MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975489356 · doi:10.2118/04-04-01

Network Modelling of Apparent-Relative Permeability of Gas in Heavy Oils

2004· article· en· W1975489356 on OpenAlexaffabout
Farzam Javadpour, M. Pooladi‐Darvish

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Canadian Petroleum Technology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPetroleum engineeringGas oil ratioBubblePermeability (electromagnetism)Enhanced oil recoveryRelative permeabilityVolumetric flow ratePorous mediumFossil fuelOil productionViscosityPorosityEnvironmental scienceMaterials scienceChemistryGeologyMechanicsComposite materialPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Some of the solution-gas drive heavy oil reservoirs known as foamy oil reservoirs, in Canada, Venezuela, and other countries have demonstrated a high primary oil recovery factor (>10%), a low producing gas-oil ratio, a low reservoir pressure decline, and a high oil production rate. One of the hypotheses to explain these unusual behaviours is that the gas mobility in a foamy oil flow is much lower than that in conventional oil, leading to improved recovery performance. In this study, the immiscible two-phase micro-displacement in porous media is modelled by using a network of pores of converging-diverging geometry. The effect of viscosity of one phase (oil) on the mobility of another phase (gas) is included in the model. The developed model is used to simulate the motion of the dispersed bubbles in an initially oil-filled network, and to determine bubble mobility. The obtained results showed that bubble mobility decreased drastically by increasing the oil viscosity. The results also showed that dispersion of gas leads to lower mobility of bubbles. Dispersed gas flow and low bubble mobility are believed to lead to improved recovery in foamy oil reservoirs. Introduction Some of the solution-gas drive heavy oil reservoirs in Canada, Venezuela, China, and Oman have demonstrated unusually high primary production rates, high primary oil recovery factors (>10%), low producing gas-oil ratios, and low reservoir pressure declines(1, 2). To explain these unusual behaviours, three fundamental reasons have been suggested: geomechanical effects(3), special fluid properties(4), and unusual flow dependent properties of oil and gas(5). Most researchers now believe that the low mobility of gas is the main reason for low producing GOR and high recoveries obtained(1, 2). Gas mobility in a heavy oil system is investigated in this paper. In one study, solution-gas drive experiments were performed in an identical sand-pack, using light oil and heavy oil(5). The experimental studies clearly showed that gas mobility in the two experiments differed by about four orders of magnitude. It has been observed that matching of field(6) and laboratory depletion data(5) required assigning extremely low values of gas relative permeability. The relative permeability functions of these studies, however, were obtained through history matching. Of primary interest is, how can relative permeability functions be determined for a particular system a priori? Following this question, the first step is to find what parameters affect relative permeability functions; the second is to find how these factors are ranked in their importance. These steps are investigated in this paper. A microscopic scale (network) model is developed and used to investigate the effects of different parameters, in particular, oil viscosity on gas mobility in porous media. Network models are simplified mathematical representations of real porous material. The objective of a porous network model is to provide a reasonable idealization of the complex geometry of a real porous medium on a microscopic scale, so that the related fluid flow can be treated mathematically at a manageable level of complexity.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.954
Threshold uncertainty score0.966

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations14
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Canadian Petroleum TechnologySame topicEnhanced Oil Recovery TechniquesFrench-language works237,207