MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2039947597 · doi:10.2118/2005-251

State of the Art of Western Canadian Heavy Oil Water Flood Technology

2005· article· en· W2039947597 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueCanadian International Petroleum Conference · 2005
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEngineering
ThématiqueEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésCitationFlood mythFlooding (psychology)DownloadLibrary scienceMillerPetroleumComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceGeographyArchaeologyWorld Wide WebGeology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

State of the Art of Western Canadian Heavy Oil Water Flood Technology K.A. Miller K.A. Miller Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Paper presented at the Canadian International Petroleum Conference, Calgary, Alberta, June 2005. Paper Number: PETSOC-2005-251 https://doi.org/10.2118/2005-251 Published: June 07 2005 Cite View This Citation Add to Citation Manager Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Get Permissions Search Site Citation Miller, K.A. "State of the Art of Western Canadian Heavy Oil Water Flood Technology." Paper presented at the Canadian International Petroleum Conference, Calgary, Alberta, June 2005. doi: https://doi.org/10.2118/2005-251 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex Search nav search search input Search input auto suggest search filter All ContentAll ProceedingsPetroleum Society of CanadaPETSOC Canadian International Petroleum Conference Search Advanced Search AbstractHeavy oil water floods have been operated in Saskatchewan and Alberta for up to 50 years, yet remarkably little discussion of the theory or operation of heavy oil water flooding has been published.Conventional water flood theory is based on assumptions that are not met in heavy oil reservoirs, and those theoretical and operational experiences should not be substituted.This discussion uses information from the relatively small number of significant theoretical and field discussions of Western Canadian heavy oil water flooding available in the public domain to establish the 'state of the art,' including proposed production mechanisms, prediction of performance, and improvement of performance.IntroductionThe initial challenge to this study was deciding which water flooded pools to include under the 'heavy oil' umbrella. An imprecise definition of heavy oil is use by both government agencies and water flood operators. Definitions are often based on API gravity (a value of 蠄 20 ° API is sometimes used), but often the driving criterion is geography. If a water flood is located in an area near heavy oil cold production, it is sometimes simply classified as heavy oil, and given to the heavy oil group to operate.Emphasis on an oil-gravity-based definition of heavy oil is convenient, but unfortunate, as it de-emphasizes oil viscosity even though viscosity has repeatedly been shown to be a controlling parameter in numerical simulation runs. Aversion to a viscosity-based-definition for heavy oil may be due to occasional problems obtaining consistent heavy oil viscosity measurement1,2, and to confusion about whether available viscosity values were collecting using dead oil, live oil, or something in between. Despite this general neglect of viscosity data when discussing heavy oil water floods, the most cited statement about heavy oil water floods is "You can't have a successful heavy oil water flood if the dead oil viscosity is greater than" a particular value. 1,000 to 2,000 cp dead oil viscosity range (at reservoir temperature) is often cited as 'the limit,' but no study establishing this guideline could be located.Conventional water flood theory is based on assumptions regarding mobility ratio or fractional flow values that do not apply to heavy oil reservoirs, and should not be used to make project decisions. Even if 'heavy oil' is shown in the title of a water flood article, be aware that some conventional oil water flood technical staff consider oil with viscosity in the range of 3 to 10 cp, (much lower than the hundreds to thousands of cp oil more typically water flooded in Western Canada) to be heavy oil.There is a historic connection between conventional and heavy oil water flooding, and therefore an explanation for prior theory transfer, as early Western Canadian projects were likely initiated by those familiar with conventional water flooding to 'see what would happen.' Enough good things happened at selected projects for them to be continually expanded, and to sustain economic performance for up to 50 years and counting. Keywords: modeling & simulation, producer, production rate, heavy oil water flood, injection, viscosity, water flooding, water flood performance, water injection, water flood Subjects: Improved and Enhanced Recovery, Waterflooding This content is only available via PDF. 2005. Petroleum Society of Canada You can access this article if you purchase or spend a download.

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.

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 candidatesaucune
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 enseignants0,821
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,864

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

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 Opus0,007
Tête enseignante GPT0,200
Écart entre enseignants0,193 · 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