Cold heavy oil production with sand simulation including wormhole propagation and foamy oil behaviour
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Cold heavy oil production with sand (CHOPS) is a primary production method used for heavy oil reservoirs with no requirements of external energy consumption. A new model for CHOPS is simulated by incorporating wormhole propagation and foamy oil behaviour mechanisms to evaluate the recovery of an extra‐heavy oil reservoir of the Athabasca region. The most critical mechanisms of CHOPS, wormhole propagation and foamy oil behaviour, are captured by using Wang's model for wormhole propagation and Uddin's model of gas exsolution. After 120 months of simulation, 53.38%, 99.76%, and 100% of wormhole propagation were achieved during three time steps of 12, 48, and 60 months, respectively, toward the sides of the studied reservoir section. The propagation was achieved within all directions of the investigated section compatible with the erratic nature of wormhole propagation. Furthermore, the application of Uddin's model was incorporated into production by reducing the fluid viscosity as a result of the foamy oil behaviour. Over 3% of the recovery was achieved at the end of the primary CHOPS phase simulation by taking into account that we modelled the recovery based on highly viscous oil with API 7.5. Finally, the model can provide an improved understanding of the primary CHOPS process by considering its two significant mechanisms.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".