MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415136218 · doi:10.2118/227862-ms

Use of Rate-Transient Analysis, Porosity, Permeability (RTAPK) Core Analysis Method to Constrain Permeability Estimates from MICP Data

2025· article· en· W4415136218 on OpenAlexaff
Mengzhou Chang, James Greene, Joseph Comisky, K. E. Newsham, C. R. Clarkson

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNMR spectroscopy and applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPorosityPermeability (electromagnetism)Spark plugCore sampleCapillary pressureRelative permeabilityTransient analysisSlippage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The RTAPK (rate-transient analysis, porosity and permeability) core analysis method was developed to replicate conditions under which wells completed in unconventional reservoirs are operated in the field; this allows RTAPK data to be analyzed using RTA methods. Multiple estimates of permeability and porosity can be obtained through analysis of RTA-derived flow regimes. Due to this redundancy, speed, and dynamic range of the method, it is used herein to evaluate permeability correlations derived from mercury injection capillary pressure (MICP) data, which are more commonly available. A suite of Permian Basin (Dean-Stark cleaned) core plug samples, representing a wide range of lithologies, rock fabrics, and textures, were analyzed with RTAPK using N2 gas. Samples were screened for further analysis based on RTAPK and MICP porosities. A new semi-automated, multi-sample RTAPK device was constructed to allow samples to be run in parallel. For each RTAPK test performed at different effective stresses, flow regimes were identified and analyzed using RTA straight-line analysis (SLA) methods to derive permeability and porosity. Results were corrected for gas slippage using the Klinkenberg reciprocal mean pressure plot. MICP measurements were performed on Soxhlet-cleaned end trims from the host RTAPK plugs. Each sample underwent a vacuum procedure (to 50umHg), followed by a low-pressure injection cycle (to 30 psia), which serves to provide mercury conformance around the bulk volume. After transferring to a high-pressure cell, mercury was injected (to a maximum pressure of 60,000 psia) to determine the pore throat distribution that contributes to permeability. The flow-regime sequence of transient linear flow (TLF) followed by boundary-dominated flow (BDF) was observed in most samples and test conditions. Some variations in this sequence were attributed to rock fabric, as verified by CT scanning. Two (slip-corrected) permeability estimates were obtained from the square-root of time (SQRT) plot, one permeability estimate from the contacted fluid-in-place (CFIP) plot, and one from the flowing material balance (FMB) plot, for each test. The resultant permeabilities ranged from 10 nano-Darcy to 100 micro-Darcy. The high degree of consistency in the RTAPK permeabilities provides confidence in using this dataset as a calibration reference for MICP-based correlations. Hence, multi-linear regression (MLR) through machine learning was used to predict permeability from MICP-derived properties for comparison with RTAPK-derived permeability values. For the first time, MICP-derived permeability estimates are compared with RTAPK for a range of lithologies across a broad range of permeabilities. The results demonstrate good agreement between the methods, allowing for improved confidence in permeability estimates for unconventional reservoirs using RTAPK and MICP.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.343 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSPE Annual Technical Conference and ExhibitionSame topicNMR spectroscopy and applicationsFrench-language works237,207