MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2022027184 · doi:10.2118/170177-ms

SAGD Vacuum Insulated Tubing vs. Bare Tubing – Concentric and Eccentric Configurations: A Comparative Thermal Computational Fluid Dynamics Study

2014· article· en· W2022027184 on OpenAlex
Shashank K. Karra, Mike Chudiak, Apoorv Sinha, Boser Greg

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

VenueSPE Heavy Oil Conference-Canada · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOil and Gas Production Techniques
Canadian institutionsAnsys (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInjectorCasingConcentricTube (container)MechanicsHeat transferMechanical engineeringMaterials scienceComputational fluid dynamicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In a typical injector string in SAGD operation, steam is injected through tubing placed inside a casing. Heat losses through the string and casing can result in lower quality steam being injected into the formation, and hence reduce the productivity of a SAGD operation. An ideal SAGD operation would be one where no heat losses happen inside the tubing and all the latent heat is released inside the formation to heat up the heavy oil. Several methods have been used to reduce heat losses in the injector tubing. One of the methods is the usage of a vacuum insulated tubing (VIT) placed inside the casing. VIT consists of specially manufactured tubing with a getter coating to maintain vacuum between ID and the OD of the tube. This helps in preventing heat losses compared to normal bare steel tubing. In an effort to demonstrate the benefits of VIT compared to bare tubing injector string, a comparative 3D Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) study was carried out. The objective of the study is to provide a comparison of heat loss in both VIT and bare tubing concentric and eccentric configurations. The simulation accounts for frictional and heat losses throughout the tubing and most importantly, condensation of steam inside the tubing as result of heat loss. The consideration of condensation inside the tubing is a critical component of the simulation as it in turn affects the heat loss through the tubing. The other significant aspect of the study is the consideration of eccentric and concentric placement of tubing string inside the casing and its effect on heat loss. This study uses an Euler-Euler Multiphase flow based approach which accounts for the fluid-fluid interactions such as drag, turbulent dispersion etc. between steam and water inside the tubing. The thermal phase change model in ANSYS CFD accounts for the condensation of steam into water. The computed results successfully demonstrate the benefits of vacuum insulated tubing over bare tubing in maintaining steam quality in the vertical section of the wellbore. Also, the study shows reduction in steam quality for eccentric position of the bare tubing compared to concentric position. Most importantly this study demonstrates the capability of CFD to solve industrial scale complex problems and provide engineers with an insight into some of the challenging physics associated with a SAGD operation in the field.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.537
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.198 · 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