Determination of Thermal Conductivity of Carbonate Cores
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The difficulties of accurately measuring thermal properties, such as thermal conductivity of fractured and/or vuggy rocks are well known. Many commercially available methods are suitable only for liquids or re-packed sands. Others either require samples to be fairly uniform or are potentially destructive due to sample size limitations. In-situ measurements are possible, but can be costly. It can also be affected by in-situ distributions of fluids in the fractures and vugs, such as water, oil and possibly gas. In order to adapt the highly non-uniform nature of the carbonate cores without having to create further destruction of these cores, we developed a non-destructive method for measuring thermal conductivity of highly vuggy and moderately fractured carbonate cores in their whole diameter. In this paper, we report the theoretical background of this methodology; laboratory observations of thermal behaviours; data analysis and resulting thermal conductivity values of carbonates cores. Using this method, we measured 20 cleaned carbonate cores (88 mm in diameter) from Grosmont C and D Formation in Saleski area. Measured thermal conductivity values ranged from 1.00 to 2.87 W/m•K in Grosmont C, and 0.82 to 3.16 W/m•K in Grosmont D. These values were determined to be a strong function of porosity rather than mineralogy, as the Grosmont Formation typically consists of greater than 95% dolomite. These measurements are also shown to be in good agreement with prior studies on non-fractured dolomite reservoirs. A correlation for thermal conductivity was derived which can be used for numerical simulation models.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".