MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2548250367 · doi:10.2118/180242-pa

A Petrophysical Dual-Porosity Model for Evaluation of Secondary Mineralization and Tortuosity in Naturally Fractured Reservoirs

2016· article· en· W2548250367 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jaime Piedrahita, Roberto Aguilera

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersChina National Offshore Oil Corporation
KeywordsCementation (geology)PetrophysicsPorosityMineralization (soil science)TortuosityGeologyCompactionFracture (geology)MineralogyGeotechnical engineeringSoil scienceComposite materialMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Quantification of secondary mineralization or cementation within natural fractures has not been considered in previous petrophysical dual-porosity models. This is, however, of paramount importance because morphology of the fractures indicates that they can be open or partially or completely mineralized. If cementation with secondary minerals is complete, the recovery of hydrocarbons will be generally very small because hydrocarbons will not have any way to move from matrix to natural fracture and then to the wellbore. However, if secondary mineralization is partial, production rates and recoveries could be quite significant because the secondary minerals would play the role of natural proppant agents helping to maintain the fractures open as the reservoir is depleted. If the fractures are initially open, production rates and recoveries could be large or small depending on the relative orientation of the natural fractures with respect to in-situ stresses. These observations lead to the key objective of this paper: to develop an analytical dual-porosity model using resistance networks for quantifying petrophysical fracture parameters such as degree of cementation (β), formation factor (F), dual-porosity exponent (m), and tortuosity (τ) for different degrees of mineralization (cementation) within the fractures. The method further allows estimating matrix and fracture porosities and fracture compressibility on the basis of the amount of secondary mineralization. Use of the new dual-porosity model is explained with two core data sets drawn from tight gas formations in the United States and Canada. A comparison is made with results of current dual-porosity models that do not take into account secondary mineralization within the natural fractures and tortuosity. The conclusion is reached that the proposed dual-porosity model provides a valuable new quantitative tool for petrophysical and reservoir-engineering evaluations of naturally fractured reservoirs. This is illustrated with two numerical examples that show determination of original petroleum in place and recovery. One example is volumetric, and the other one is based on the material-balance calculations.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.092
Threshold uncertainty score0.901

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations7
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSPE Reservoir Evaluation & EngineeringSame topicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir AnalysisFrench-language works237,207