MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417094709 · doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2025.137903

Multiphase flow model of CO2 and formation fluid for production wellbores in CO2 geological storage

2025· article· en· W4417094709 on OpenAlexaff
Fengyuan Zhang, Ruihan Lu, Zhenhua Rui, Tayfun Babadagli, Qiang Xia, Zhigang Ji

Bibliographic record

VenueFuel · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCO2 Sequestration and Geologic Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsPressure dropMultiphase flowSupercritical fluidEnhanced oil recoveryWellboreFluid dynamicsFlow (mathematics)Oil fieldDrop (telecommunication)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurate prediction of multiphase flow behavior in production wellbores is critical for understanding CO 2 migration and fluid dynamics during geological carbon storage. However, existing wellbore multiphase flow models have limited capability in accurately describing the coupled hydrodynamic and thermodynamic behavior of gas–liquid mixtures under high-CO 2 and high-pressure conditions, due to the strong non-ideal thermophysical and phase-behavior characteristics of CO 2 –formation fluid systems. This study develops an improved multiphase flow model that couples a modified flow-pattern identification approach with an interphase mass-transfer model based on flash-calculation theory. A novel method is proposed for identifying multiphase flow patterns in CO 2 flooding production wells. Additionally, leveraging the fluid phase characteristics of an oil field that is undergoing CO 2 flooding for a period of time, an interphase mass transfer model for the wellbore is developed. By integrating this model with the newly proposed flow pattern identification method, an improved predictive model for wellbore pressure drop is established. The model’s reliability is validated using actual wellbore pressure data. For example, when applied to a CO 2 flooding production well in an oilfield, the predicted pressure values closely match the measured data, with a relative average error of −1.9% and an absolute average error of 7.15%, demonstrating high accuracy. The developed model provides a robust theoretical and technical foundation for optimizing CO 2 injection and production strategies in geological storage and EOR operations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.165

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations7
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFuelSame topicCO2 Sequestration and Geologic InteractionsFrench-language works237,207