A New Evaluation of Skin Factor in Inclined Wells with Anisotropic Permeability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Oil and gas well productivity can be affected by a number of different skin factors, the combined influences of which contribute to a well’s total skin factor. The skin caused by deviated wells is one such well-known factor. The present study aimed to investigate skin effects caused by deviated well slants when considering vertical-to-horizontal permeability anisotropy. The research employed computational fluid dynamics (CFD) software to simulate fluid flows in inclined wells through the injection of water with Darcy flow using 3D geometric formations. The present work investigates the effects of four main characteristics—namely, the permeability anisotropy, wellbore radius, reservoir thickness, and deviation angle—of open-hole inclined wells. Additional investigations sought to verify the effect of the direction of perforations on the skin factor or pressure drop in perforated inclined wells. In the case of an inclined open hole well, the novel correlation produced in the current study simplifies the estimation of the skin factor of inclined wells at different inclination angles. Our comparison indicates good agreement between the proposed correlation and available models. Furthermore, the results demonstrated a deviation in the skin factor estimation results for perforated inclined wells in different perforation orientation scenarios; therefore, existing models must be improved in light of this variance. This work contributes to the understanding and simulation of the effects of well inclination on skin factor in the near-wellbore region.
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".