MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1985003598 · doi:10.2118/04-07-04

Oxidation and Ignition Behaviour of Saturated Hydrocarbon Samples With Crude Oils Using TG/DTG and DTA Thermal Analysis Techniques

2004· article· en· W1985003598 on OpenAlexafffund
J. Li, S. A. Mehta, R.G. Moore, M.G. Ursenbach, E. Zalewski, Helen A. Ferguson, N.E. Okazawa

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Canadian Petroleum Technology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicPetroleum Processing and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsExothermic reactionThermogravimetric analysisChemistryHydrocarbonSecondary air injectionIgnition systemAutoignition temperatureThermal oxidationExothermic processOxygenChemical engineeringCombustionOrganic chemistryWaste managementThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This research is aimed at providing a better understanding of the oxidation behaviour of fractions of crude oil, and to then develop an approach to improve ignition for air injection processes. In this research, Thermogravimetric and Differential Thermal Analysis (TG/DTA) techniques were used to investigate oxidation behaviour using thermal fingerprinting effects on pure paraffin samples and mixtures of pure components with crude oil. The results demonstrated that each paraffin sample shows different oxidation behaviours at low temperatures and high temperatures. The fractions lighter than C16 distill before they reach a temperature where oxidation reactions are significant. Only low temperature exothermic activities are apparent for the fractions between C16 and C26. The heavier fractions show both low and high temperature exothermic activities. The lower molecular weight samples show lower onset temperatures for oxidation reactions. With increasing molecular weight, the exothermic peak temperatures both in the low and high temperature regions shift to higher temperatures and increased energy release. When low activity Oil B and the more reactive Oil C were mixed with a small amount of paraffin sample heavier than C26, both crude oils showed intensified low temperature oxidation behaviour, with a greater magnitude of heat evolution. The addition of heavier paraffins offers the potential to accelerate reactions and improve ignition. Introduction High Pressure Air Injection (HPAI) has been proven as a potential and viable process for improving oil recovery from several light oil reservoirs. When air is injected into an oil reservoir, the oxygen contained in the air can potentially react with the oil in place by various oxidation reaction schemes. Success of such a process depends mainly on the crude oil properties and rock properties, as well as operating conditions. The oxidation behaviour and the conditions typically favouring auto-ignition of crude oils are of the utmost importance for light oil air injection. However, because of the low initial temperature of many of the formations, and the poor reactivity of some crude oils, the magnitude of timedelay is often so great that spontaneous ignition is not economically attractive. Chemical ignition is one of the options to improve ignition(1, 2). Unfortunately, little research has been documented. The potential for using thermal analysis techniques to investigate oxidation behaviour of crude oils during combustion has been realized. Thermal analysis techniques include Thermogravimetric (TG) and Differential Thermal Analysis techniques (DTA) or Differential Scanning Calorimetry (DSC). In TG, a small amount of a sample of crude oil, with or without sand, is heated in the presence of flowing air and the change in weight of the sample is recorded as a function of temperature. In DTA or DSC, the difference in temperature or energy input/output during hemical or physical transitions based on the differences between the sample and a reference material is recorded as a function oftemperature or time.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.211 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations29
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Canadian Petroleum TechnologySame topicPetroleum Processing and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207