Application of Temperature Observation Wells During SAGD Operations in a Medium Deep Bitumen Reservoir
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The steam assisted gravity drainage (SAGD) pilot test in the LiaoHe oilfield of China is the first SAGD project conducted in China in the deeper bitumen reservoir (650 - 800 m), using a combination of vertical injectors and horizontal producers. Temperature observation wells play an important role in the understanding of the pilot performance and optimization of the operation process. This paper will present the objectives, principles, interpretation and application of the temperature observation wells in the pilot area. A number of production problems were identified and solutions were sought to improve the SAGD performance through the use of temperature and other data obtained from the observation wells. Introduction This paper is a continuation of CIPC paper 2006-146. That paper introduced the successful test of the SAGD pilot in a deep biutmen reservoir in China(1). The pilot has been expanded to include 12 horizontal wells since the presentation of the original paper. The earlier two wells have reached a daily oil rate of over 100 m3/day per well. The current recovery factor is approximately 27% and the anticipated ultimate recovery is over 60%. Compared with most current Canadian SAGD projects, the reservoirs in the LiaoHe oil field operated by PetroChina presented two challenges to the use of SAGD technologies. First, the reservoir depth exceeded 500 m (530 - 810 m) compared to the typical 200 - 500 m present in most Canadian SAGD projects(2), which increased the heat loss from the injection wellbores to the overburden Second, the reservoir had been subjected to primary production by Cyclic Steam Stimulation (CSS) prior to the implementation of the SAGD process while for the majority of the Canadian SAGD projects the technique is applied directly to a virgin reservoir. The current recovery factor by CSS in the LiaoHe reservoir is approximately 20% of the OOIP. This prior depletion by CSS complicated the conversion to SAGD applications and determination of operating parameters caused by the alteration in the distribution of the remaining oil saturation present in the formation (Figure 1).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".