MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3092765587 · doi:10.1080/15567036.2020.1825559

Numerical Simulation of Gas Mobility Control by Chemical Additives Injection and Foam Generation during Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage (SAGD)

2020· article· en· W3092765587 on OpenAlexaff
Ran Li, Zhangxin Chen, Keliu Wu, Jinze Xu, Zhandong Li, Jing Li

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy Sources Part A Recovery Utilization and Environmental Effects · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersScience Foundation of China University of Petroleum, BeijingNatural Science Foundation of Beijing MunicipalityNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsSteam-assisted gravity drainageResidual oilSteam injectionPetroleum engineeringSurface tensionComputer simulationOil sandsWaste managementEnvironmental scienceMaterials scienceEngineeringComposite materialSimulationThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gas mobility control is highly required to obtain a sufficiently-expanded and uniformly-developed steam chamber, which is conducive to steam-assisted gravity drainage (SAGD) production. Adding chemical additives with in-situ generation of foam (CAFA-SAGD) is an approach to improve sweep efficiency, displace residual oil and reduce heat loss, enhancing SAGD performance in terms of both oil production and steam oil ratio (SOR). With the input of the obtained chemicals and foam parameters and the consideration of the principle mechanisms (steam foam mobility control and IFT reduction), it depicts the dynamic distribution of components and compares the performance of CAFA-SAGD and SAGD with numerical simulation. Foam generation and foam collapse are also incorporated. Simulation study demonstrates that steam mobility control is conducive to generate a larger oil displacement area in the lower part of the model. Also, residual oil is more depleted owing to higher injection pressure and interfacial tension reduction. The optimization from this study ensures that the oil recovery factor is improved by 5.34%.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergy Sources Part A Recovery Utilization and Environmental EffectsSame topicEnhanced Oil Recovery TechniquesFrench-language works237,207