MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2072929666 · doi:10.1680/geot.2006.56.1.27

Field determination of mechanical aperture, entry pressure and relative permeability of fractures using NAPL injection

2006· article· en· W2072929666 on OpenAlexaff
Adrian Steele, D. A. Reynolds, B. H. Kueper, David N. Lerner

Bibliographic record

VenueGéotechnique · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilBritish Geological Survey
KeywordsAperture (computer memory)Geotechnical engineeringPermeability (electromagnetism)BoreholeGeologyRelative permeabilitySaturation (graph theory)Penetration (warfare)Materials sciencePorosityChemistryEngineeringStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An in situ field technique has been developed and implemented to measure non-aqueous phase liquid (NAPL) entry pressure and subsequently estimate mechanical aperture variability in an undisturbed, water-saturated rock fracture. The field experiment also provided the opportunity to measure wetting phase relative permeability at residual non-wetting phase saturation, k w,r (S nw,r ). The radial aperture determination by the injection of oil (RADIO) method employs a constant-rate injection of a non-toxic NAPL into a fracture isolated by a double packer array. Injection pressures are recorded to provide a characteristic signature that is interpreted to reveal aperture enlargements and constrictions several metres from the borehole. Fracture aperture values are calculated by reverse modelling of the pressure signatures using the FRACAS fully compositional two-phase flow model. Pre-NAPL injection hydraulic testing established a baseline dataset of hydraulic apertures ranging from 26 μm to 259 μm with a mean value of 86 μm. Post-NAPL injection hydraulic testing gave k w,r (S nw,r ) values ranging from 0·04 to 0·39 with a mean value of 0·15. Numerical modelling calculated fracture mechanical apertures vary from 36 μm to >1000 μm in test 1, and from 46 μm to >1000 μm in test 2. Single-value approximations of volume-averaged fracture apertures are two to three times larger than the respective hydraulic apertures, suggesting that volume balance calculations using the hydraulic aperture may overpredict NAPL penetration distances.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.670
Threshold uncertainty score0.318

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations7
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGéotechniqueSame topicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir AnalysisFrench-language works237,207