MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3152555928 · doi:10.2118/200824-ms

What are the Dominant Flow Regimes During Carbon Dioxide Propagation in Shale Reservoirs’ Matrix, Natural Fractures and Hydraulic Fractures?

2021· article· en· W3152555928 on OpenAlexaff
Sherif Fakher, Youssef Elgahawy, Hesham Abdelaal, Abdulmohsin Imqam

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Western Regional Meeting · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKnudsen numberSlippageKnudsen diffusionNanometreFlow (mathematics)Oil shalePermeability (electromagnetism)Materials scienceMechanicsPore water pressurePetroleum engineeringGeologyChemistryGeotechnical engineeringComposite materialPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Carbon dioxide (CO2) injection in low permeability shale reservoirs has recently gained much attention due to the claims that it has a large recovery factor and can also be used in CO2 storage operations. This research investigates the different flow regimes that the CO2 will exhibit during its propagation through the fractures, micropores, and the nanopores in unconventional shale reservoirs to accurately evaluate the mechanism by which CO2 recovers oil from these reservoirs. One of the most widely used tools to distinguish between different flow regimes is the Knudsen Number. Initially, a mathematical analysis of the different flow regimes that can be observed in pore sizes ranging between 0.2 nanometer and more than 2 micrometers was undergone at different pressure and temperature conditions to distinguish between the different flow regimes that the CO2 will exhibit in the different pore sizes. Based on the results, several flow regime maps were conducted for different pore sizes. The pore sizes were grouped together in separate maps based on the flow regimes exhibited at different thermodynamic conditions. Based on the results, it was found that Knudsen diffusion dominated the flow regime in nanopores ranging between 0.2 nanometers, up to 1 nanometer. Pore sizes between 2 and 10 nanometers were dominated by both a transition flow, and slip flow. At 25 nanometer, and up to 100 nanometers, three flow regimes can be observed, including gas slippage flow, transition flow, and viscous flow. When the pore size reached 150 nanometers, Knudsen diffusion and transition flow disappeared, and the slippage and viscous flow regimes were dominant. At pore sizes above one micrometer, the flow was viscous for all thermodynamic conditions. This indicated that in the larger pore sizes the flow will be mainly viscous flow, which is usually modeled using Darcy's law, while in the extremely small pore sizes the dominating flow regime is Knudsen diffusion, which can be modeled using Knudsen's Diffusion law or in cases where surface diffusion is dominant, Fick's law of diffusion can be applied. The mechanism by which the CO2 improves recovery in unconventional shale reservoirs is not fully understood to this date, which is the main reason why this process has proven successful in some shale plays, and failed in others. This research studies the flow behavior of the CO2 in the different features that could be present in the shale reservoir to illustrate the mechanism by which oil recovery can be increased.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.240
Threshold uncertainty score0.803

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 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

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSPE Western Regional MeetingSame topicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysisFrench-language works237,207