MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969784830 · doi:10.2523/iptc-13650-ms

Prediction of Asphaltene Stability for Live Oils and Chemical Selection to Mitigate Deposition and Fouling

2009· article· en· W1969784830 on OpenAlexaff
Stephen P. Appleyard, David Cope, Samir Gharfeh, Probjot Singh, Kriangsak Kraiwattanawong

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Petroleum Technology Conference · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicPetroleum Processing and Analysis
Canadian institutionsConocoPhillips (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsphalteneSolubilityFoulingPrecipitationPetroleum engineeringDiluentChemical engineeringPetroleumHildebrand solubility parameterMaterials scienceChemistryEnvironmental scienceThermodynamicsOrganic chemistryGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The precipitation of asphaltenes from crude oil can be induced by changes in temperature, pressure and composition. This study reviews a thermodynamic approach to describing the solubility of asphaltenes with a model that accounts for all of these effects. This solubility model can then be used to assess the relative stability of crude oil systems at all stages of production from the reservoir to the tank farm. The impact of changes in temperature, pressure and composition are individually addressed. Increasing temperature only is shown to lower the absolute values of both the oil solubility and onset solubility parameters. Also, temperature has little impact (if any) on the relative stability of the asphaltenes (provided that no chemical changes occur). The effect of pressure on the impact of dissolved gases is captured by the model, and shown to have a potentially strong influence on asphaltene solubility. Finally, examples are presented describing the effect on oil stability due to changes in composition under both pressurized and ambient conditions. Addition of miscible injectant to reservoir fluids, and blending of bitumen with diluents in surface facilities are addressed. In both of these examples, prior knowledge of problematic compositions and blending ratios could help to avoid the occurrence of asphaltene precipitation in operations. 1.0 Introduction Asphaltene precipitation can have a strong, negative impact on productivity and maintenance costs due to plugging of the reservoir formation, well-bore equipment and flow-lines, and due to fouling of surface facilities. Oil instability, leading to asphaltene precipitation, may be induced by changes in temperature, pressure and chemical composition of the produced oil. Pressure depletion above the bubble point causes an expansion/increase in the volume fraction of the dissolved hydrocarbon gases and reduces solvency towards asphaltenes. At pressures below the bubble point, the separation (evaporation) of light ends can improve the solvency of the remaining fluid towards asphaltenes. The development of new wells in the vicinity of existing production facilities may entail commingling of oils, resulting in a mixed fluid of very different composition. This mixed fluid may be unstable, leading to asphaltene precipitation and flocculation (aggregation). Enhanced oil recovery methods by using gas injection / miscible injectant, or carbon dioxide may also adversely impact oil stability leading to asphaltene precipitation and deposition. Ideally, measurements should be made to assess the stability of oils under a variety of conditions. Unfortunately however, the measurement of asphaltene stability at reservoir conditions is rather expensive and may not actually be feasible due to an absence of "live oil" samples and/or due to difficulties in obtaining such samples of suitable quality and size. Consequently, there is continued interest in the development of predictive models to assess the stability of oils, both at reservoir conditions and as a function of pressure depletion. Additionally, it is informative to extend the application of these models to include the effects of dissolved hydrocarbon gases on oil stability and to assess the effect of commingling potentially incompatible fluids.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.481

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Petroleum Technology ConferenceSame topicPetroleum Processing and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207