MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3095881961 · doi:10.2118/202960-ms

Interpretation of Mini-Frac and Flowback Pressure Response: Application to Unconventional Reservoirs in the UAE

2020· article· en· W3095881961 on OpenAlexaff
Omar T. AlHashmi, Ilkay Eker, Hossein Kazemi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Canadian institutionsHaliburton Forest & Wild Life Reserve
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPetroleum engineeringOil shaleHydraulic fracturingGeologyPermeability (electromagnetism)Well stimulationTransient analysisGeothermal gradientGeomechanicsEnhanced oil recoveryUnconventional oilOil fieldGeotechnical engineeringPetrologyReservoir engineeringPetroleumEngineeringGeophysicsTransient response

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The main objective of the research presented in this paper was to develop a working knowledge of the unconventional shale in the UAE Diyab formation which includes reservoir engineering evaluation of the UAE Diyab Upper Jurassic gas condensate and Shilaif Middle Cretaceous light oil shale development. To achieve this objective, (1) we measured core permeability of a couple of Diyab cores with and without fractures, (2) we analyzed the pressure fall-off data from a Diagnostic Fracture Injection Test (DFIT) to determine in-situ matrix permeability for use in reservoir evaluation, modeling, and forecasting reservoir performance, and (3) we determined the effective permeability (that is, combined permeability of matrix and microfractures) of a Diyab stimulated well using rate transient analysis (RTA). Furthermore, we put together both analytical and numerical models for single-phase and two-phase flows in support of the interpretation of the field pressure falloff DFIT data, and the data from a laboratory DFIT conducted in a granite core by Frash in 2014 to shed light on enhanced geothermal reservoirs. Finally, we calculated the depths of filtrate invasion and the cooled region surrounding the hydraulic fracture surfaces to determine the net stress change near the surface of hydraulic fractures, which is commonly referred to as the ‘stress shadow' effect. We concluded that our research effort was both informative and instructive in determining the effectiveness of the stimulation efforts for the wells used in this study, and the process can be similarly utilized in any shale stimulation effort elsewhere.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 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 topicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis→French-language works237,207→