MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2087380491 · doi:10.2118/117648-ms

Improved Heavy Oil Recovery by Low Rate Waterflooding

2008· article· en· W2087380491 on OpenAlex
A. Mai, Apostolos Kantzas

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Thermal Operations and Heavy Oil Symposium · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques
Canadian institutionsLaricina Energy (Canada)University of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsPetroleum engineeringImbibitionWater injection (oil production)Relative permeabilitySteam injectionPermeability (electromagnetism)Environmental scienceCapillary pressurePetroleumGeologyPorous mediumPorosityGeotechnical engineeringChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This work details the results of ambient temperature waterfloods in unconsolidated sand containing heavy oil (11°API and viscosity of 11,500 mPa⋅s at 23°C). Experiments are performed at rates ranging from 0.4 – 0.02 m/day, in sand with permeability of under 1 D to 9 D. By varying both the injection rate and the permeability of the sand, the relative influence of viscous and capillary forces can be determined. It is shown that by properly controlling the waterflood, significant heavy oil can still be recovered after water breakthrough has already occurred. The application of this work is for the significant heavy oil resource in Canada that exists in reservoirs that are too thin for thermal operations. A fraction of oil may initially be recovered through primary production, however at its conclusion a significant amount of oil still remains in the reservoir. Waterflooding is a simple process that has potential for recovery of additional oil, in reservoirs where more expensive options will not be possible. Due to the adverse mobility ratio between water and oil, water breakthrough occurs early in a waterflood, with a significant amount of the oil still being continuous at this time. The key to understanding the displacement of heavy oil by water is to consider the oil recovery after breakthrough. This oil is produced at high water cuts, and under negligible pressure gradients. Oil is therefore recovered by water imbibition into the water-wet sand. By varying the injection rates and the permeability of the sand, the importance of these capillary forces to oil recovery has been quantified. Capillary forces are generally deemed to be insignificant in heavy oil waterfloods due to the high oil viscosity. As such, concepts of viscous fingering and mobility ratio dominate discussions of heavy oil waterflood responses. In this work, it is shown that not only are capillary forces actually still important in heavy oil reservoirs, but in fact they are a significant mechanism responsible for oil recovery after water breakthrough. With this understood, heavy oil waterfloods can be properly designed to maximize flood efficiency and oil recovery.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.121
Threshold uncertainty score0.944

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.211 · 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