MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2340116295 · doi:10.2118/180237-ms

Phase Behavior of Multicomponent Hydrocarbons in Organic Nanopores Under the Effects of Capillary Pressure and Adsorption Film

2016· article· en· W2340116295 on OpenAlexafffund
Xiaohu Dong, Huiqing Liu, Jirui Hou, Zhangxin Chen, Keliu Wu, Jie Zhan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlberta Innovates - Technology FuturesCMG Reservoir Simulation Foundation
KeywordsNanoporeAdsorptionCapillary pressureCapillary condensationCapillary actionMaterials scienceKelvin equationLaplace pressurePhase (matter)Chemical engineeringThermodynamicsMethaneButaneChemical physicsChemistryPorous mediumPorositySurface tensionComposite materialNanotechnologyPhysical chemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The presence of nanopores in tight rocks and shales have been confirmed by numerous studies. These pores are also the primary storage space of oil and gas in shales. Due to the effect of nanoscale confinement, the phase behavior of fluids confined in such extra-low permeability formation (nanodarcy scale) differs significantly from those observed in the conventional formation. In this paper, the cubic PR EOR is coupled with the capillary-pressure equation and adsorption theory to investigate and represent the phase equilibria of pure components and their mixtures in cylindrical nanopores. The pore confinement effects of interaction between fluid molecule and pore wall and the shift of critical properties are all considered. Also due to the effect of adsorption film, an improved Young-Laplace equation is adopted to simulate the capillarity instead of the conventional equation. For the adsorption behavior, the experimental data on the adsorbent of silicalite are used to represent the adsorption behavior of hydrocarbons in nanopores. Then, a prediction process for the behavior of methane, n-butane, n-pentane, n-hexane and their mixtures are performed. And the results are compared against the available experimental data to confirm the accuracy of this scheme. The actual Eagle Ford oil is also used to examine the performance of our scheme. Results indicate that the presence of adsorption film could further increase the vapor-liquid equilibrium constant (K-value) and capillary pressure of the confined pure-component fluid, especially for the nanopores with few nanometers. The smaller the nanopore radius, the higher the deviation between the actual K-value and bulk value. For methane, when the pore radius is higher than about 20 nm, the K-value is approaching the bulk fluids and the effect of capillary pressure and adsorption film can be neglected. For n-pentane, it is about 18 nm. For binary mixture, it is found the higher the difference between the two components, the stronger the nanopore confinement effects. The capillary pressure will present a bilinear relation with the pore radius in the log-log plot. For multicomponent mixture, as the pore radius decreases, the bubble-point pressure is depressed, the dew-point pressure is increased, and the phase envelop of confined fluids is also shrinked. When the adsorption film is neglected, the bubble-point pressure will be overestimated, and the dew-point pressure is underestimated. For Eagle Ford oil, when the nanopore radius is higher than about 100 nm, the behavior will approach the bulk value and the influence of nanopore confinement can be neglected. This study will shed some important insights for the phase behavior of tight oil and gas condensate in nanopores.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations9
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysisFrench-language works237,207