Immiscible displacement of oil by water in consolidated porous media due to capillary imbibition under ultrasonic waves
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Numerous studies done in the last four decades have demonstrated that acoustic stimulation may enhance recovery in oil reservoirs. This technology is not only technically feasible, but also serves as an economical, environmentally friendly alternative to currently accepted enhanced oil recovery (EOR) method. It requires low capital expenditure, and yields almost immediate improvement without any additional EOR agents. Despite a vast body of empirical and theoretical support, this method lacks sufficient understanding to make meaningful and consistent engineering predictions. This is in part due to the complex nature of the physical processes involved, as well as due to a shortage of fundamental/experimental research. Much of what the authors believe is happening within acoustically stimulated porous media is speculative and theoretical. This paper focuses on the effects of ultrasound on the interfacial forces between immiscible fluids. Capillary (spontaneous) imbibition of an aqueous phase into oil (or air)-saturated Berea sandstone and Indiana limestone samples experiments were conducted. Solutions of water, brine (15,000 and 150,000 ppm NaCl), anionic surfactant (sodium dodecyl diphenyloxide disulfonate), nonionic surfactant (alcohol ethoxylate) and polymer (xanthan gum) were prepared as the aqueous phase. Both counter-current and co-current geometries were tested. Due to the intrinsically unforced, gentle nature of the process, and their strong dependence on wettability, interfacial tension, viscosity and density, such experiments provide valuable insight into some of the governing mechanisms behind ultrasonic stimulation.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".