Adsorption and Surfactant Transport in Porous Media Shunhua Liu George J. Hirasaki Clarence A. Miller 06.04.2005.

Adsorption and Surfactant Transport in Porous Media

Shunhua Liu

George J. Hirasaki

Clarence A. Miller

06.04.2005

Outline

Surfactant Adsorption

•Test the effect of different potential determining ions

•Test the nonionic surfactant

•Test the new surfactant (N67-7PO: IOS=4:1)

The transportation of two surfactants in porous media

•Background

•Propagation of the two surfactants

Adsorption of Anionic Surfactant (CS330+TDA-4PO 1:1 Blend) with Different Potential Determining Ions on DOLOMITE Powder

Zeta Potential at Interfaces

-80

-60

-40

-20

0

20

40

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

pH

Ze

ta P

ote

nti

al,

mv

MY1/Brine Calcite/Brine Calcite/Na2CO3/NaHCO3

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14

Residual Surfactant Concentration(Wt%)

Ad

so

rpti

on

De

ns

ity

(mg

/m2 )

Anionic surfactant on dolomite without alkali, plateau=83 Å2/molecule

Anionic surfactantwith Na2CO3(0.2M,0.3M,0.4M)

plateau = 830 Å2/molecule

Nonionic surfactant on dolomite

plateau=714 Å2/molecule

Comparisons of Anionic Surfactant (CS330+TDA-4PO 1:1) and Nonionic Surfactant (Nonylphenol-12EO-3PO) Adsorption on DOLOMITE Powder

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12

Residual Surfactant Concentration(Wt%)

Ad

so

rpti

on

De

ns

ity

(mg

/m2 )

Nonionic surfactant on silica

CS330 on silica

5000 Å2/molecule

Plateau

184 Å2/molecule.

Comparisons of Anionic Surfactant (CS330) and Nonionic Surfactant (Nonylphenol-12EO-3PO) Adsorption on SILICA Powder

Absorption Threshold Measurement for Na2CO3

0.000

0.005

0.010

0.015

0.020

0.025

0.030

0.035

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6

%Na2CO3

Resid

ual S

urf

acta

nt C

on

cen

tratio

n (%

)

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3 A

dso

rptio

n d

en

sity

(mg

/m2)

Same Initial surfactant concentration 0.05%

Same Solid Liquid Ratio(10:1)

Outline

Surfactant Adsorption

•Test the effect of different potential determining ions

•Test the nonionic surfactant

•Test the new surfactant (N67-7PO: IOS=4:1)

The transportation of two surfactants in porous media

•Background

•Propagation of the two surfactants

Background for two surfactants system

Two Surfactants

Natural Soap (Naphthenic Acid+Alkali)

•A hydrophobic surfactant

•Initial condition for our system

Synthetic surfactant

•A hydrophilic surfactant

•Boundary condition for our system

Partition Coefficient =Concentration in oleic phase

Concentration in aqueous phase

e.g. 31

323cc

KC

41

424cc

KC

where KCi is the partition coefficient of i component

ci1 is the concentration in aqueous phase

ci2 is the concentration in oleic phase

i=3 for synthetic surfactant; i=4 for natural soap

The effect of two surfactants

Optimal Salinity vs. Soap-Synthetic Surfactant Ratio Curve

Contour of IFT (log10(IFT))

10-1

10-2

10-3

Type II Region

Type I Region

Type III Region

(%N

aCl)

Residual Phase Saturation Curve

Ref:L. W. LakeEnhanced Oil Recovery Prentice-Hall, New Jersey,1989

Capillary Number Nc

u

Nc IFT=10-3IFT=10-2

Contour of Partition Coefficient (log10(K))

K>>1

K<<1

Adsorption of Synthetic Surfactant

Langmuir type isotherm

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

0 5 10 15 20c31

C3ads

K

Cmax

Base Case Parameters

Sor=0.3 Oil Viscosity: 8cp

Formation brine:4.8%NaCl Soap Concentration: c42=510-4, C4=1.5 10-

4

NX=100

Surfactant Concentration:1 10-3(~0.1%) Slug Size:0.3PV

Aqueous phase viscosity: 15 cp

Keep the salinity fixed

Base Case Effluent History

Base Case Surfactants’ Profiles

Base Case IFT and Soap Surfactant Ratio Profiles

Base Case Oil Profiles

Parameter Study (Salinity)

Recovery vs Salinity

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

0 2 4 6Salinity(%)

Re

co

ve

ry

Parameter Study (Salinity)

Base Case (Salinity=4.8%)

At t=0.5PV

Salinity=1.0%

Salinity=5.5%

Parameter Study (Aqueous phase viscosity)

Recovery vs Aqueous phase viscosity

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

0 5 10 15 20 25Aqueous phase viscosity(cp)

Oil R

ec

ove

ry

Parameter Study (Aqueous phase viscosity)

Base Case (Viscosity=15cp)At t=0.5PV

(Viscosity=1cp)

Parameter Study (NX)

Recovery vs NX

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

0 50 100 150 200NX

Re

co

ve

ry

Conclusion CO3

-2 can be used to reduce the adsorption of anionic surfactant on carbonate formation. The threshold is around 0.08% Na2CO3.

When surfactant and natural soap propagate together, we can make the Winsor type II region ahead of the surfactant front and make the type I region behind the front.

The low IFT region will increase as the surfactant and soap propagate.

By manipulating the operational parameters, We can take advantage of the existence of soap and make the low tension region wide enough for recovering all the oil. The usage of surfactant could be very small.

Future Work

Add the polymer term to control the viscosity

Add the alkali term to describe the generation of soap

Find an economic strategy by using the simulator

Flooding experiments for the history match.