MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073825147 · doi:10.2118/169054-ms

Wettability, Trapping and Fracture-Matrix Interaction during WAG Injection in Fractured Carbonate Reservoirs

2014· article· en· W2073825147 on OpenAlex
Simeon Agada, S. Geiger

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Improved Oil Recovery Symposium · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCMG Reservoir Simulation Foundation
KeywordsImbibitionCarbonateWettingGeologySaturation (graph theory)Petroleum engineeringRelative permeabilityCarbonate rockPermeability (electromagnetism)Water injection (oil production)Geotechnical engineeringMaterials sciencePorosityChemistryComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Relative permeabilities show significant dependence on the saturation path during enhanced oil recovery. This dependence (or hysteresis) is particularly important for water-alternating-gas (WAG) injection, a successful EOR method for clastic and carbonate reservoirs. WAG is characterized by an alternating sequence of drainage and imbibition cycles. Hysteresis is hence common and results in trapping of the non-wetting phase, which impacts incremental recovery. The competition of trapping and geological heterogeneity during WAG, particularly in carbonate reservoirs, is not yet fully understood. In this study, we therefore use a high-resolution simulation model of a Jurassic Carbonate ramp, which is an analogue for the highly prolific reservoirs of the Arab D formation in Qatar, to investigate the impact of non-wetting phase trapping during miscible and immiscible WAG in heterogeneous carbonate formations. We then compare the impact of trapping on recovery to the impact of heterogeneity in wettability and reservoir structure. We test end-member wettability scenarios and multiple rock types. We also compute effective fracture permeabilities using discrete fracture networks (DFN), ranging from sparsely distributed background fractures to fracture networks where intensity varies with proximity to faults. The results enable us to analyse and compare WAG efficiency in carbonate reservoirs by ranking the impact of physical displacement processes (imbibition, drainage, trapping, miscibility) versus heterogeneity (wettability, faults, fractures, layering) that are typical for carbonate reservoirs. We show that while miscible WAG injection gives better displacement results than immiscible WAG injection or water flooding for this reservoir, recovery efficiency is limited by structurally induced bypassing and flow channelling. This bypassing is magnified if fractures are considered, leading to an earlier breakthrough of injected fluids and ultimate recoveries that are at least 8% lower compared to matrix-only models. We also demonstrate the impact of different hysteresis models and show that when irreversibility of the drainage and imbibition scanning curves during WAG is accounted for, trapping is enhanced and at least a 5% increase in recovery is observed. This modelling approach, therefore, enables us to increase the reliability of WAG simulations by accounting for trapping and its interaction with wettability, miscibility, and geological heterogeneity in fractured carbonate reservoirs.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.217 · 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