MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2042701129 · doi:10.2118/100497-ms

Critical Evaluation of Existing Methods for Accounting for Multiphase Effects Around Producers in Depleting Gas Condensate Reservoirs

2006· article· en· W2042701129 on OpenAlexaff
Carlos A. Estrada, A. Settari

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Gas Technology Symposium · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques
Canadian institutionsNexen (Canada)University of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSaturation (graph theory)Capillary actionMechanicsInertial frame of referenceCapillary numberRelative permeabilityConstant (computer programming)Petroleum engineeringPressure dropDrop (telecommunication)ThermodynamicsMaterials scienceChemistryPhysicsMathematicsGeologyComputer scienceMechanical engineeringPorosityEngineeringComposite materialClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Well test analysis techniques use variations of the pseudopressure concept to account for multiphase effects due to condensate drop-out in near-well regions (e.g. Jones and Raghavan1 approach). In this work, an evaluation of the accuracy and applicability of these techniques was carried out using data from the discovery well of the Cupiagua field, including well testing, relative permeabilities (Kr) measured at low capillary number and a tuned PREOS. Henderson et al's capillary number dependent relative permeability and effective inertial resistance correlations2, as implemented in a commercial simulator, were used to history match the well test data. To investigate the assumptions in the analytical models, numerical simulations were run, first with constant Kr, and then with the effect of capillary number and inertial resistance. The main conclusions are: For the constant Kr simulation, a constant composition expansion (CCE) data of the flowing composition accurately reproduces the pressure-saturation relationship in the region where both oil and gas are mobile. However, contrary to Fevang and Whitson's assumption3, the constant volume depletion (CVD) data did not match the saturation distribution of the region where only gas flows.When Kr dependence on capillary number and inertial resistance was considered, the immobile oil region practically disappeared. In consequence, the CCE data of the original fluid composition can reproduce the pressure-saturation relationship in the two phase region.Al-Hussainy et al's total skin versus rate plots4 to obtain mechanical skin figures were found to give results similar to those obtained by numerical simulation. In summary, this work identifies clearly the conditions under which the analytical models are not correct, which data should be used for analysis, and when the numerical instead of an analytical approach is required.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.345 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSPE Gas Technology SymposiumSame topicEnhanced Oil Recovery TechniquesFrench-language works237,207