MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4243336019 · doi:10.2523/80271-ms

Identification of Mechanisms and Parameters of Formation Damage Associated with Chemical Flooding

2003· article· en· W4243336019 sur OpenAlexaff
Patino Omar, Faruk Civan, Subhash Shah, D. R. Zornes, Eugene Spinler

Notice bibliographique

RevueProceedings of International Symposium on Oilfield Chemistry · 2003
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEngineering
ThématiqueHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Établissements canadiensConocoPhillips (Canada)
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésCitationIdentification (biology)DownloadLibrary scienceInformation retrievalComputer scienceFlooding (psychology)ChemistryWorld Wide WebBiology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Identification of Mechanisms and Parameters of Formation Damage Associated with Chemical Flooding Omar Patino; Omar Patino University of Oklahoma Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Faruk Civan; Faruk Civan University of Oklahoma Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Subhash N. Shah; Subhash N. Shah University of Oklahoma Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar David R. Zornes; David R. Zornes ConocoPhillips Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Eugene A. Spinler Eugene A. Spinler ConocoPhillips Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Paper presented at the International Symposium on Oilfield Chemistry, Houston, Texas, February 2003. Paper Number: SPE-80271-MS https://doi.org/10.2118/80271-MS Published: February 05 2003 Cite View This Citation Add to Citation Manager Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Get Permissions Search Site Citation Patino, Omar, Civan, Faruk, Shah, Subhash N., Zornes, David R., and Eugene A. Spinler. "Identification of Mechanisms and Parameters of Formation Damage Associated with Chemical Flooding." Paper presented at the International Symposium on Oilfield Chemistry, Houston, Texas, February 2003. doi: https://doi.org/10.2118/80271-MS Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex Search Dropdown Menu nav search search input Search input auto suggest search filter All ContentAll ProceedingsSociety of Petroleum Engineers (SPE)SPE International Conference on Oilfield Chemistry Search Advanced Search AbstractThis paper presents a practical methodology and its verification for determination of the mechanisms and parameters of chemically induced formation damage. It is based on interpretation of laboratory core flood tests by diagnostic straight-line plotting schemes. Laboratory tests were conducted to measure the permeability impairment and effluent conditions as a function of time by flooding sandstone and limestone outcrop rock samples with various alkaline solutions (NaOH, KOH, NaSiO4) and alcohol (ethanol) as might be used for improved oil recovery. The single-phase permeability variation data were plotted according to prescribed diagnostic straight-line plotting schemes proposed by Wojtanowicz et al. and Civan. Plots that result in satisfactory straight-line trends reveal the predominate mechanisms of the formation damage. Further, the values of the parameters of the governing formation damage processes are determined from the intercept and slope of the straight-lines. Higher pH solutions were observed to have caused greater reductions in rock permeability. Civan's model better described the permeability variation due to scale dissolution and precipitation processes. The Wojtanowicz et al. model identified the formation damage mechanisms as pore surface deposition and sweeping. Different rock damage conditions were observed for the initial and the later test periods, indicating that more than one formation damage mechanism was involved. The analysis of the same experimental data reveals that a numerical model such as UTCHEM will require significantly more information to perform a similar analysis of the laboratory flood results. However, the diagnostic equations provide a practical and rapid means for the determination of the formation damage mechanisms.The methodology developed in this paper can be used for rapid detection and quantification of the formation damage mechanisms from core tests. The technique can be useful in the design of alkaline-surfactant-polymer (ASP) and/or micellar flooding chemical systems for field applications.IntroductionThe alkali technique is distinguished from all others by the fundamental basis that the chemicals promoting oil recovery are generated in situ1. High molecular naphtanic species in the oil react with alkali to produce salts, which must be surface active. However, it is not alkali per se that enhances oil recovery, but rather the hydrolyzed surfactant products.Mineral-alkali interactions have traditionally been of principal interest with respect to alkaline flooding operations, where considerable effort has been devoted to the analysis and prediction of alkali consumption throughout the flood. The objective is to maintain sufficient alkalinity in order to achieve the desired treatment efficiency.Strong Alkali (NaOH, KOH, NaSiO4) are very effective for mobilizing residual oil in laboratory core floods but implies also higher reactivity effects with reservoir rocks (clays, basically kaolinite), leading to chemical consumption and precipitation of aluminosilicates, and thus leading to a decrease in the value of permeability2.In this paper, first the methods for analysis of single-phase formation damage tests are presented. Second the previous published single-phase core flood tests are analyzed using these methods. Third various in-house experimental data for single- and two-phase experiments are generated and analyzed. A discussion of the results is also presented. Keywords: experimental data, deposition, turksoy 12, upstream oil & gas, mechanism, naoh, wojtanowicz, flow in porous media, bertaux, permeability Subjects: Reservoir Fluid Dynamics, Improved and Enhanced Recovery, Flow in porous media, Chemical flooding methods This content is only available via PDF. 2003. Society of Petroleum Engineers 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.

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 candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Expérimental (laboratoire) · Signal consensuel: Expérimental (laboratoire)
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,011
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,310

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)0,0000,000

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 Opus0,004
Tête enseignante GPT0,186
Écart entre enseignants0,182 · 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.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
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

Citations1
Publié2003
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueProceedings of International Symposium on Oilfield ChemistryMême sujetHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir AnalysisTravaux en français237 207