A Simple Relation between Solubility Parameters and Densities for Live Reservoir Fluids
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A simple equation has been developed for estimating the solubility parameters of live reservoir fluids at elevated pressure and reservoir temperature. The solubility parameters of live reservoir fluids have been simply related to their measured densities by a linear function. The equation has been validated using 45 reservoir fluids covering heavy oil, black oil, volatile oil, and gas condensate with a total of 760 data points. The gas to oil ratio (GOR) range is from (25 to 9369) m 3 ·m −3, and the American Petroleum Institute (API) gravity varies from (16.6 to 50.2). The pressure ranges from (0.1 to 150.7) MPa, and the reservoir temperature is over a range of (323.9 to 422.0) K. The average absolute deviation of solubility parameters is 0.19 MPa 0.5 between the new equation and the method proposed by Wang et al. Furthermore, the new equation and the Peng−Robinson equation of state (PR EoS) have been used to calculate solubility parameters, and the results have been compared with the experimental data at pressures up to 30 MPa and 303.15 K for four pure hydrocarbons as well as dead and live oils. The predictions by the new equation and the PR EoS with an average deviation of < 0.5 MPa 0.5 are within the experimental uncertainty of < 0.8 MPa 0.5 . The results show that the developed equation in this work can be successfully used to approximate the solubility parameters of live reservoir fluids in terms of their measured densities with good accuracy.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it