Work With Chemical Additives Advances Understanding of Relative Permeability Shifts
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This article, written by JPT Technology Editor Chris Carpenter, contains highlights of paper SPE 201520, “Advances in Understanding Relative Permeability Shifts by Imbibition of Surfactant Solutions Into Tight Plugs,” by Mohammad Yousefi, Lin Yuan, and Hassan Dehghanpour, SPE, University of Alberta, prepared for the 2020 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, originally scheduled to be held in Denver, Colorado, 5–7 October. The paper has not been peer reviewed. Various chemical additives have been proposed recently to enhance imbibition oil recovery from tight formations during shut-in periods after hydraulic fracturing operations. In the complete paper, the authors develop and apply a laboratory protocol mimicking leakoff, shut-in, and flowback processes to evaluate the effects of fracturing-fluid additives on oil regained permeability. A conventional coreflooding apparatus is modified to measure oil effective permeability (koeff) before and after the surfactant-imbibition experiments. Methodology Proposed Technique for Measuring Oil Effective Permeability. Despite the simplicity of the steady-state method, measuring permeability of tight rocks with this technique is challenging because of its time-consuming nature and the fact that accurate measurement is necessary of extremely low flow rates corresponding to low injectivity of tight rocks. The authors use a pair of plugs from a well drilled in the Montney formation that is a stratigraphic unit of the Lower Triassic age in the western Canadian sedimentary basin located in British Columbia and Alberta. It is mainly a low-permeability siltstone reservoir. In the modified coreflooding apparatus, the authors reduce the effect of compressibility in order to reduce the duration of the transient period by approximately one order of magnitude. Because monitoring changes in pressure is much easier and more accurate than monitoring flow-rate changes, a constant flow-rate mode is used and pressure is recorded with time. Oil is injected at different constant flow rates (qo), and the inlet pressure is monitored. The stable pressure difference across the plug is recorded for each flow rate. After steady-state conditions are reached based on the pressure profile, the qo is increased. This process is repeated until four stable pressure differences corresponding to four different qo are obtained. After the highest qo is reached, it is decreased in similar steps to check the repeatability of each data point. The permeability is calculated with the Darcy equation and slope of the qo vs. stable pressure difference across the 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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».