MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2318115176 · doi:10.2118/176716-ms

Optimization of Cyclic Steam Stimulation (CSS) Under Geomechanics-Dependent Permeability

2015· article· en· W2318115176 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

VenueSPE Russian Petroleum Technology Conference · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSteam injectionPetroleum engineeringGeomechanicsPermeability (electromagnetism)Steam-assisted gravity drainageEnhanced oil recoveryReservoir simulationEnvironmental scienceVapor qualityGeologyGeotechnical engineeringMaterials scienceOil sandsEngineeringHeat exchangerMechanical engineeringChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objectives/Scope: Since its accidental discovery in Venezuela during a steamflood procedure, and despite the high costs associated with using steam. CSS has been widely used throughout the world in heavy-oil reservoirs, especially in Alberta, California, and Venezuela. It has turned out that it is also important to understand the degree of impact of geomechanics as it is a key parameter in reservoirs with geomechanical response. This makes the optimization process more valuable in terms of the application of crucial operational constraints and parameters, such as injection rate, cycle size, cycle life, and well spacing, not only for the reservoir but also the wellbore, which are important for delivering steam to the subsurface while ensuring minimum heat loss along with reservoir integrity and permeability variation. Methods, Procedures, Process The CSS recovery method is influenced by complex reservoir geologies, where a CSS well can penetrate multiple layers having significantly different properties, including permeability. It is important to have a solid understanding of the impact of multiple layers on recovery when using CSS, not only to help maximize recovery but also net-present value because of the high cost of steam generation. In this study, a commercial full-physics reservoir simulator is used to simulate the effect of multiple layers with varying permeabilities under different operating conditions. Results, Observations, Conclusions CSS helps to increase recoveries up to 20 to 25% by means of certain mechanisms, including but not limited to viscosity reduction thermal expansion of oil, blocking removal, and gravity drainage. Although it is generally valid that higher steam qualities and shorter soak times provide higher recoveries, the main stages of cyclic steam stimulation (CSS)—injection, soaking, and production—should be carefully optimized because the efficiency of this technique is reduced after the first few cycles. The influence of geomechanics turns out to be a significant parameter in this process. Novel/Additive Information The results and sensitivities are compared and discussed in light of a comprehensive literature review of CSS with different process optimization methods, including sequential CSS and cumulative average daily profit methods. The significance of all major parameters are outlined using tornado charts to serve as a practical example for optimization of similar future applications.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.788
Threshold uncertainty score0.829

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.215 · 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