A New Method for Optimizing Water-Flooding Strategies in Multi-Layer Sandstone Reservoirs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As one of the most important and economically enhanced oil-recovery technologies, water flooding has been applied in various oilfields worldwide for nearly a century. Stratified water injection is the key to improving water-flooding performance. In water flooding, the water-injection rate is normally optimized based on the reservoir permeability and thickness. However, this strategy is not applicable after oilfields enter the ultra-high-water-cut period. In this study, an original method for optimizing water-flooding parameters for developing multi-layer sandstone reservoirs in the entire flooding process and in a given period is proposed based on reservoir engineering theory and optimization technology. Meanwhile, optimization mathematical models that yield maximum oil recovery or net present value (NPV) are developed. The new method is verified by water-flooding experiments using Berea cores. The results show that using the method developed in this study can increase the total oil recovery by approximately 3 percent compared with the traditional method using the same water-injection amounts. The experimental results are consistent with the results from theoretical analysis. Moreover, this study shows that the geological reserves of each layer and the relative permeability curves have the greatest influence on the optimized water-injection rate, rather than the reservoir properties, which are the primary consideration in a traditional optimization method. The method developed in this study could not only be implemented in a newly developed oilfield but also could be used in a mature oilfield that has been developed for years. However, this study also shows that using the optimized water injection at an earlier stage will provide better EOR performance.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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".