Oil Oxidation and Adiabatic Compression as Ignition Sources in Oilfield Operations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Well interventions or work-overs are generally a safe operation, however there are areas where an explosion might occur in surface equipment during the process, causing Health, Safety, and Environmental (HSE) hazards and damages to surrounding equipment and the environment. The source of these explosions often remains a mystery as they are initiated inside the process piping under conditions where there is no obvious source of oxygen and often no obvious ignition mechanism. The In-situ Combustion Research Group (ISCRG) believes that trapped pockets of air in contact with immobile hydrocarbons, accumulated in surface equipment, could be the source of ignition. These accumulations under the right temperature conditions such as during a hot summer day could raise the temperature of the trapped pocket of air and immobile hydrocarbon high enough to exceed the Self-ignition Temperature (SIT) of the immobile hydrocarbon and initiate the generation of flammable liquid and vapor phase components through spontaneous liquid phase oxidation (LTO) reactions. Therefore, the objective of this dissertation was to analyze the ignition and self-heating characteristics of oxidized oils in order to better understand LTO-initiated explosions. Three (3) different oil samples (Athabasca bitumen, a paraffinic light oil, and diesel as a refined product) were chosen. Twelve (12) High Pressure Isothermal Oxidation (HPIO) tests were performed to oxidize the oil samples in the batch reactors at temperatures of 25°C, 50°C, 75°C, and 100°C, by keeping them in contact with normal air (21% O2 and 79% N2) at a nominal pressure of 7 MPa for the period of seven days. Seven (7) Accelerating Rate Calorimeter (ARC) tests were conducted on original (un-oxidized) and selected oxidized oil samples to determine the ignition and self-heating characteristics. The major finding of the study was that two of the oil types (Oil B – light paraffinic crude oil and Oil C - diesel) exhibited oxidation characteristics that could lead to explosive events. Both of these hydrocarbons exhibited increased maximum reaction rates when they were pre-oxidized. The third sample, Oil A or Athabasca bitumen exhibited easily observable oxygen uptake rate at 75°C, but it is unlikely that the bitumen would support an explosive event during a well work-over operation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".