MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061706735 · doi:10.2118/127848-ms

Role of Steam Injection Pressure to Achieve Successful Cyclic Steam Project Issaran Field - Egypt

2010· article· en· W2061706735 on OpenAlexaff
M. Samir

Bibliographic record

VenueNorth Africa Technical Conference and Exhibition · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Canadian institutionsCarbon Engineering (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPetroleum engineeringSteam injectionInjectorInjection wellDolomiteWater injection (oil production)SteamingEnvironmental scienceOil fieldGeologyMineralogyEngineeringChemistryMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Issaran fied Upper Dolomite Zone were subjected to a steam project by year 2006. The steam injection pressure is very important factor during the steam cyclic project as at any single injector difference in the performance of nearby wells may be attributed to (1) local differences in reservoir characteristics and initial fluid contents, (2) anisotropy in properties (perhaps a preferred fracture orientation), (3) effects of dip, (4) differences in well completion, operation, or impairment, and (5) differences in the location of fluid fronts in the reservoir. Normally the injection pressure measure during thermal operations to provide (1) information on the injectivity and productivity of wells and flow resistance in the reservoir, (2) confidence that equipment and wells are being operated at design pressure levels and within safe pressure limits, (3) information on the enthalpy of fluids, and (4) information about properties and conditions existing in the reservoir through the use of diagnostic well test and continuous pressure observations. The injection pressure play very important role on the oil production after the injection period. Here will discuss the pressure performance while steaming and its effect on the average oil production on the production period after. On Issaran Upper Dolomite fracture zone, 16 wells were subjected to two steam cycles and based on the injection performance these 16 wells were subdivide to three groups, the first group for the wells which showed a decline on the oil rate after the second cycle, second group for the wells showed sustain on the oil production after the second cycle and the third group showed an increase on the oil production after the second cycle. This paper will highlight these results, and the methodology taken for analyzing the data, and the ways of investigation taken to reach a certain conclusion by the injection pressure should not exceed the fracture pressure otherwise during the second cycle the average oil production will be decrease.

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 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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.275
Threshold uncertainty score0.602

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNorth Africa Technical Conference and ExhibitionSame topicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir AnalysisFrench-language works237,207