MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293090981 · doi:10.1017/jfm.2022.626

Primary cementing of vertical wells: displacement and dispersion effects in narrow eccentric annuli

2022· article· en· W4293090981 on OpenAlexafffund
Ruizi Zhang, I.A. Frigaard

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fluid Mechanics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMechanicsLaminar flowScalingDispersion (optics)Newtonian fluidPhysicsDisplacement (psychology)Duct (anatomy)Coalescence (physics)ComputationGeometryMathematicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Laminar miscible displacement flows in narrow, vertical, eccentric annuli show a wide range of interesting physical phenomena, e.g. static layers and channels, dispersive spikes/fronts and various instabilities. These are of relevance to the primary cementing of wells, where gas leakage and greenhouse gas emissions can result from ineffective cementing. The current popular way to model this process is via a Hele-Shaw approach, reducing the Navier–Stokes equations via scaling arguments and then averaging across the annular gap: the two-dimensional (2-D) gap averaged (2DGA) model. This leads to a reduced model that is computationally efficient and represents some important features of cementing flows, but is also deficient in capturing the effects of dispersion. While three-dimensional (3-D) simulations are able to capture dispersion and most other physical phenomena, they suffer from excessive computational times due to the extreme aspect ratios of cementing geometries and non-Newtonian properties of the fluids. Here we extend the 2DGA approach by modelling the high Péclet number limit of miscible duct displacement flows, to take into account the leading-order effects of dispersion. Our modified dispersive 2DGA model is well able to approximate dispersive effects that are observed by gap-averaging the results of 3-D computations, including geometric effects of eccentricity and instabilities. This represents a marked improvement over the 2DGA approach, while keeping the computational advantages of a 2-D model.

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)0.000
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Fluid MechanicsSame topicEnhanced Oil Recovery TechniquesFrench-language works237,207