Experimental Investigation of Radial and Linear Acid Injection into Carbonates for Well Stimulation Operations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Linear core flooding experiments have been extensively conducted to develop a fundamental understanding of the interactions between the acid and rock and provide guidance to control and optimize matrix acidizing operations. These experimental studies are mostly performed at lower than true reservoir operating conditions (pressure and temperature) using cylindrical cores of few inches length. Well treatment design software based on upscaling linear core flood data to design well treatment schedules including the selection of pump volumes, rates and fluids may fail to predict wormhole penetration depth and identify the optimum injection rate as the field acidizing operations are dictated by radial flow configuration. Given its associated complexity, only few radial acidizing experiments have been reported in the literature. A sophisticated experimental set-up capable of treating large-scale rock blocks is used to conduct radial acidizing experiments at high pressure levels mimicking real reservoir conditions. A series of linear core flow experiments are also conducted for various injection rates at similar operating conditions in terms of applied pressure and temperature. Acidizing efficiency curves showing the variations of the pore volume to breakthrough (PVBT) as function of acid injection rate, along with the optimum injection rate are obtained and compared. The experimental results show that the acidizing efficiency curve of radial acid injection is drastically different from that of linear core acid injection. Higher PVBT values are for the linear acidizing case. The 3D wormhole networks resulting from acidizing such as wormhole depth, branching, initiation and death are influenced by a transfer to radial acid injection, leading to a significant change of the resultant fluid conductivity compared to that predicted from linear studies. Acidizing efficiency curves constitute a critical component of most carbonate-matrix-stimulation models used in the oil & gas industry. Most of the existing models are based on the linear core acid injection experimental data while radial acidizing is more representative of real acidizing operations. The present experimental study is expected to redefine state-of-the-art of PVBT and optimum injection used in matrix acidizing applications.
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) | 0.000 | 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".