MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084519285 · doi:10.2118/165563-ms

Design and Field Evaluation of Tubing Deployed Passive Outflow Control Devices in SAGD Injection Wells

2013· article· en· W2084519285 on OpenAlex
Max Medina

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
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 Heavy Oil Conference-Canada · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPetroleum engineeringSteam injectionBody orificeInjection wellCompletion (oil and gas wells)EngineeringOutflowWellheadOil fieldMechanical engineeringGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The integration of horizontal wells and thermal oil recovery methods, such as Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage (SAGD), has enabled the economic exploitation of extra-heavy oil resources, mainly in Canada. The use of passive outflow control devices (OCDs) in SAGD wells adds steam injection points along the horizontal wellbore influencing steam placement and chamber growth; thus, potentially reducing the steam-to-oil ratio (SOR), productivity uncertainty and accelerating production. For designing OCD installations in SAGD, we need to address two main aspects. Firstly, the interface between horizontal wellbore hydraulics and reservoir injectivity that allows determining the optimum number and location of the steam injection points. Secondly, the design of the OCD itself, which involves selecting and configuring the device with a hydraulic performance that is fit for purpose. For this study we will focus specifically on straight-orifice choke passive OCDs. This paper presents a comprehensive design methodology for tubing deployed passive OCDs in SAGD. The completion design is carried out with a steady-state model of the injection well using a commercial thermal wellbore simulator. The field performance evaluation of tubing deployed passive OCDs is critical for verifying the effectiveness of the design methodology and the hydraulic performance of the devices under real field conditions. The field evaluation is done by history matching the injection pressure vs. steam rate data with a model developed in the thermal wellbore simulator. A dynamic pressure gradient (under flowing conditions) in the injection string carrying the OCDs is obtained with a temperature log, taken with fiber optic technology, where the temperature data is converted to pressure by virtue of the properties of saturated steam. This approach is new for the SAGD industry. The OCDs hydraulic field performance was successfully matched with the simulated model, which indicates the effectiveness of the design methodology, the field performance evaluation techniques and the effectiveness of the OCDs in delivering the desired amount of steam at each location.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.540

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.196 · 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