MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4415878572 · doi:10.2118/229724-ms

Geomechanical Quantitative Evaluation Method for Connectivity in Ultra-Deep Fault-Controlled Carbonate Reservoirs

2025· article· W4415878572 on OpenAlexaff
Guoqing Yin, Kongyou Wu, Jiacheng Cao, Yu Pei

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Canadian institutionsPetro-Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCarbonateFracture (geology)Fault (geology)Carbonate rockEvaluation methodsTrajectoryStress (linguistics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In the Tarim Basin's ultra-deep fault-controlled carbonate reservoirs, western China, development faces two primary challenges: significant inter-well productivity variations and insufficient data for optimal well placement and trajectory design. Additionally, while initial production in these reservoirs is high, sustained output is limited, exacerbated by lacking of systematic research on reservoir connectivity, crucial for effective water flooding strategies. Evaluating connectivity in drilling-constrained environments remains a significant hurdle, affecting well placement and flooding efficiency in such reservoirs. This study presents a novel connectivity discriminator, Factor of Reservoir Connectivity (FRC), for fractured carbonate reservoirs. Utilizing 3D fracture network analysis, a regional geomechanical model is constructed. Stress tensor transformations reveal the stress states of fracture cells, and critical stresses are calculated using the principle of critical stress fracturing. This determines the critical opening pressure, establishing a discriminant index for fracture mechanical activity. Furthermore, a quantitative method assesses connectivity in fault-controlled carbonate reservoirs by integrating the fracture activity index with seismic interpretation attributes, normalized with weights to create a reservoir connectivity discriminant factor. A comprehensive 3D geomechanical model, a 3D fracture mechanics activity distribution model, and a 3D reservoir connectivity factor distribution model were established for the Fuman Oilfield in the northern Tarim Basin. These models delineate connectivity across diverse fault zones, varying lateral positions within the same fault zone, and distinct vertical depths. By integrating geological findings, the study investigated hydrocarbon charging and accumulation, prioritizing well locations based on favorable fracture activity within the same connectivity unit. Well trajectory optimization considered varying depths to control the entire hydrocarbon reservoir. This research provided a more scientific and quantitative basis for well location deployment and trajectory optimization in key fracture zones like FⅠ17 and FⅠ19, and for the quantitative design of water flooding schemes in the Fuyuan 210 fracture zone. This approach enhanced the proportion of high-yield wells from 35% to 70%, with cumulative incremental oil production exceeding 1.2 million tons, supporting sustained high and stable production in the Fuman Oilfield The connectivity of fault-controlled reservoirs is governed by natural fracturing under certain stresses, leading to tensile opening or shear displacement. This method computes connectivity using mechanical and seismic attributes with limited drilling data. This method calculates connectivity factors for entire 3D work areas with multiple faults, and scalable in large depth ranges, delineating distinct reservoir connectivity units. The successful implementation offers a valuable reference for the quantitative evaluation of connectivity in similar carbonate reservoirs globally.

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)0.001
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.319 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis→French-language works237,207→