MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4244384548 · doi:10.2118/164840-ms

A Numerical Model for Multi-Mechanism Flow in Shale Gas Reservoirs with Application to Laboratory Scale Testing

2013· article· en· W4244384548 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Vivek Swami, A. Settari, Farzam Javadpour

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsKerogenOil shalePetroleum engineeringNatural gasShale gasMatrix (chemical analysis)AdsorptionPorosityNanoporeFlow (mathematics)MineralogyGeologyMaterials scienceChemistrySource rockMechanicsGeotechnical engineeringNanotechnologyComposite materialPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Shale is a complex unconventional reservoir having a variety of storage and flow mechanisms coupled together. Contrary to conventional reservoirs where gas is stored only in the pore space as free gas; current numerical simulators assume gas is stored as free and adsorbed phase in shale. Recent advancement of visualization and measurement techniques has enabled us to look at shale more closely. Shale has been found to contain a well-developed nanopore network in the organic matter or kerogen. Correspondingly we believe that gas is stored via four storage mechanisms: gas in natural fractures, free gas in matrix pores, adsorbed gas and gas dissolved in kerogen bulk in the shales. In this work we formulate a flow model for shale gas reservoirs including the physics at nano scale. The model incorporates the gas stored in micro-fractures, gas stored in nanopores, gas adsorbed on the pore walls and gas dissolved in kerogen bulk. This complex quad porosity system has coupled equations between three interconnected systems; between matrix and fracture set, between matrix and adsorbed gas and between matrix and kerogen bulk. Sets of governing equations were derived for the coupled systems and numerically solved to find gas production as a function of time. The model was validated against laboratory observed data for a shale canister test from a Canadian shale gas field. This laboratory scale model can be suitably up-scaled for field scale simulation of shale reservoirs.

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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations39
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysisFrench-language works237,207