MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990587796 · doi:10.2118/121857-ms

Impact of Mutual Solvent Preflush on Scale Squeeze Treatments: Extended Squeeze Lifetime and Improved Well Clean-up Time

2009· article· en· W1990587796 on OpenAlexaff
Oscar Vazquez, Eric Mackay, K. S. Sorbie, M. M. Jordan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCalcium Carbonate Crystallization and Inhibition
Canadian institutionsNalco (Canada)
FundersHeriot-Watt University
KeywordsSolventScale (ratio)SCALE-UPPetroleum engineeringChemistryEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceProcess engineeringEngineeringOrganic chemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The most common method for preventing scale formation is by applying a scale inhibitor squeeze treatment. In this process, a scale inhibitor solution is injected down a producer well into the near wellbore formation. Commonly, scale treatments comprise the following stages: preflush, main scale inhibitor pill, overflush tubing displacement and shut-in, followed by back-production of the well. For some years the industry has applied mutual solvent chemicals in the preflush stage of such treatments to (i) avoid emulsion formation or water blocking, thus avoiding slow well clean-up, and also (ii) for enhancing adsorption of the scale inhibitor onto the formation rock. This paper discusses the effect of a mutual solvent preflush on scale inhibitor squeeze lifetime and also on well clean up time. It builds on a previous publication that introduced a recent model to simulate the impact of a surfactant on improved inhibitor retention, which used data derived from laboratory experiments. The focus of this paper will be to consider the impact of the mutual solvent on well clean up time and the model is used to demonstrate the effect of a mutual solvent in quickly bringing wells back to full oil production. A field example is presented for a deepwater field in West Africa where intervention costs are high and any negative impact of squeeze treatments can have a significant associated deferred oil cost. A scale inhibitor squeeze design in which a mutual solvent is deployed in the preflush should account for the following phenomena: mutual solvent propagation, diminishing mutual solvent efficiency due to interaction with the fluid phases, impact of the mutual solvent on scale inhibitor retention due to increased rock surface area available for adsorption, and impact of mutual solvent on saturation dependent relative permeability functions and phase mobilities. These aspects are discussed in the paper, and the model is used to demonstrate their impact on a squeeze treatment. Particular attention is paid to the reservoir wettability, and the importance of the shape of the relative permeability curves in determining the clean up time for a well, and the benefit that a mutual solvent may bring in overcoming slow clean up times. The model is then used to demonstrate how the preflush stage of given specific field squeeze designs may be adapted to ensure optimum efficiency in terms of chemical usage, minimised deferred oil production and extended squeeze life.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

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)0.0050.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.253 · 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.

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

Citations11
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCalcium Carbonate Crystallization and InhibitionFrench-language works237,207