Adhesion and surface energy of shale rocks

Nguyen, Duy; Phan, Tri T.; Hsu, Tzu-Ping; Phan, Jenny

doi:10.1016/j.colsurfa.2017.02.029

Cited by 24 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Cation bridging as a low salinity oil release mechanism has also been identified at core scales previously [30,36]. Adhesion is a function of both rock/liquid and liquid/liquid interfacial activities [52,53] and brine chemistry also affects oil/water interfacial tension and oil/brine zeta potential. Xie and colleagues [51] observed that, at 10,000 ppm concentration, NaCl led to a more negative zeta potential (~25 mV) than CaCl 2 (~13 mV) and MgCl 2 (~14 mV).…”

Section: Effect Of Brine Salinity On the Adhesion Of -C6h5 Groups To Micamentioning

confidence: 93%

Insights into Nanoscale Wettability Effects of Low Salinity and Nanofluid Enhanced Oil Recovery Techniques

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study, enhanced oil recovery (EOR) techniques—namely low salinity and nanofluid EOR—are probed at the nanometer-scale using an atomic force microscope (AFM). Mica substrates were used as model clay-rich rocks while AFM tips were coated to present alkyl (-CH3), aromatic (-C6H5) and carboxylic acid (-COOH) functional groups, to simulate oil media. We prepared brine formulations to test brine dilution and cation bridging effects while selected concentrations (0 to 1 wt%) of hydrophilic SiO2 nanoparticles dispersed in 1 wt% NaCl were used as nanofluids. Samples were immersed in fluid cells and chemical force mapping was used to measure the adhesion force between polar/non-polar moieties to substrates. Adhesion work was evaluated based on force-displacement curves and compared with theories. Results from AFM studies indicate that low salinity waters and nanoparticle dispersions promote nanoscale wettability alteration by significantly reducing three-phase adhesion force and the reversible thermodynamic work of adhesion, also known as adhesion energy. The maximum reduction in adhesion energy obtained in experiments was in excellent agreement with existing theories. Electrostatic repulsion and reduced non-electrostatic adhesion are prominent surface forces common to both low salinity and nanofluid EOR. Structural forces are complex in nature and may not always decrease total adhesion force and energy at high nanoparticle concentration. Wettability effects also depend on surface chemical groups and the presence of divalent Mg2+ and Ca2+ cations. This study provides fresh insights and fundamental information about low salinity and nanofluid EOR while demonstrating the application of force-distance spectroscopy in investigating EOR techniques.

show abstract

Section: Effect Of Brine Salinity On the Adhesion Of -C6h5 Groups To Micamentioning

confidence: 93%

Insights into Nanoscale Wettability Effects of Low Salinity and Nanofluid Enhanced Oil Recovery Techniques

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In general, the static contact angle was calculated using the Young equation: where, γS, γSL, γL and θ are the surface free energy of the solid, the solid/liquid interfacial tension, the surface tension of liquid and the contact angle, respectively. The polar and dispersive surface free energies were determined using the Owens–Wendt equation 15,16 expressed as: where Wa is work of adhesion by Owens-Wendt equation, while γL is overall surface tension of the wetting liquid, θ is the contact angle between the liquid and the solid, γSd is dispersive component of the surface energy of the solid, γLd are dispersive component of the surface tension of the wetting liquid, γSp is polar component of the surface energy of the solid, and γLp…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of mechanical properties and EMI shielding effectiveness of long carbon fiber reinforced thermoplastic with different matrix

Roh

Kwon²,

Guk³

et al. 2020

Journal of Composite Materials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the present study, the difference of long carbon fiber reinforced thermoplastic (C-LFT) depending on the type of polymer resins at the same carbon fiber content (30 wt.%) was compared. The different types of C-LFT were made using five polymer resins such as polyamide 6, polyamide 6,6, polycarbonate, high density polyethylene and polypropylene. Tensile test, flexural test, and unnotched Izod impact test were carried out and the cause of difference in the mechanical properties was considered by analyzing the adhesion characteristics. Fracture appearance and work of adhesion between the fiber and the resin were observed. In addition, the difference and its cause in electromagnetic interference shielding effectiveness (EMI SE) was investigated. From the results, the polyamide 6 is most appropriate to the carbon fiber among the samples in the aspects of interfacial shear strength and fiber dispersion.

