Application of a Novel Hyperbranched-Polymer Fracturing-Fluid System in a Low-Permeability Heavy-Oil Reservoir
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Hydraulic fracturing can be used for stimulating low-permeability heavy-oil reservoirs. It is challenging to achieve a high degree of fracturing-fluid flowback, as well as a low degree of formation damage, in low-permeability heavy-oil reservoirs. This research investigates the application of a novel hyperbranched-polymer fracturing fluid in low-permeability heavy-oil reservoirs. Such hyperbranched polymer is characterized by Fourier-transform infrared (FTIR) spectrophotometry. It has numerous end groups and possesses a 3D spherical molecular structure with many branches. Laboratory tests are conducted to evaluate the thermal stability and shearing resistance, reversible-crosslinking performance, salinity tolerance, static-filtration performance, gel-breaking performance, and sand-carrying performance. The degrees of core damage are evaluated through conducting coreflooding experiments, where the cores are treated with two kinds of gel-breaking fluids formed by hyperbranched-polymer fracturing fluid and guar fracturing fluid, respectively. Laboratory tests show that the hyperbranched-polymer fracturing fluid has good rheological characteristics, a high swelling ratio, a high proppant-carrying performance, and good thermal stability and shearing resistance. After being sheared for 90 minutes under 170 s−1 at 150°C, it can still reverse to gel with high strength because of its good reversible-crosslinking performance. This fracturing fluid exhibits a high-salinity tolerance. Furthermore, the hyperbranched polymer has a high swelling ratio. Field applications in some wells in China show that the friction loss of this fracturing fluid during fracturing is approximately 30 to 50% of that of the normal guar fracturing fluid. Thus, it has an ultralow friction-loss feature. As for the same reservoir, hyperbranched-polymer fracturing fluid has a higher flowback ratio compared with the guar fracturing fluid. Besides, its cost is approximately 75% of that of normal guar fracturing fluid, making it a clean and cost-effective system. The fracturing fluid prepared with hyperbranched polymer possesses outstanding technical advantages and good cost effectiveness, implying a promising application in the large-scale fracturing stimulation of low-permeability heavy-oil reservoirs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".