MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4223976092 · doi:10.2118/209462-ms

Pressure Barrier Applicability to Polymer Flood Design

2022· article· en· W4223976092 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Improved Oil Recovery Conference · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCaprockPetroleum engineeringPolymerPermeability (electromagnetism)Enhanced oil recoveryPressure dropSaturation (graph theory)GeologyViscosityMaterials scienceGeotechnical engineeringMechanicsChemistryComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Effective oil displacement from a reservoir requires adequate and properly directed pressure gradients in areas of high oil saturation. If the polymer bank is too large or too viscous during a polymer flood, the pressure drop from the injection well to the polymer front may act as a pressure barrier by usurping most of the downstream driving force for oil displacement. Polymer injection pressures must be limited. The maximum allowable injection pressure is commonly constrained by caprock integrity, injection equipment, and/or regulations, even though fractures can be beneficial to polymer injectivity (and even sweep efficiency in some cases). This paper examines when the pressure-barrier concept limits the size and viscosity of the polymer bank during a polymer flood. Both analytical and numerical methods are used to address this issue. We examine the relevance of the pressure barrier concept for a wide variety of circumstances, including oil viscosities ranging from 10-cp (like at Daqing, China) to 1650-cp (like at Pelican Lake, Alberta), vertical wells (like at Tambaredjo, Suriname) versus horizontal wells (like at Milne Point, Alaska), single versus multiple layered reservoirs, permeability contrast, and with versus with crossflow between layers. We also examine the relation between the pressure-barrier concept and fractures and fracture extension during polymer injection. We demonstrate that in reservoirs with single layers, the pressure-barrier concept only limits the optimum viscosity of the injected polymer if the mobility of the polymer bank is less than the mobility of the displaced oil bank. The same is true for multi-zoned reservoirs with no crossflow between layers. Thus, for these cases, the optimum polymer viscosity is likely to be dictated by the mobility of the oil bank, unless other factors (like fracture extension) intervene. For multi-zoned reservoirs with free crossflow between layers, the situation is different. A compromise must be reached between injected polymer viscosity and the efficiency of oil recovery. The relevance of our findings is applied to operations for several existing polymer floods. This work is particularly relevant to viscous-oil reservoirs (like Pelican Lake and others) where the injected polymer viscosities are substantially lower than the oil viscosity

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.807
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.206 · 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