Evaluation of Gas-Based EOR Methods in Gas-Invaded Zones of Fractured Carbonate Reservoir
Bibliographic record
Abstract
More than half of all recoverable oil reserves are found in carbonate rocks. Most of these fields are highly fractured and develop different zonations during primary and secondary recovery stages; therefore, they require a different developmental approach than conventional reservoirs. Experimental results for water-alternating gas injection [WAG] and foam-assisted water-alternating gas [FAWAG] injection under secondary and tertiary recovery conditions were used to investigate these enhanced oil recovery [EOR] methods in gas-invaded reservoirs. The relative permeability curves of the cores and the fitting foam parameters were derived from these experiments through history matching. These findings were then used in a quarter five-spot, cross-sectional, and a sector model of a carbonate reservoir where a double five-spot setup was implemented. The fracture and matrix properties’ impact on the recovery was illustrated through the cross-sectional model. The gas mobility reduction effect of the FAWAG was more noticeable than that of WAG. The apparent viscosity of the gas was increased due to the foam presence, which caused a diversion of the gas from the fractures into the matrix blocks. This greatly enhanced the sweep efficiency and led to higher oil recovery. The gas front was much sharper, and gravity overrides by the gas were much less of a concern. The properties of the fracture network also had a significant effect on the recovery. Oil recovery was found to be most sensitive to fracture permeability. At the same time, sweep efficiency increased substantially, improving the recovery rate in the early injection stages, and differed slightly at the ultimate recovery. However, a lower fracture permeability facilitated gas entry into the matrix blocks. The results of the reservoir sector model were similar to the core and pilot. However, the WAG injection recovered more of the uppermost layers, whereas significant portions of the lowest layer were not effectively recovered. In contrast, FAWAG was more effective in the lowest layer of the reservoir. The FAWAG was a beneficial aid in the recovery of gas-invaded fractured reservoirs, increasing the oil recovery factor with respect to WAG.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".