MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036684247 · doi:10.2118/2007-133-ea

Incorporation of Heat in the VAPEX Process: Warm VAPEX

2007· article· en· W2036684247 on OpenAlex

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

VenueCanadian International Petroleum Conference · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicGas Dynamics and Kinetic Theory
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProcess (computing)ThermodynamicsMechanicsPetroleum engineeringMaterials scienceMechanical engineeringComputer scienceEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Warm VAPEX, as one of the variations of vapor extraction process, is investigated in the current research which incorporates heat in a VAPEX process. The idea behind it is to heat the solvent above the dew point temperature of solvent vapors at reservoir conditions and inject it to the reservoir. The superheated vapors carry some sensible heat to the solvent- heavy oil interface and also cause an additional driving force due to mixing, when the solvent vapor condenses at the pore scale. The experiments have been conducted in a rectangular packed glass-bead model. Superheated n-pentane was injected to the model at elevated temperatures, above the model temperature. The model was insulated to lower the potential for heat loss to surrounding and a so-called dummy experiment was conducted to find out the rate of pentane condensation in the system due to heat losses. The preliminary results show the promising feature of warm VAPEX process in terms of enhanced oil production rates. Introduction The vapor extraction (VAPEX) process has recently drawn lots of attention for the recovery of heavy oil. The increasing trend in the energy costs along with great concerns regarding the environmental aspects, global warming, specifically, have provided the opportunity for applying this process for heavy oil recovery, greater than ever. However, the process suffers from an inherent drawback; it is slow in production rate. Creative efforts have resulted in developing several variations of VAPEX with higher production rates than the conventional process, one of which to incorporate heat in the VAPEX process. The idea of using solvent vapors for the recovery of heavy oil was introduced in 1974 [1]. However, unattractive production rates prevented the idea to be tested in the field. A decade after, VAPEX, was introduced as a variation of steam assisted gravity drainage (SAGD), which utilized the horizontal well technology [2]. However, the process was still slow in terms of oil production rate. Several researchers investigated the incorporation of heat in a VAPEX process in order to improve the diffusion-controlled process. Co-injection of solvent and steam/hot water, so-called hybrid VAPEX process, was investigated by several researchers, as a novel approach to VAPEX [3–8]. The steam alternating solvent (SAS) was also studied as a variation of "huff n puff" process, utilizing solvent in cycles along with steam [1, 9]. Near the well bore, electrical heating is also utilized to create a limited hot temperature region during VAPEX process, to recycle the solvent in-situ [10]. Overall, the effect of heat in VAPEX process was found to be promising in terms of comparable oil production rates and decreased energy requirements when compared to thermal oil recovery methods. Warm VAPEX Experiment The experiments for the investigation of warm VAPEX process were conducted in a rectangular packed model. Fig. 1 shows a schematic of the experimental setup used. Liquid n-pentane was pumped at constant flow rate and passed through a tube, wrapped by heating tape. The power of heating tape was adjusted to obtain the desire temperature of injecting solvent vapor at the injection point.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.223
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.259 · 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