Heavy-Oil Solution Gas Drive in Consolidated and Unconsolidated Rock
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Solution gas drive is an effective process to recover heavy oil from some reservoirs. However, characterization of the relevant recovery mechanism remains a challenge. In this work, we present an experimental study of solution gas drive of a 9°API crude oil with a composite core (consolidated) and a sandpack (unconsolidated). The composite core is placed in a stainless steel, Hasseler-sleeved type coreholder. A confining pressure is employed during depletion. The sandpack is made up of clean Ottawa sands with a grain size distribution similar to the reservoir cores. This sandpack does not employ a confining pressure and it is transparent to X-rays. Therefore, gas saturation development in the sandpack is monitored through X-ray computed tomography scanning. The live crude oil has a solution gas-oil ratio of 105 SCF/bbl and a viscosity of 258 cp at 178°F. With the two different porous media, we investigated the effect of depletion rate and overburden pressure on heavy-oil solution gas drive. The results show that the overburden pressure affects heavy oil solution gas drive by offsetting partially the pore pressure decline. As a result, the apparent supersaturation in the sandpack is greater than that in the composite core. In addition, the measured critical gas saturation and oil recovery for the sandpack are greater than that for the composite core at the same depletion rate. The estimated gas relative permeability in the composite core is also greater than that in the sandpack.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".