MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2586097038 · doi:10.2118/185076-ms

Imbibition Oil Recovery from Tight Rocks with Dual-Wettability Pore-Network A Montney Case Study

2017· article· en· W2586097038 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 Unconventional Resources Conference · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)University of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImbibitionWettingContact angleBrinePetroleum engineeringGeologyTight oilCore (optical fiber)Materials scienceChemistryComposite materialOil shale

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Previous studies demonstrate that the Montney rock samples have a dual-wettability pore network. Recovery of the oil retained in the small hydrophobic pores is a unique challenge. In this study, we apply dual-core imbibition (DCI) method on several Montney core plugs and introduce imbibition-recovery (IR) trio to investigate the recovery mechanisms in rocks with dual-wettability pore network. First, we evaluate the wetting affinity of five twin core-plugs from the Montney Formation by measuring spontaneous imbibition of reservoir oil and brine, and by measuring equilibrium contact angle. We place one plug of each pair in the oil and the other in the brine, and measure the weight change periodically. Second, we place the oil-saturated samples in the brine to visualize the expelled oil droplets and measure volume of the recovered oil. We comparatively analyze the spontaneous imbibition data from the first step and the recovery data of the second step in one imbibition-recovery trio (oil imbibition, brine imbibition, and imbibition oil recovery). The results of air-liquid contact angle and spontaneous imbibition on dry samples suggest that the affinity of the samples to oil is higher than that to brine, in an air-liquid system. However, the results of liquid-liquid contact angle and counter-current imbibition tests suggest that the affinity of the samples to water is higher than that to oil, in a liquid-liquid system. For each twin set, the oil recovery curve follows the trend of brine imbibition curve, and the final oil recovery is always less than the equilibrated water uptake of dry samples. This observation indicates that water can only access the hydrophilic part of the pore network initially saturated with oil. Finally, we introduce a porosity-based model to analyze oil-recovery data.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.380
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.225 · 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