1991
DOI: 10.1016/0016-7142(91)90038-e
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Numerical modeling of surface-to-borehole electromagnetic surveys for monitoring thermal enhanced oil recovery

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

1994
1994
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Wilt et al (1991) demonstrated, in an oilfield experiment, that cross-hole EM measurements made between boreholes spaced 100 m apart can be repeated to better than 1% of the field amplitude. The numerical model study by Spies and Greaves (1991) showed that, using a borehole-to-surface configuration, it is possible to detect the changes in resistivity associated with the progress of an enhanced oil recovery (EOR) processs.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Wilt et al (1991) demonstrated, in an oilfield experiment, that cross-hole EM measurements made between boreholes spaced 100 m apart can be repeated to better than 1% of the field amplitude. The numerical model study by Spies and Greaves (1991) showed that, using a borehole-to-surface configuration, it is possible to detect the changes in resistivity associated with the progress of an enhanced oil recovery (EOR) processs.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Ithas beenestablished that atlow ternperaturcs up toabout200 degrees thercsistivities ofrocks and saturating fluid have similar temperature d_-_)cndcncc: theincrease inconductivity withincreasing temperature up toabout200oC (Llera etal., 1990).Thisiscausedby anincreased mobility ofions withtheincrease oftemperature (Senand Goode, 1992). (Mansure, 1990;Spies and Greaves, 1991), indicate that the conductivity of the steaming zone can increase by a factor between 5 to 8 from its presteaming values. This increase is caused by the fact that, although the steam itself is resistive, only between of 60% to 80% of the steam actually enters the medium.…”
Section: II Range Of Conductivity Variationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Published reports have shown that the resistivity typically decreases from 35 to more than 80% after steam injection (Mansure and Meldau, 1990;Ranganayaki et al, 1992;Spies and Greaves, 1990). This decrease occurs because temperature increases and because the high-resistivity oil is replaced by the lower-resistivity steam and water injectate mixture.…”
Section: P3 Determine a New Pointmentioning
confidence: 99%