An Experimental and Modelling Study to Evaluate the Potential of Low-salinity Waterflooding in a Tight Carbonate Reservoir
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Over the years, the low-salinity water flooding (LSWF) process has received a lot of attention as a promising enhanced oil recovery (EOR) method due to its superior performance over conventional water flooding. It has been an area of great interest for the researchers for almost last three decades for its cost effectiveness and the potential benefit over other enhanced oil recovery (EOR) techniques. Conventional waterflooding is not as effective especially in carbonate reservoirs as they tend to be more oil wet. The objective of this study is to modify the ionic composition of the injection brine in a way that leads to higher incremental oil recovery for a specific carbonate reservoir. Before doing any of the experimental studies to study the rock-brine-oil interactions in a LSWF process, we characterized the physical and chemical properties of rock and fluid to understand the reservoir. Experimental components of this study included reservoir-condition high-pressure high-temperature (HPHT) displacement tests in composite cores using brines of different salinities and specially designed ionic compositions, investigation of wettability alteration in a unique and specifically designed HPHT imbibition cell, interfacial tension (IFT) studies and Zeta potential studies using a Zeta potentiometer that provided a more representative evaluation in brine-saturated whole cores rather than with pulverized samples. These studies gave us an insight to the rock-brine-oil interactions. Simulation studies involved flow simulation using geochemical reactions during LSWF, incorporating oil/brine/rock interactions, and linking laboratory data to simulation data from the given candidate reservoir. Findings of the coreflooding experiments conclusively showed that LSWF with certain specific ionic compositions yielded a higher oil recovery. HPHT imbibition tests provided visual and quantitative estimations and monitoring of how wettability alteration took place during LSWF and how it was impacted by the degree and magnitude of temperature and pressure. Zeta potentiometric studies enabled an investigation of the charging behavior at the rock-water interface at various salinities using a whole reservoir core rather than pulverized samples. A new method to estimate Zeta potential in a high-salinity environment was developed and validated, and it conclusively proved that rock-surface charge played a vital role in the LSWF process. Results of various experiments conducted indicated that lower ionic strength brine can yield higher oil recovery. Coreflooding experiments revealed that low ionic strength brine, particularly 1% diluted seawater (1% dSW) flooding, had the highest incremental recovery factor due to increased repulsive forces between the oil-brine and rock-brine surface. Zeta potential measurements showed that the addition of divalent anions, such as SO42-, to smart brine could generate more negative values than 1%dSW, but this must be weighed against the potential for sulfate ions to cause scaling on the porous formation and reduce fluid permeability. Divalent cations like Ca/Mg ions did not help in increasing oil recovery. Wettability alteration was observed as the dominant mechanism for improving oil recovery in LSWF experiments. IFT, Hele-shaw model and Zeta potential measurements indicated that rock-water interactions were more dominant than oil-water interactions. A statistical model was developed to predict the zeta potential for a given brine based on the comprehensive analysis of the various experiments. At the end, the simulation studies involved history matching of coreflooding displacement tests to predict the performance of various diluted brines, and incorporate various geochemical reactions occurring during a LSWF process. Developing a proper geochemical reservoir model requires the measurement of effluent concentration and history matching of effluent concentration. We used the geochemical reactions published in the literature to simulate LSWF process.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| 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 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».