MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011446303 · doi:10.2118/129599-pa

Performance and Economic Evaluation of Cyclic-Pressure Pulsing in Naturally Fractured Reservoirs

2011· article· en· W2011446303 on OpenAlex
Emre Artun, Turgay Ertekin, R.W. Watson, Majid Al-Wadhahi, Bernie J. Miller

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Canadian Petroleum Technology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReservoir Engineering and Simulation Methods
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPetroleum engineeringFossil fuelPorosityNatural gas fieldParametric statisticsOil productionEnhanced oil recoveryOil fieldNatural gasEnvironmental scienceGeologyEngineeringMathematicsGeotechnical engineeringStatisticsWaste management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Gas cyclic-pressure pulsing is an effective improved-oil-recovery (IOR) method in naturally fractured reservoirs. A limited number of studies concerning this method in the literature focus on specific reservoirs, yet the optimum operating conditions have not been broadly investigated. In this study, we present a detailed parametric study of the process from both operational and reservoir perspectives. Incremental oil production, discounted incremental oil production, and net present value (NPV) are considered as the important markers for the performance criteria. The necessary analyses are performed using a single-well, dual-porosity, compositional reservoir model. In the first part of the study, parametric studies are conducted to develop a better understanding of the operational parameters affecting the process performance in the shallow, naturally fractured, and depleted reservoir of Big Andy field in eastern Kentucky, USA. These include analyses of various design parameters (e.g., soaking period, cycle rate limit, number of cycles, cycle, and cumulative injected-gas volumes). In the second part of the study, reservoir characteristics are investigated. Comparative discussions are presented between cases with CO2 and N2 as the injected gas on reservoir fluids of different compositions (heavy, black, and volatile oils). Influences of area, thickness, fracture/matrix permeabilities, initial reservoir pressure, and temperature on the process are studied. It is observed that N2, as a lower-cost gas, would be a better choice than CO2 in the Big Andy field. With the oil price used in this study, the cost of injected gas becomes relatively insignificant in economic considerations. Increased income from increased oil production overcomes the increased costs with higher volumes of gas. The way reservoir characteristics affect the process performance is similar in cases with CO2 and N2, but differs significantly with different reservoir fluids. Thicknesses ranging between 20 and 50 ft produced more favourable results than thicker reservoirs. A higher efficiency was observed with smaller drainage areas (5 to 8 acres) in the presence of heavy oil. For the cases with volatile and black oil, it is observed that the process efficiency is not altered significantly by the area. The phase behaviour of the reservoir fluid is important for the performance of the process. Initial pressure/temperature of the reservoir and, therefore, the initial fractions of gas/liquid phases affect the process efficiency in a more pronounced manner.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.104
Threshold uncertainty score0.682

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.222 · 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