4.7 Article

Axial stress localization facilitates pressure propagation in gelled pipes

期刊

PHYSICS OF FLUIDS
卷 28, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

AMER INST PHYSICS
DOI: 10.1063/1.4942899

关键词

-

资金

  1. Research Council of Norway
  2. Statoil ASA
  3. Petroliam Nasional Berhad
  4. BASF SE
  5. Nalco Champion-An Ecolab Company

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Paraffin wax-oil gels are unique rheological fluids which undergo shear degradation starting at a deformation (shear strain level) of approximately 1%. Flow commencement in pipelines filled with wax-oil gels is a complex hydrodynamic process involving propagation of acoustic, diffusive, and rheological degradation pressure wave fronts. Dynamic simulation informed by qualified rheological relations provides useful insight into the physical nature of these flow processes. Eulerian simulations are presented which emulate known physical phenomena and essential characteristics of wax-gel flow dynamics. A constitutive rheological equation set accounts for deformation-driven reduction in yield stress and viscosity terms. No explicit time-dependent rheological parameters are utilized in the equations. Rheological yielding alters the nature of the dominant pressure wave from inherently diffusive towards self-sharpening. Axial stress localization effectively sequentializes the gel breakage process, quantified by reduced length of the pressure wave-front zone. Ultimately, axial stress localization allows flow in longer pipe segments, albeit with a concomitant time delay. Viscous behavior and yielding degradation behavior are shown to account for upward and downward concavity in transient axial pressure profiles, respectively. Overall, a unique synergy between gel compressibility and gel degradation is revealed. Deformation-coupled interaction between compressibility and degradation allows pressure propagation and subsequent sustained flow through a gel material which is otherwise immobile in the incompressible case. (C) 2016 AIP Publishing LLC.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据