MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2758404197 · doi:10.2118/185052-pa

Multiwell, Multiphase Flowing Material Balance

2017· article· en· W2758404197 on OpenAlex
M. S. Shahamat, C. R. Clarkson

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 Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPetroleum engineeringMaterial balanceFlow (mathematics)Fossil fuelProduction (economics)Phase (matter)Reservoir engineeringMultiphase flowEnhanced oil recoveryOil productionCrude oilGeologyChemistryProcess engineeringMechanicsPetroleumEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Flowing-material-balance (FMB) analysis is a practical method for determining original hydrocarbon volumes in place. It is attractive because it enables performing material-balance calculations without shutting in wells to obtain estimates of reservoir pressure. However, with some exceptions, its application is limited to single-phase oil and/or gas reservoirs over limited pressure ranges during depletion. In unconventional reservoirs, reservoir and/or production complexities may further restrict FMB use. Among these complexities are significant production/injection of water, production resulting in higher gas/oil ratios (GORs) and pressure drawdowns, geomechanical effects, and multiwell-production effects. As a result, application of the conventional FMB to unconventional reservoirs may lead to significant errors in hydrocarbons-in-place estimation. This paper first discusses the application of conventional FMB to the analysis of single-phase or multiphase flow in single or multiwell scenarios, and then provides a new, comprehensive version of the FMB to address the previously mentioned complications. For the new FMB, pseudopressure is used to account for two-phase oil/gas flow. In addition, by use of a general material-balance equation, water production/injection and multiwell effects are included in the analysis. The new FMB-analysis approach is validated by comparing results with numerical simulation of multifractured horizontal wells (MFHWs). These comparisons demonstrate that, not only gas production, but also water production/injection can have a significant effect on the calculated original-in-place hydrocarbon volumes. The new FMB-analysis approach provided herein successfully accounts for all flowing phases in the reservoir, and is demonstrated to be applicable for multiwell scenarios. The methodology presented in this paper maintains the simplicity of FMB, yet accounts for multiphase flow and multiwell complications. The developed FMB and the presented approach can be used by reservoir engineers to reasonably determine the original volumes of hydrocarbons in place in both conventional and unconventional 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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.260 · 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