MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2155276309 · doi:10.2516/ogst/2012015

Analysis of Heavy Oil Recovery by Thermal EOR in a Meander Belt: From Geological to Reservoir Modeling

2012· article· en· W2155276309 on OpenAlex

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

VenueOil & Gas Science and Technology – Revue d’IFP Energies nouvelles · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Mathematical Modeling in Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersIFP Energies Nouvelles
KeywordsMeander (mathematics)GeologyOutcropReservoir simulationSteam-assisted gravity drainagePetroleum engineeringPoint barSteam injectionPetrologyInjectorEnhanced oil recoveryOil sandsGeomorphologyFluvial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objectives of this work is to assess the impact of reservoir heterogeneities on heavy oil recovery of a reservoir analogue of meander belt through the Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage (SAGD) process by using numerical models. These models are obtained with different scales of upscaling of the geological model. Meander belts consist of point bar deposits, characterized by a 3D complex internal architecture, with different scales of heterogeneities, which distribution is associated with the depositional processes. Based on a 3D outcrop description of a meander belt analogue to the Canadian heavy-oil fields, the approach includes three steps: 1) the construction of a reference static reservoir model based on a very fine description of the outcrops in terms of architecture and geological heterogeneities, 2) upscaling of the grid at different scales using different upscaling factors in order to evaluate their impact on the heterogeneity distribution in the reservoir, 3) reservoir SAGD simulations using horizontal well doublet (steam injector and producer) across the meander belt, so as to assess the impact of upscaling of heterogeneities on heavy oil production. The impact of heterogeneities on simulation results are evaluated for several upscaling stages. Results show that heterogeneity distribution has an impact on fluid flow at different stages of production. On the fine gridded model, small scale heterogeneities impact the steam chamber development and fluid flow in the wellbore vicinity at the beginning of the steam injection, whereas large scale heterogeneities strongly influence oil recovery during the whole recovery process and lower the efficiency of the reservoir drainage. On coarser grids, the effect of small-scale heterogeneities can be diminished, depending on the upscaling stage. The geomechanical effect is not taken into account in this work, the objective being to assess the impact of heterogeneities on oil recovery. The performance of SAGD is clearly linked to the steam chamber development, which depends on the degree of heterogeneities present in the reservoir. The simulation workflow and the sensitivity study on the upscaling method contribute to a better restoration of the heterogeneity distribution in the reservoir. The negative effect of these heterogeneities during the oil recovery must thus be quantified in order to monitor the thermal production at crucial periods of the production process.

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)0.001
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 score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.751

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.236
Teacher spread0.222 · 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