show abstract

“…1 As a result, these fractured "tight" reservoirs experience rapid production declines. 2 One of the most widely used techniques to improve oil recovery in these reservoirs is by surfactant flooding. Surfactant flooding is an enhanced oil recovery (EOR) technique that loosens up and mobilizes oil trapped in these reservoirs through reduction of the oil−water interfacial tension and through altering the wettability of the oil-wet shale to a water-wet state.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Unlike most conventional oil reservoirs, shale reservoirs possess ultralow permeability, oil-wet character, and low porosity . As a result, these fractured “tight” reservoirs experience rapid production declines . One of the most widely used techniques to improve oil recovery in these reservoirs is by surfactant flooding.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One of the most widely used techniques to improve oil recovery in these reservoirs is by surfactant flooding. Surfactant flooding is an enhanced oil recovery (EOR) technique that loosens up and mobilizes oil trapped in these reservoirs through reduction of the oil–water interfacial tension and through altering the wettability of the oil-wet shale to a water-wet state . However, surfactant flooding of oil reservoirs is subject to loss of surfactant by adsorption to oil-free regions of the reservoir matrix. , Mitigating surfactant loss through adsorption thus has an economic impact on the viability of surfactant-based oil recovery processes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Nanocomposite of Halloysite/Surfactant/Wax to Inhibit Surfactant Adsorption onto Reservoir Rock Surfaces for Improved Oil Recovery

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Surfactant adsorption onto reservoir rock surfaces is a major issue in enhanced oil recovery (EOR) applications, decreasing the economic success of an EOR project. A method to minimize loss of surfactant is to encapsulate the surfactant and deliver it directly to the oil–water interface. This can be done through the use of naturally occurring clay nanotubes known as halloysites, where surfactants can be encapsulated in the lumen of the nanotubes. Halloysite nanotubes are about 1 μm in length with an outer diameter of about 70 nm and a lumen diameter of about 50 nm. These natural clay nanotubes are thermally stable, inexpensive, abundantly available, and environmentally friendly. An interesting aspect of the halloysite is that it has a predominantly negatively charged outer silica surface and a positively charged inner alumina surface. The surfactants are loaded into the halloysite nanotubes (HNTs) and coated with a thin layer of paraffin wax through a vacuum suction and solvent evaporation method. A thin paraffin wax coating/skin over the surfactant-loaded halloysites prevents the premature release of surfactants until they are in contact with oil, which promotes dissolution of the wax, releasing the surfactant. Imbibition experiments are carried out by measuring oil recovered after pushing injection fluids containing the HNTs through a capillary packed tightly with fresh and crude oil-saturated crushed shale cores. At 70 °C, the wax-coated surfactant-loaded halloysites system exhibited 40% oil recovery, compared to just 16% for surfactant alone and 3% for wax-coated halloysite (no surfactant). A much lower oil recovery for the surfactant alone (16%) can be attributed to excessive surfactant adsorption to the fresh core (85% adsorption), making these adsorbed surfactants unavailable to be in contact with the oil for enhancing the recovery. The method of surfactant encapsulation in wax-coated halloysites therefore leads to a targeted, stimulus-responsive delivery system to the oil–water interface in shale reservoirs with the potential to enhance oil recovery.

show abstract

Adhesion and surface energy of shale rocks

Cited by 24 publications

References 26 publications

Insights into Nanoscale Wettability Effects of Low Salinity and Nanofluid Enhanced Oil Recovery Techniques

Insights into Nanoscale Wettability Effects of Low Salinity and Nanofluid Enhanced Oil Recovery Techniques

Evaluation of mechanical properties and EMI shielding effectiveness of long carbon fiber reinforced thermoplastic with different matrix

A Nanocomposite of Halloysite/Surfactant/Wax to Inhibit Surfactant Adsorption onto Reservoir Rock Surfaces for Improved Oil Recovery

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About