MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2325372313 · doi:10.1021/ie402363h

Parametric Study of the Cyclic CO<sub>2</sub>Injection Process in Light Oil Systems

2013· article· en· W2325372313 on OpenAlexaff
Ali Abedini, Farshid Torabi

Bibliographic record

VenueIndustrial & Engineering Chemistry Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSaturation (graph theory)Light crude oilSolubilitySurface tensionDissolutionMiscibilityChemistryEnhanced oil recoveryMaterials scienceAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Penetration (warfare)ChromatographyPetroleum engineeringThermodynamicsComposite materialOrganic chemistryGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Performance of cyclic CO 2 injection as an enhanced oil recovery (EOR) technique in a light crude oil system was experimentally investigated. Series of cyclic CO 2 injection tests were designed and carried out at various operating conditions. Effects of parameters including operating pressure ( P op ), injection time ( t inj ), soaking period ( t soaking ) and connate water saturation ( S wc ) were investigated on the oil recovery factor (RF) of cyclic injection tests. First, the CO 2 solubility in the crude oil sample and the oil swelling factor as a result of CO 2 dissolution into the oil phase for the crude oil–CO 2 system at temperatures T = 21 and 30 °C were determined. Second, the equilibrium interfacial tension of the crude oil–CO 2 system at T = 30 °C was measured. Afterward, the minimum miscibility pressure (MMP) between crude oil and CO 2 was calculated by means of the vanishing interfacial tension (VIT) technique and found to be MMP = 9.18 MPa. Finally, a total of 12 cyclic CO 2 injection tests were performed at operating pressures P op = 5.38, 6.55, and 8.27 MPa (i.e., immiscible to near-miscible conditions), and constant temperature T = 30 °C and in the presence and absence of connate water saturation. CO 2 injection time and soaking period were varied at each operating pressure in order to determine how these parameters might affect the performance of cyclic CO 2 injection. According to the obtained experimental results, it was found that the oil recovery factor of the cyclic CO 2 injection technique increases considerably with increased operating pressure (e.g., from RF = 32.6% at P op = 5.38 MPa to RF = 54.4% at P op = 8.27 MPa). The results also demonstrated that the oil recovery factor increases by a longer soaking period particularly if the cyclic CO 2 injection performed at lower operating pressures. Moreover, it was observed that the oil recovery factor is independent of CO 2 injection time. In addition, at each operating pressure, the oil recovery factor obtained in the presence of connate water saturation was found to be more than that when there was no connate water saturation in the system.

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 score0.156
Threshold uncertainty score0.887

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations43
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndustrial & Engineering Chemistry ResearchSame topicEnhanced Oil Recovery TechniquesFrench-language works237,207