MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2522465111 · doi:10.2118/152716-pa

Corrosion Rates of Cr- and Ni-Based Alloys With Organic Acids and Chelating Agents Used in Stimulation of Deep Wells

2016· article· en· W2522465111 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 Production & Operations · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOil and Gas Production Techniques
Canadian institutionsAkzoNobel (Canada)
FundersAkzoNobelUniversiteit Utrecht
KeywordsFormic acidCorrosionCarbonateChromiumOrganic acidChemistryAcetic acidInorganic chemistryMetallurgyMaterials scienceOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Acid treatments of deep wells completed by use of chromium (Cr) -based tubulars represent a real challenge to the oil industry. On one hand, Cr-based tubulars are used to protect against carbon dioxide (CO2) corrosion, but on the other hand, the protective layer [chromium(III) oxide (Cr2O3)] dissolves in hydrochloric acid (HCl). This makes protection of Cr tubulars during acidizing very challenging, especially at high temperatures. At temperatures greater than 200°F, there is a need to add corrosion-inhibitor intensifiers, most of which depend on heavy metals [copper (Cu) or antimony (Sb)] or are not effective at temperatures greater than 300°F [e.g., potassium iodide (KI)]. Over the last decade, a new chelant was developed, glutamic acid N, N-diacetic acid (GLDA), which can dissolve carbonate minerals from both carbonate and sandstone formations. This chelant can form wormholes in carbonates (both calcite and dolomite) and does not destabilize clay particles present in sandstone formations. In the present paper, the corrosion rate of GLDA solutions is compared with that of other chelants and simple organic acids that are used for carbonate dissolution, such as hydroxyethylethylenediaminetriacetic acid (HEDTA), acetic acid, and formic acid. All corrosion tests were conducted at high temperatures and pressures and extended for up to 6 hours at temperature and pressure. The Cr and nickel (Ni) -based coupons representing tubular metallurgy were examined thoroughly after the tests, and the spent fluids were analyzed for key cations [Cr, Ni, molybdenum (Mo), iron (Fe), and manganese (Mn)]. Compared with formic acid, acetic acid, and even HEDTA, GLDA is much less corrosive to Cr-13 alloys. The results of this work show that GLDA at 20 wt% causes almost no corrosion with Cr-13 up to 300°F. Unlike GLDA, HEDTA was found to be corrosive at a pH = 3.8, and requires attention when used in wells completed with Cr-13-based tubulars. On more-corrosion-resistant Cr- or Cr-Ni-based alloys, such as super Cr-13, Duplex-2205, Inconel-625, and Incoloy-925, the corrosion rate of GLDA is still far below the acceptable limit of 0.02 to 0.05 lbm/ft2 up to 350°F. In wells with corrosive sweet and sour gases, tubulars consisting of low-carbon steel, Cr-based steel, or corrosion-resistant Cr-Ni alloys can be effectively protected by a combination of GLDA with a minimal amount of a suitable corrosion inhibitor. Because of its favorable environmental profile, this mixture meets all the Oslo-Paris Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the Northeast Atlantic (OSPAR) requirements for use in the North Sea. On the basis of these results, GLDA solutions can be used to stimulate carbonate and sandstone wells completed with Cr- and Ni-based tubulars, while maintaining the integrity of the tubulars.

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 score0.171
Threshold uncertainty score0.282

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.226 · 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