Critical Oil Rate and Well Productivity in Cold Production From Heavy-Oil Reservoirs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Cold heavy-oil production with sand (CHOPS) has been widely used for recovering heavy oil from unconsolidated sandstones (UCSS). Although this technology is considered to be mature in some oil fields in Canada, there are some technical issues that need to be addressed when this technology is transferred to the fields in other parts of the world. This is mainly due to the variations in local geological and reservoir conditions. One of the concerns is whether the designed well production rate is high enough to self-clean the wellbore against sand accumulation. During planning of CHOPS completions, it is imperative to know if the designed fluid production rate will be adequate to carry sand to surface, especially when horizontal wells are employed, where significant amount of sand can accumulate in the horizontal wellbore that can kill the well. However, it is not clear as what constitutes the "adequate" fluid production rate. A theoretical investigation of sand transport in heavy oil was conducted in this study. A critical fluid production rate was defined to quantitatively describe the "adequate" production rate required to carry sand to surface in vertical, inclined and horizontal wells. Also developed in this study is a CHOPS-well deliverability model based on self-stimulation of reservoir and oil-water-gas-solid 4-phase flow in the production string. Combined use of the critical production rate model and the well deliverability model allows for optimal selection of pumps that will ensure the smooth production of fluids in CHOPTS operations. This paper provides petroleum engineers essential knowledge and information for planning CHOPS well completions.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".