MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2586506585 · doi:10.2118/182628-ms

A Framework for Mechanistic Modeling of Alkali-Surfactant-Polymer Process in an Equation-of-State Compositional Simulator

2017· article· en· W2586506585 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Reservoir Simulation Conference · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsEmulsionEquation of stateDissolutionEnhanced oil recoverySolubilityPetroleum engineeringAlkali metalChemistryPrecipitationChemical engineeringAqueous solutionPulmonary surfactantPhase (matter)ThermodynamicsProcess engineeringGeologyOrganic chemistryEngineeringMeteorologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Alkaline/Surfactant/Polymer (ASP) is an important chemical EOR process that involves the generation of in-situ soap through the reaction of the acid component in the oil with the alkali, in conjunction with intra-aqueous reactions, mineral dissolution and precipitation, micro-emulsion behavior and salinity gradient. The mechanistic simulation of ASP is very complex and has been carried out with specialized chemical flood simulators. Current trends in EOR processes show an interest in hybrid methods where chemical flooding is combined with other EOR methods such as low salinity waterflood, foam and gas/CO2 injection. Thus, it is beneficial to develop such capabilities in an Equation-of-State (EOS) compositional simulator for screening and combining different EOR processes. This paper presents a framework for mechanistic modeling of the ASP process within an EOS compositional simulator. A new approach for modeling the Winsor Type I, II and III micro-emulsion phase behavior is introduced based on laboratory solubility data. In the Type III system, the emulsion is distributed judiciously between the oil and water phase without the introduction of a third liquid phase. The optimal salinity variation with the soap/(soap + synthetic surfactant) mole fraction is modeled. This feature allows the design of salinity gradient, an essential requirement for a successful ASP flood. The above physics are coupled with comprehensive geochemistry calculations (intra-aqueous reactions and mineral precipitation/dissolution reactions) and three-phase oil/gas/water flash calculations with an equation of state and Henry's law. The whole system of associated equations is solved simultaneously with the flow and energy equations using Newton's method, making the simulator one of the most robust and comprehensive simulators for EOR methods. The simulator is validated with ASP core flood experiments. The optimization of the ASP process for a typical field is illustrated and discussed with regard to alkali, synthetic surfactant and polymer injection with decreasing salinity.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.527
Threshold uncertainty score0.732

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.276 · 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