MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3012101421 · doi:10.2118/199937-ms

Advances in Understanding the Scaling Potential for Thermal Wells: A Mechanistic Study

2020· article· en· W3012101421 on OpenAlexaff
Ali Habibi, Charles E. Fensky, Morteza Roostaei, Mahdi Mahmoudi, Vahidoddin Fattahpour, Hongbo Zeng, Mohtada Sadrzadeh

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCalcium Carbonate Crystallization and Inhibition
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCalciteMineralogyClay mineralsScalingChemistryAragoniteDeposition (geology)Analytical Chemistry (journal)GeologyEnvironmental chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Scale deposition and its treatment are crucial part of any thermal recovery method. High temperature variation, phase change associated with steam condensation and flashing, and complex flow dynamics of the wells make the thermal wells more susceptible to scale deposition. Several studies evaluated the type of scales collected from plugged sand screens; however, more investigation is required to address the reservoir conditions and wellbore hydraulics affecting the scaling potential of minerals at downhole conditions. A laboratory workflow combined with a predictive modeling toolbox to evaluate scaling tendency of minerals for different downhole conditions has been developed. First, saturation indices (SI) for different minerals were calculated at reservoir temperature and pressure using water chemistry analysis and the Pitzer theory. Then, the mineral composition of deposited materials collected from thermal wells in Athabasca and Cold Lake area were characterized using Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM), Energy Dispersive X-Ray Spectrometry (EDS), Total Organic Carbon (TOC) and Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICP-MS) analyses. Finally, a comparison analysis was performed between predictive and characterization results. The results of SI calculations showed that Mg-based silicates and Fe-based minerals are positive (SI>5) even at high temperatures (T>430 K). This indicates that the possibility of deposition for these minerals is high. Carbonates (calcite and aragonite) minerals are the most common depositing minerals. However, the extent of scaling index of carbonates is controlled by the concentration of Ca, HCO3, and CO3 in the water sample. The characterization results confirm the results of modeling part. The results of SEM/EDS, ICP-MS analyses showed that carbonates, Mg-based silicates, and Fe-based corrosion products are the most common depositing materials among all minerals. The workflow presented in this study will help the industry to evaluate the scaling potential for thermal wells at different downhole conditions to make a proper decision to prevent plugging of the completion tools.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.835
Threshold uncertainty score0.452

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCalcium Carbonate Crystallization and InhibitionFrench-language works237,207