MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998925525 · doi:10.2118/03-03-05

Mobility of Gas-in-Oil Dispersions in Enhanced Solution Gas Drive (Foamy Oil) Exploitation of Heavy Oil Reservoirs

2003· article· en· W1998925525 on OpenAlexaff
Alex Turta, Brij Maini, Carney Jackson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Canadian Petroleum Technology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPetroleum engineeringGas oil ratioBubble pointDispersion (optics)BubbleFossil fuelGas bubbleViscosityLight crude oilFraction (chemistry)Oil dropletWet gasPressure gradientFlow (mathematics)Materials scienceChemistryEnvironmental scienceMechanicsChromatographyGeologyComposite materialEmulsionPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In the cold production of foamy heavy oil under solution gas drive, the oil and the released solution gas are believed to flow in the form of a gas-in-oil dispersion. The mobility of such a dispersion is an important issue in the mathematical modelling of the cold production process. However, very little factual information is available in the literature on the mobility of gas-inheavy oil dispersions. The objective of this work was to fill this gap in our knowledge of foamy oil flow behaviour by measuring the mobility of gas-in-heavy oil dispersions under varying conditions. A new apparatus was developed for measuring gas-in-oil dispersion mobility as a function of the dispersed gas fraction and the pressure gradient. It uses a sand-pack holder with three sections of different diameter to produce three different pressure gradients in the same flow test. An in-line mixer was used to generate live oil for producing the foamy dispersions. Several validation tests were conducted to check the equipment and procedures. Tests were carried out with a viscous mineral oil, as well as with a heavy crude oil. At a low gas fraction, such as would exist immediately below the bubble point pressure in the reservoir, the apparent viscosity of a gas-in-oil dispersion was higher than that of the live oil at the bubble point pressure. At high gas fractions, the apparent viscosity of the dispersion was lower than that of the live oil at the bubble point pressure. The boundary between low gas fraction and high gas fraction was in the 15% - 20% gas fraction range. Therefore, in the interval 0 to 15% - 20% gas fraction, the apparent viscosity increases with increasing gas fraction, and then at higher gas fractions, it decreases with increasing gas fraction. The apparent viscosity was also found to vary significantly with the pressure gradient; in general, increasing with increasing pressure gradient. In terms of the relative permeability, it was found that the oil relative permeability varied significantly with pressure gradient and displayed a value of higher than unity at an optimum combination of the values of the pressure gradient and fractional flow of oil. The gas relative permeability remained low in all tests. A comparison of the mineral oil tests with the crude oil tests showed that the two systems behaved similarly. Introduction "Cold production" is the term given to a successful, but as yet not fully understood, heavy oil production technology. The term "cold" emphasizes the fact that no reservoir heating is involved. It is essentially an improved form of primary production by solution gas drive that may also be termed enhanced solution gas drive. The improvement consists in the increase of recovery factors compared to conventional primary production and is induced by producing the (vertical) wells at very high rates. The most significant difference between the new technology and the conventional one lies in the attitude toward the sand influx into the production well.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.221
Threshold uncertainty score0.862

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations22
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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