Steam-Over-Solvent Injection in Fractured Reservoirs (SOS-FR) for Heavy-Oil Recovery: Experimental Analysis of the Mechanism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Heavy oil trapped in fractured carbonate reservoirs possesses a great challenge. Previous experience has shown that heating the matrix to drain heavy-oil by gravity is a slow and inefficient process due to low matrix recovery caused by unfavorable matrix properties (oil wetness and low permeability). Acceleration of matrix-fracture interaction by changing matrix and oil properties could be possible, however, by injecting proper hydrocarbon solvent alternately with steam as reported by our earlier work (SPE 117626). This process called Solvent-Over-Steam injection in Fractured Reservoirs (SOS-FR) consists of several cycles, each having three phases: (1) steam/hot water injection, (2) solvent injection, and (3) steam/hot water injection. This paper reports a detailed experimental analysis of this new method. Static and dynamic tests were conducted by exposing (or injecting) heavy-oil saturated fractured rocks into steam/hot water and solvent alternately. Oil-wet sandstone and carbonate samples were saturated with heavy-crude. Different solvents were tested including heptane, kerosene, decane and light crude. In addition to the core experiments, the same procedure was repeated on "Hele-Shaw like" glass models to visually identify the mechanics of the process. Specific observations and conclusions as to how to apply this technique in field conditions, which mechanisms control the rate of recovery and residual matrix oil saturation, ideal solvent type, and optimal operational conditions (optimal soaking time for huff-and-puff and injection rate for continuous injection) were reported. It is hoped the proposed new technique will be an alternative for tapping heavy matrix oil from oil-wet, fractured, deep, carbonate fields.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".