2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmultiphaseflow.2016.11.006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Bayesian model selection analysis of equilibrium and nonequilibrium models for multiphase flow in porous media

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It is also possible that a Bayesian probability approach could yield a different prediction, by accounting for a freshly exposed pore having a larger probability of being impaled next to a pore not invaded by previous steps. However, a Bayesian approach requires an experimental calibration that was not possible here, 50,51 while our uniform probability approach was simple and in reasonable agreement with the experiments.…”
Section: ■ Results and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 58%
“…It is also possible that a Bayesian probability approach could yield a different prediction, by accounting for a freshly exposed pore having a larger probability of being impaled next to a pore not invaded by previous steps. However, a Bayesian approach requires an experimental calibration that was not possible here, 50,51 while our uniform probability approach was simple and in reasonable agreement with the experiments.…”
Section: ■ Results and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 58%
“…On the other hand, unstable flow regimes may lead to significant losses of economically recoverable resources from petroleum assets [29], or losses in storage capacity in geologic storage of CO2, due to bypassing of resident fluids [30]. Flow instabilities are caused by heterogeneities in the media and nonlinearities in the flow equations [26,[31][32][33][34]. Bypassing of resident fluids promoted in unstable flow regimes…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, this dynamic term could yield relative permeability, which highly agreed with the relative permeability experimentally determined. Then, another petroleum study from Ren, et al [198] numerically solved the theories of Buckley and Leverett [8], Barenblatt [151], and Hassanizadeh and Gray [43]. Based on a Bayesian analysis examining the efficacy of these theories to experimental results of decane/pentane-brine seeping in sandstone, Ren, Rafiee, Aryana and Younis [198] concluded that the two-phase fluid redistribution theory agreed more with experimental observations for the higher viscosity ratios of 4.4 and 15, while the other two theories outperformed the two-phase fluid redistribution theory for the lowest viscosity ratio of 1.1.…”
Section: The Validations Of Advanced Theories Against Experimentsmentioning
confidence: 99%