Chamber Volume/Size Estimation for SAGD Process From Horizontal Well Testing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Steam-assisted gravity drainage, SAGD, is one of the most recent and the most promising technique in enhanced oil recovery processes. The determination of the swept volume in a steam chamber process provides an early means in which to evaluate the project's progress. The pseudosteady state method has been used to estimate the swept volume, from pressure falloff testing, of horizontal wells. This method is easy to use and is similar in form to the well-known productivity equation for a vertical well. The applicability of the pseudosteady state method in estimating the swept volume for steam injection through a horizontal well was thoroughly investigated. A 3-D thermal numerical simulator was used to investigate the accuracy of the numerically calculated swept volume with the analytically estimated swept volume in SAGD process. In addition, a number of parameters, such as grid blocks number, duration of njection time, permeability ratio(kv kh), steam quality, and the location of the producer, were also studied. Results of this studies show that the pseudosteady state method is valid to use to estimate the swept volume for steam injection through a horizontal well. Within the norms of the independent parameters, the analytically (PSS) estimated swept volume was in good agreement with the numerically simulated swept volume. Introduction In the past, heavy oil or bitumen production has been only marginally economic. However, in recent years, tremendous advances have been achieved in the technology for the recovery of heavy oil or bitumen in both surface mining and in-situ operations. Syncrude and Suncor, the two current mining operations, have been increasing their production and profits consistently, even in the face of varying oil prices. Surface mining currently produces more than 500,000 barrels a day of bitumen. For in-situ recovery, horizontal well technologies have been widely used in both the thermal and non-thermal recovery of heavy oil and bitumen. Primary recovery by conventional production usually yields a low oil recovery in heavy oil reservoirs. Economically feasible technologies, such as steamflooding, steam-assisted gravity drainage (SAGD), and vapour extraction (Vapex) have been developed in order to upgrade large volumes of heavy oil underground (~10 ° to 25 °) API oil1–3. Nowadays, over 80 percent of the total oil produced from all enhanced oil recovery projects in the world is produced by the thermal method. The most economically feasible method of transporting heat to a reservoir, and the flux there of, is by the use of steam. This medium is fully utilized within the areas of steamflooding and SAGD. The Steam-Assisted Gravity Drainage (SAGD) process was successfully tested in AOSTRA's UTF project and has been applied commercially to the Athabasca oil sands and to the Tangleflags' North field. In the usual form of this process, two parallel horizontal wells are placed in the reservoir with a relatively small vertical spacing between them. The top one is used as an injector and the lower one as a producer. As injected steam rises and spreads in the reservoir to form a steam chamber above the injector, heated oil with condensed steam flows continuously downward to the production well byravity4.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".