MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2767839010 · doi:10.2118/188528-ms

Successful Field Trial of a Shear-Resistant, High-Injectivity, Reservoir-Triggered Polymer

2017· article· en· W2767839010 on OpenAlexaff
David Chappell, Jon Stapley, Bilal Rashid, Martin Towns, William J. Andrews, Mojtaba Kiani, Mehdi Salehi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques
Canadian institutionsNalco (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolymerEnhanced oil recoveryViscosityPetroleum engineeringPolyacrylamideOil fieldMaterials scienceInjectorShear (geology)Injection wellPermeability (electromagnetism)GeologyChemical engineeringComposite materialChemistryEngineeringMechanical engineeringPolymer chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper describes the successful execution of an inter-well field trial to test a novel reservoir-triggered polymer technology (the Polymer) which has been proven to mitigate two of the major operational and economic challenges facing polymer injection for enhanced oil recovery (EOR), particularly in the offshore environment. The challenges of shear degradation and reduced injectivity are overcome by delaying the development of viscosity until the Polymer is in the reservoir. The field trial was conducted in an onshore sandstone oil field in Texas. The 1,000 ppm Polymer solution was injected at rates of 500 to 900 bbl/d into a 10-ft interval of low water permeability (50-100 mD) under matrix conditions. To demonstrate development of its expected viscosity in the reservoir, the growing Polymer bank was sampled from an existing producer. Pressure Transient Analysis (PTA) was used to confirm the deep-reservoir behaviour of the Polymer. Field data demonstrates that the Polymer behaves as intended. The viscosity of the produced Polymer samples corresponds to the target viscosity as determined from surface activation of the Polymer at the same concentration. This confirms the shear-stability of the Polymer in its un-triggered form. In addition, the injection pressures were no greater than expected and significantly lower than the expected injection pressures, under matrix conditions, for an equivalent partially-hydrolysed polyacrylamide (HPAM). PTA indicates a bank of fluid of increased viscosity some distance from the injector, as designed.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations11
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEnhanced Oil Recovery TechniquesFrench-language works237,207