DomainePhysics and Astronomy
ThématiqueNMR spectroscopy and applications
Établissements canadiensUniversity of Calgary
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésImbibitionSaturation (graph theory)Water saturationPetroleum engineeringResidualChemistryMaterials scienceGeologyPorosityComposite materialMathematics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Knowledge of gas saturation history is very important in determining gas recovery from gas reservoirs with water influx. Water imbibition is known to control gas recovery. Spontaneous imbibition experiments have been traditionally employed to determine gas saturation. On-line NMR relaxometry is introduced as a method for monitoring co-current imbibition. A group of plugs from a western Canadian sandstone reservoir were selected and a series of imbibition tests were run. NMR was used to measure the amount of water imbibed in the cores and the gas saturation during each experiment was measured. The values of final residual gas saturation and the production profiles were compared to the results from corresponding counter-current imbibition tests. The correlations of residual gas saturation with initial imbibition rate and other operating parameters were investigated. Through interpretation of the NMR spectra, bound water T2cutoff values were obtained. Water distribution in different pore sizes during the experiments was also calculated. The initial imbibition rate in different pore sizes was measured. Empirical equations from the literature, which were used to describe the behavior of co-current imbibition tests, were applied to the experimental data. The proposed methodology can be used to evaluate the mechanisms of water imbibition in gas reservoirs. Introduction The understanding of the mechanisms that govern spontaneous water imbibition in gas-water systems is important to the development of natural gas reservoirs. Many researchers indicate that residual gas saturation is affected by factors such as wettability, imbibition rate, initial water saturation and also the experiment methods1,2,3. In this work, a group of sandstone plugs underwent co-current imbibition tests. The fluid saturations were measured using NMR relaxometry. The results were compared with those coming from countercurrent imbibition tests from previous work4,5. Some results from the literature6,7 were also tested against our experimental results. In 1960, Handy6 developed an equation to describe the behavior of co-current imbibition tests. He postulated that the weight or volume of imbibed water is proportional to the square root of imbibition time: Equation (1) (Available in full paper) It this equation, A and Nwt are the cross-section area of the core and the volume of water imbibed into the core respectively. Swf is the water saturation behind the imbibition front. kw and Pc are the effective water permeability and capillary pressure at Swf respectively. Finally ∅is the porosity and µw is the viscosity of the imbibing brine. Li and Horne7 point out there are some disadvantages of Handy's equation6 since effective water saturation behind the front and capillary pressure cannot be calculated separately and the relationship between the square of weight gain and the time is not a straight line during the later period of water imbibition. They developed an equation to describe the relationship between the imbibition rate and gas recovery based on the assumption of a piston-like imbibition flow. In their equation, the imbibition rate should be in a linear relation with the reciprocal of gas recovery. They performed cocurrent water imbibition tests in a balance using a glass bead pack and a Berea sandstone plug.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Expérimental (laboratoire) · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,587
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,998

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0060,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,024
Tête enseignante GPT0,316
Écart entre enseignants0,292 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeExpérimental (laboratoire)
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations9
Publié2003
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueCanadian International Petroleum ConferenceMême sujetNMR spectroscopy and applicationsTravaux en français237 207