MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008026008 · doi:10.2118/01-01-04

Numerical and Experimental Modelling of the Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage (SAGD)

2001· article· en· W2008026008 on OpenAlexaff
Kyuro Sasaki, S. Akibayahsi, Nintoku Yazawa, Q. Doan, S.M. Farouq Ali

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Canadian Petroleum Technology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSteam-assisted gravity drainageComputer simulationPetroleum engineeringSteam injectionGeologyPermeability (electromagnetism)DrainageVolume (thermodynamics)Oil in placeGeotechnical engineeringOil sandsEngineeringPetroleumSimulationMaterials scienceThermodynamicsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract For complex petroleum recovery processes, an experimental investigation isusually performed with a numerical simulation to study the recoverymechanism(s). In this paper, both physical and numerical simulations of thesteam assisted gravity drainage (SAGD) process were performed. One of theobjectives of the numerical investigation was to determine the match betweenumerical results with data generated from scaled model experiments. The Computer Modelling Group's (CMG) STARS? thermal simulator was used. Resultsfrom the numerical simulation were found to be in reasonable agreement withthose obtained from the experiments for oil production rates, and cumulativeoil production. In addition, the steam chamber volume and temperaturedistribution were also examined. ffects of different parameters, such as steaminjection pressure, vertical separation between injection and production wells, nd reservoir thickness, on the performance of the SAGD process ereinvestigated. They were observed to have the same effects on both experimentaland numerical results. The numerical simulator was also used to study theinfluence of rock and fluid properties, such as oil viscosity, permeability, porosity, and the mount of heat loss from the reservoir to thesurroundings. Introduction The steam assisted gravity drainage (SAGD) process was developed by Butler(1), and is illustrated in Figure 1. It has been applied inseveral projects, including the Underground Test Facility (UTF) and has shownpromise of achieving high recovery (more than 50 % of OOIP in some cases). Many experimental and numerical studies of the SAGD process have been carriedout over the last ten years, on different aspects of the process. One of therecent numerical studies was presented by Chow and Butler(2). Theyfocused on history matching the oil recovery and the steam temperatureinterface position with those observed in the SAGD experiments by Chung and Butler(3). In the present study, numerical history matching of the experimental data, suchas the oil production and the steam chamber temperature contours [Sasaki etal.(4)] is the main focus. Furthermore, time to establish initialcommunication between the two steam injection and production wells (steambreakthrough time) was investigated. The physical and operational conditions inthe experimental study were different, compared to those used in Chung and Butler's experiments(3). They included a pressure drop of?Pi = 20 kPa, permeability of k =142 D; no pre-heating was employed.The experiments were configured to examine phenomena associated with the risingchamber. More details are provided in the following, for both experimentalinvestigation and numerical simulation. Description of the Experimental Model Several 2D visual, scaled physical models were used in the experiments. Theywere designed to represent a vertical section of a heavy oil reservoir. Themodels had sidewalls of acrylic resin (of 20 mm in thickness).

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.291
Threshold uncertainty score0.438

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations28
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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