Physico-Chemical Characterization of Non-Aqueous Colloidal Gas Aphron-Based Drilling Fluids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The colloidal gas aphron (CGA) based drilling fluids are designed to minimize formation damage by blocking the pores of the rock with microbubbles, which can later be removed easily when the well is open for production. Aphrons behave like a flexible bridging material and form an internal seal in a pore-structure. Size and concentrations of the bridging materials are very critical to the fluid's ability to seal the high permeability zones. Proper sizing of the microbubbles with respect to pore size distribution is essential for developing an aphron drilling fluid with effective sealing ability. The physico-chemical properties (i.e., viscosity, density, fluid loss, etc.) of the CGA base drilling fluids also need to be understood in order to drill with these fluids more effectively. Aqueous CGA based drilling fluids systems have been fairly well characterized and successfully implemented in high-angle and horizontal wells drilled in low permeability as well as highly depleted reservoirs. Effectiveness of pore blocking by colloidal gas aphrons is expected to be improved even more, if we can replace water with non-aqueous base fluid such as mineral oil. An experimental study has been conducted to determine the effect of base fluid composition (i.e., surfactant and polymer concentration) on the microbubble size and stability. The surfactant and polymer concentrations required for optimum formulation of mineral oil base CGA drilling fluids were determined. The physico-chemical properties of non-aqueous CGA drilling fluids are also investigated. The results of rheology, filtration loss and density measurement tests are also presented.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".