4.0 Article

Evaluation of Wettability Alteration by Oil Doped with Organic Acid and Low-High Brine Solutions in Sandstone and Carbonate Rocks

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE BRAZILIAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY
卷 34, 期 10, 页码 1432-1444

出版社

SOC BRASILEIRA QUIMICA
DOI: 10.21577/0103-5053.20230055

关键词

wettability; brine solution; aging process; oil recovery; contact angle

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aims to investigate the process involved in the wettability associated with interactions between the surface of powdered reservoir rock samples and the surrounding fluids. The results indicate that carbonate rocks have a higher adsorption capacity for the organic phase compared to sandstone, suggesting that carbonate rocks can improve the oil recovery rate better under low-salinity brine conditions.
Petroleum reserves available worldwide are geologically based mainly on sedimentary and carbonate rocks, and the reservoir performance depends on the intrinsic properties of each rock and their response to changes in wettability. Recently, the change in wettability with low-salinity brine has been used to improve the oil recovery, which is an environmentally friendly and low investment, but there is no unanimity about the mechanisms of oil recovery process. Therefore, the aim of this study is to investigate the process involved in the wettability associated with interactions between the surface of powdered reservoir rock samples and the surrounding fluids. The reservoir rock surface (sandstone, calcite and dolomite) was evaluated under three different conditions. The total amount of adsorbed oil on aged samples was twice as high in carbonate rocks as in sandstone. The thermal gravimetric analysis (TGA) for the desorption steps of the organic fraction on dolomite and calcite indicates that the treatment under high brine concentration favored the oil desorption and the opposite result was observed for sandstone. This behavior suggests that carbonate rocks adsorb more strongly the organic phase compared to sandstone.

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

4.0
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