Primary cementing of vertical wells: displacement and dispersion effects in narrow eccentric annuli. Part 2. Flow behaviour and classification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present results for Newtonian laminar miscible displacement flows in a narrow, vertical, eccentric annulus, obtained from experiments carried out in a scaled laboratory set-up. These are compared with two computational models introduced in Part 1, Zhang & Frigaard ( J. Fluid Mech. , vol. 947, 2022, A732). Quite close matches have been found for different approaches, regarding the overall evolving displacement process: front shape, dispersion levels and front velocities. Standardized criteria have been established to identify whether a flow has steady/unsteady and dispersive/non-dispersive displacement front, applicable to both concentric and eccentric annuli. Three characteristic flows have been observed, unsteady and dispersive, dispersive with steady front, and non-dispersive with steady front. Through both qualitative and quantitative studies, the importance of the buoyancy number has been established: it both restrains dispersion on the annular gap scale and induces secondary flows in the azimuthal direction.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".