MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2419221110 · doi:10.2118/180858-ms

A Way to Improve Water Alternating Gas Performance in Tight Oil Reservoirs

2016· article· en· W2419221110 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Trinidad and Tobago Section Energy Resources Conference · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSurface tensionPetroleum engineeringWettingEnhanced oil recoveryPulmonary surfactantOil in placeOil shaleViscosityMaterials scienceDisjoining pressurePorous mediumChemical engineeringContact anglePorosityGeologyComposite materialPetroleumChemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Primary recovery remains as low as 5-10 % of original oil in place (OOIP) in tight oil reservoirs, even with horizontal wells and massively hydraulical fracturing applied. Water flood helps to maintain the pressure and CO2 contributes to oil swelling, viscosity reduction and wettability alteration; in addition, CO2 and water have a chance to improve oil recovery. Furthermore, a water alternating gas (WAG) process gives a higher oil recovery compared to continuous water or gas injection. The WAG performance can be improved by mobility control, wettability alteration and interfaical tension management. Chemical additives like polymer or foam can help to improve mobility, but they are limited to large porous media. The common pore diameter is approximately 30 nm to 2,000 nm in tight sandstone reservoirs and 2nm to 50nm in shale reservoirs. Alkaline can cause a reduction in interfacial tension. However, a candidate for alkaline flood should have an acid number above 0.5 mg OH- /g oil, corresponding to oil with API below 30. The surfactant particles with a diameter of around 10nm to 30nm can reduce interfacial tension while nanoparticles with a diameter of 1nm to 7 nm can affect disjoining pressure at interface and alter wettability; both of them can be candidate additives in improving WAG performance. Moreover, low salinity water exchanges ions in a reservoir, resulting in water film instability and wettability alteration. It can be an alternative solution in improving WAG performance. In this paper, an analytical model of the WAG process is studied. Afterwards, numerical reservoir simulations are made for surfactant, low salinity water and nanofluid additives in improving WAG performance.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.657
Threshold uncertainty score0.595

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.189 · 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