Analytical coupled axial and radial productivity model for steady-state flow in horizontal wells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A new analytical model for coupled radial well inflow and axial flow has been developed and applied to horizontal well productivity calculations. This analytical model results in a linear pressure distribution in the axial direction and a logarithmic pressure distribution in the radial direction. The analytical solution is investigated for two special cases where a one-dimensional analytical solution already exists. It is proven that the model reduces to the classical radial inflow model in the case when the axial pressure gradient is zero and to the linear Darcy equation when there is zero radial inflow. The new equations are also used to evaluate the well flow rates when the skin effect is included. The analytical solution verifies that the axial flow in the reservoir, in general, cannot be ignored, particularly in reservoirs with high permeability and high well productivity. The analytical model is used to quantify the importance of frictional losses in well productivity calculations. An example on how the analytical model can be used in hand calculations to determine well productivity and frictional losses is presented.
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) | 0.000 | 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".