MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4242871584 · doi:10.2523/84610-ms

Classifying Crude Oil Emulsions Using Chemical Demulsifiers and Statistical Analyses

2003· article· en· W4242871584 sur OpenAlex
Michael K. Poindexter, Shaokun Chuai, Robert A. Marble, Samuel C. Marsh

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

affAu moins un auteur déclare une institution canadienne dans l'instantané OpenAlex épinglé.

Notice bibliographique

RevueProceedings of SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition · 2003
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineChemistry
ThématiquePetroleum Processing and Analysis
Établissements canadiensNalcor Energy (Canada)
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésExhibitionCitationUploadEngineeringLibrary scienceComputer scienceArt historyArtWorld Wide Web

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Classifying Crude Oil Emulsions Using Chemical Demulsifiers and Statistical Analyses Michael K. Poindexter; Michael K. Poindexter Ondeo Nalco Energy Services Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Shaokun Chuai; Shaokun Chuai Ondeo Nalco Energy Services Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Robert A. Marble; Robert A. Marble Ondeo Nalco Energy Services Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Samuel C. Marsh Samuel C. Marsh Ondeo Nalco Energy Services Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Paper presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Denver, Colorado, October 2003. Paper Number: SPE-84610-MS https://doi.org/10.2118/84610-MS Published: October 05 2003 Cite View This Citation Add to Citation Manager Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Get Permissions Search Site Citation Poindexter, Michael K., Chuai, Shaokun, Marble, Robert A., and Samuel C. Marsh. "Classifying Crude Oil Emulsions Using Chemical Demulsifiers and Statistical Analyses." Paper presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Denver, Colorado, October 2003. doi: https://doi.org/10.2118/84610-MS Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex Search nav search search input Search input auto suggest search filter All ContentAll ProceedingsSociety of Petroleum Engineers (SPE)SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition Search Advanced Search AbstractCrude oil emulsions are highly complex mixtures that can be stabilized by a number of naturally occurring species and conditions (e.g. asphaltenes, resins, acids, solids, solvency, viscosity, temperature, etc.). Emulsion resolution is often accomplished using chemicals. Optimization of chemical treatment is generally accomplished in the field by bottle testing a large number of potential chemical intermediates and their combinations. Successful chemical formulations are able to drop water rapidly, provide relatively clean interfaces, and produce dry, saleable oil.The very nature of bottle testing produces a large amount of data. Some of the data provides information regarding water drop, while part focuses on breaking the emulsion (i.e. producing dry oil and clean interfaces). To summarize results from multiple test sites, a highly structured bottle test was devised to make comparisons among different oilfield emulsions. Thirty-eight chemical intermediates, tested at two dosages, were evaluated at nine different sites. From the testing, ten bottle test performance parameters (four describing water drop, three describing oil dryness, and three describing the oil-water interface) were analyzed using several statistical methods: analysis of variance, multivariate correlations, cluster analysis, and principal component analysis. The analyses revealed a number of interesting trends. For example, the water drop and oil dryness parameters were found to be more independent of one another than the water drop and interface parameters. These results suggest that water drop and oil dryness are likely governed by two different mechanisms. This work has resulted in several emulsion "maps" where crudes can now be classified with regard to their ability to drop water and break emulsion.IntroductionCrude oils are extremely complex fluids. Numerous separation methods have been used to classify crudes.1 Ongoing research efforts introducing new techniques and more efficient methods of separation continue at a steady pace.2–6 Part of the intent to classify is to better predict crude oil behavior during production, blending, and processing. By building robust predictive models, crude oil production problems can be anticipated and minimized.7As difficult as classifying crudes can be, an additional degree of complexity occurs when water is part of the equation such that water-in-crude oil emulsions result. Most crude oil production has or will have associated water. Many emulsions have a time dependent nature meaning that emulsion stabilization can either increase or decrease over time once the sample emulsion is isolated for initial study. Thus, conclusions drawn from a study at one point in time might not fully agree with other time frames. This aging effect on samples studied in the lab versus the field has been noted.8,9 Work in our laboratory agrees. Many of the field studies discussed in this paper were repeated on the same emulsion but at a later time. In all but one case, the aged emulsion was more difficult to resolve than the field (or fresh) emulsion taken directly from the production facility and tested immediately.This paper will focus only on oilfield emulsions and will introduce a new twist on an established test procedure, namely the bottle test. Various statistical techniques were used to sort through the data with the goal of classifying emulsions at the point where production issues are relevant. These techniques permit different emulsions to be grouped or ranked regarding traits seen in the bottle test.The Bottle TestEmulsions are resolved by a variety of means including separation equipment, heat, time, and specialty chemicals. Optimizing the combination of these factors (especially the latter three factors) can often be accomplished with the bottle test. The bottle test has existed for years10 and continues to be a source of guidance when addressing field emulsion problems. While the exact steps used in the bottle test can vary from tester to tester, the purpose of the test remains the same: among many possibilities identify a treatment protocol that will effectively resolve the emulsion. Emulsion resolution involves producing dry, saleable oil, clean water, and minimal residual emulsion (often referred to as "slop" or "rag"). Keywords: rock/fluid interaction, artificial intelligence, upstream oil & gas, fluid compatibility, demulsifier, interface, water drop, correlation, machine learning, variance Subjects: Production Chemistry, Metallurgy and Biology, Downhole chemical treatments and fluid compatibility This content is only available via PDF. 2003. Society of Petroleum Engineers You can access this article if you purchase or spend a download.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Expérimental (laboratoire) · Signal consensuel: Expérimental (laboratoire)
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,019
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,749

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,056
Tête enseignante GPT0,323
Écart entre enseignants0,268 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle