IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v17y2024i16p3908-d1452009.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Research on Gas Channeling Identification Using the Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation Method

Author

Listed:
  • Yang Liu

    (PetroChina Research Institute of Petroleum Exploration and Development, Beijing 100083, China)

  • Mingqiang Hao

    (PetroChina Research Institute of Petroleum Exploration and Development, Beijing 100083, China)

  • Ran Bi

    (PetroChina Research Institute of Petroleum Exploration and Development, Beijing 100083, China)

  • Chaoliang Bian

    (PetroChina Jilin Oilfield, Songyuan 138000, China)

  • Xiaoqing Wang

    (Institute of Unconventional Oil and Gas Science and Technology, China University of Petroleum, Beijing 102249, China)

Abstract

With the development of the petroleum industry and advancements in technology, gas injection techniques have gradually matured and become an important means to enhance oil recovery in reservoir development. Gas channeling is a major challenge in the process of gas injection development. The presence of gas channeling can lead to a decrease in the swept volume of gas flooding, severely affecting the effectiveness of gas injection development. This paper focuses on low-permeability reservoirs, comprehensively analyzing the development characteristics of low-permeability reservoirs and the dynamic characteristics of gas flooding production. It selects and evaluates indicators for assessing the development degree of gas channeling and establishes a fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method for evaluating gas channeling in the gas injection development of low-permeability reservoirs. Based on the evaluation values derived from the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation, it classifies the development levels of gas channeling. Application in oilfield cases shows that the evaluation results of this method are generally consistent with the dynamic response of production data, with high evaluation accuracy. This provides strong support for implementing gas channeling prevention and control measures on site and improving the effectiveness of gas injection development.

Suggested Citation

  • Yang Liu & Mingqiang Hao & Ran Bi & Chaoliang Bian & Xiaoqing Wang, 2024. "Research on Gas Channeling Identification Using the Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation Method," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(16), pages 1-14, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:17:y:2024:i:16:p:3908-:d:1452009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/17/16/3908/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/17/16/3908/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Saaty, Thomas L., 1994. "Highlights and critical points in the theory and application of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 74(3), pages 426-447, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Banai, Reza, 2010. "Evaluation of land use-transportation systems with the Analytic Network Process," The Journal of Transport and Land Use, Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, vol. 3(1), pages 85-112.
    2. Levary, Reuven R. & Wan, Ke, 1999. "An analytic hierarchy process based simulation model for entry mode decision regarding foreign direct investment," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 27(6), pages 661-677, December.
    3. Sudhakar Yedla & Ram M. Shrestha, 2007. "Application of analytic hierarchy process to prioritize urban transport options: Comparative analysis of group aggregation methods," Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai Working Papers 2007-011, Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai, India.
    4. Kenneth David Strang, 2012. "Man versus math: Behaviorist exploration of post-crisis non-banking asset management," Journal of Asset Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 13(5), pages 348-367, October.
    5. Chao, Ching-Cheng & Yu, Po-Cheng, 2013. "Quantitative evaluation model of air cargo competitiveness and comparative analysis of major Asia-Pacific airports," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 318-326.
    6. Banai, Reza & Wakolbinger, Tina, 2011. "A measure of regional influence with the analytic network process," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 165-173, December.
    7. Wiebke Mohr & Anika Rädke & Adel Afi & Franka Mühlichen & Moritz Platen & Annelie Scharf & Bernhard Michalowsky & Wolfgang Hoffmann, 2022. "Development of a Quantitative Preference Instrument for Person-Centered Dementia Care—Stage 2: Insights from a Formative Qualitative Study to Design and Pretest a Dementia-Friendly Analytic Hierarchy ," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(14), pages 1-21, July.
    8. Sato, Yuji, 2012. "Optimal budget planning for investment in safety measures of a chemical company," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(2), pages 579-585.
    9. Azam Abdolazimi & Mehdi Momeni & Majid Montazeri, 2015. "Comparing ELECTRE and Linear Assignment Methods in Zoning Shahroud-Bastam Watershed for Artificial Recharge of Groundwater with GIS Technique," Modern Applied Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 9(1), pages 1-68, January.
    10. Şebnem Karul Tonka & Ismail Ekmekci, 2022. "A Model Proposal for Occupational Health and Safety Performance Measurement in Geothermal Drilling Areas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-24, November.
    11. Mukherjee, Krishnendu, 2014. "Analytic hierarchy process and technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution: a bibliometric analysis from past, present and future of AHP and TOPSIS," MPRA Paper 59887, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Dong, Yucheng & Xu, Yinfeng & Li, Hongyi & Dai, Min, 2008. "A comparative study of the numerical scales and the prioritization methods in AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(1), pages 229-242, April.
    13. Alina Popa & Shahrazad Hadad & Robert Paiusan & Marian Nastase, 2018. "A New Method for Agricultural Market Share Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-13, December.
    14. Madurai Elavarasan, Rajvikram & Pugazhendhi, Rishi & Irfan, Muhammad & Mihet-Popa, Lucian & Campana, Pietro Elia & Khan, Irfan Ahmad, 2022. "A novel Sustainable Development Goal 7 composite index as the paradigm for energy sustainability assessment: A case study from Europe," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 307(C).
    15. Raharjo, Hendry & Xie, Min & Brombacher, Aarnout C., 2009. "On modeling dynamic priorities in the analytic hierarchy process using compositional data analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 194(3), pages 834-846, May.
    16. Contantin BR?TIANU & Ivona ORZEA, 2013. "Knowledge Strategies in Using Social Networks," Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy, College of Management, National University of Political Studies and Public Administration, vol. 1(1), pages 25-38, May.
    17. Iwaro, Joseph & Mwasha, Abrahams & Williams, Rupert G. & Zico, Ricardo, 2014. "An Integrated Criteria Weighting Framework for the sustainable performance assessment and design of building envelope," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 417-434.
    18. Mohammad Karamouz & Sara Nazif & Mohammad Sherafat & Zahra Zahmatkesh, 2014. "Development of an Optimal Reservoir Operation Scheme Using Extended Evolutionary Computing Algorithms Based on Conflict Resolution Approach: A Case Study," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 28(11), pages 3539-3554, September.
    19. P Ji & R Jiang, 2003. "Scale transitivity in the AHP," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 54(8), pages 896-905, August.
    20. J. Hummel & John Bridges & Maarten IJzerman, 2014. "Group Decision Making with the Analytic Hierarchy Process in Benefit-Risk Assessment: A Tutorial," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 7(2), pages 129-140, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:17:y:2024:i:16:p:3908-:d:1452009. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.