MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2397635737 · doi:10.2118/180724-ms

In-Situ Combustion Experience in Heavy Oil Carbonate

2016· article· en· W2397635737 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 Canada Heavy Oil Technical Conference · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicPetroleum Processing and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsphalteneCombustionThermogravimetric analysisChemical engineeringEndothermic processFraction (chemistry)Differential scanning calorimetryChemistryMaterials scienceOrganic chemistryThermodynamicsAdsorption

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In-situ Combustion (ISC) has the potential to be the most effective enhanced oil recovery (EOR) method for heavy oil recovery. However, it is considered a high risk failure rate process since it is hard to predict the combustion reactions between complex crude oil and heterogeneous rock matrices. If the reservoir rock is reactive, like carbonates, the risk factor of ISC increases. This research studies the ISC performance for different rock matrices found in Alberta, Canada. The reaction kinetics analyses were carried out by Thermogravimetric Analysis/Differential Scanning Calorimetry (TGA/DSC) on bulk oil, and its Saturates, Aromatics, Resins, and Asphaltenes (SARA) fractions at a constant heating rate (20°C/min). To better understand the combustion behavior of bulk oil, pseudo blends of SARA fractions were prepared and systematic TGA/DSC tests were run on these blends. Furthermore, the impact of reactive porous media on fuel formation mechanism was investigated by using clays and carbonates. The reaction kinetic analyses on bulk oil and SARA fractions suggest that asphaltenes, resins, and aromatics fractions go into endothermic reactions at elevated temperatures, still the asphaltenes fraction generates the greatest amount of heat. The two-component interaction of asphaltenes with other fractions produces less heat than the combustion of asphaltenes alone. The three- component pseudo blend prepared by mixing asphaltenes-resins-aromatics produced the highest amount of heat and we believe that in bulk oil combustion saturates by acting as an ignitor provides the necessary heat to initiate the reactions among aromatics, resins, and asphaltenes fractions. Moreover, the effect of reactive porous media on reaction kinetics of bulk oil were investigated at a constant heating rate (20°C/min). Carbonates and clays were used. Since the clays act like a catalyst, heat generation was observed lower with clays than carbonates and carbonates required more heat for successful combustion. While the heating rates during in-situ combustion are generated naturally, in TGA/DSC tests, a constant heating rate is applied. In this study, we used 20°C/min as the heating rate. If the same heating rate during ISC cannot be reached, then, the heat generation cannot be as high as reported in this manuscript. Thus, it is important to extend the systematic TGA/DSC analyses presented in this paper. Tests should be conducted at varying heating rates on different oil samples and on their SARA fractions.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.593
Threshold uncertainty score0.834

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.237 · 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