MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2325300606 · doi:10.2118/180913-pa

Relative Permeability of Foamy Oil for Different Types of Dissolved Gases

2016· article· en· W2325300606 on OpenAlexafffund
Achinta Bera, Tayfun Babadagli

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPropanePetroleum engineeringMethaneEnhanced oil recoveryPorous mediumDissolutionChemistryCarbon dioxideVolume (thermodynamics)Chemical engineeringMaterials sciencePorosityGeologyThermodynamicsEngineeringOrganic chemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Foamy-oil flow is encountered not only during the primary stage of the cold-heavy-oil-production (CHOP) process through evolving methane originally in the oil but also in the post-CHOP enhanced-oil-recovery (EOR) applications in which different gases are injected and dissolved in heavy oil. Despite remarkable efforts on the physics of foamy oil flow, the mechanics of its flow through porous media is not properly understood yet. This is mainly because of lack of detailed experimental studies at the core scale to clarify the physics of the process and to support numerical-modeling studies. One also should test foamy-oil flow for different types of EOR gases dissolved and evolved at different conditions under pressure depletion. The objective of the present work is to perform detailed laboratory experiments on foamy-oil flow through porous media. Pressure/volume/temperature (PVT) studies were conducted to determine the actual pressure ranges in the coreflooding experiments in the beginning. After dissolving different gases in dead oil at 400 psi for methane (CH4) and carbon dioxide (CO2) and 112 psi for propane, the oil was injected into a sandpack to saturate it. The solution-gas-drive test was started by opening the outlet valve of the coreholder after reaching equilibrium. To mimic typical post-CHOP EOR conditions with methane, propane, or CO2 injection, the pressure was kept high (400 psi for CO2 and CH4 and 112 psi for propane). The produced oil by solution-gas drive and the gas evolved were monitored by collecting them in a graduated cylinder and a gas cylinder, respectively, while the pressure was recorded by an automatic data-acquisition system. The experimental data provided information about the effect of initial pressure of the depletion test in the amount of oil and gas measured as well as the visual observations of bubble characteristics of the foamy oil. Results showed that, among the three gases, CO2 is a good candidate for foamy oil. Maximum oil recovery [more than 50% of original oil in place (OIP) (OOIP)] was obtained in case of CO2.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.150
Threshold uncertainty score0.538

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations26
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSPE Reservoir Evaluation & EngineeringSame topicEnhanced Oil Recovery TechniquesFrench-language works237,207