A Novel Method for Determining Brine-Induced Incremental Oil Recovery During Waterflooding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A modified analytical model for field application of improved waterflooding through brine concentration is presented. Based on several laboratory studies, many researchers suggested changing the brine concentration during waterflooding offered viable options for improved oil recovery. In this regard, particularly in cyclic waterflooding, several laboratory studies have confirmed the effectiveness of such approach. However, generally, these studies are limited to laboratory studies without much field application. This is based on the fact that most laboratory results did not present clearly defined approach for practical application. This paper analyses the laboratory results presented in the literature and proffers a concise approach for field application. To this end, based on the reinterpretation of the Civan and Knapp model, a modified oil recovery model is developed for field application during cyclic waterflooding. This model would help in monitoring waterflood performance based on the impact of brine injection on increased oil recovery during field application of cyclic waterflooding process. Introduction and Background The process of improving waterflooding performance through brine concentration has obvious practical benefits. Several laboratory studies have indicated increase in oil recovery with change in injected brine salinity. Crude oil properties, particularly the solvency of high molecularweight polar component and modest increase in temperature have been shown to have a major effect on crude oil, brine and rock interacti that selection or adjustment of an injection brine composition to advantageously alter wettability is a novel method for increasing oil recovery at potentially low cost. They demonstrated that laboratory waterflood recoveries of crude-oil/brine/rock (COBR) ensembles are strongly dependent on brine composition and on related COBR interactions. To this end, it was shown that rate and extent of final waterflood recoveries increased with decrease in brine concentration. Tang and Morrow (1999) reported that modification to brine chemistry have resulted not only in changes in the wetting state, but also increasing oil recovery during laboratory corefloods. Another study (4) suggested a significant increase in recovery with decrease in salinity and presented laboratory results on oil recovery from a selected field for potential application. In addition to improved oil recovery, COBR combinations were also found where there was little or no response to injected brine composition. Bagci et al. (2001) studied the effect of brine composition on oil recovery through injection of different composition of brine into packed one-dimensional unconsolidated limestone core using Garzan crude oil and distilled water. They reported only slight response for the limestone core sample used, which confirmed findings that laboratory evaluations are essential to identifying potential candidate reservoirs for application(4). Laboratory testing has identified three key conditions for the waterflooding process to be effective through controlled.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".