Laboratory Measurements of Gas-Water Interfacial Tension at HP/HT Reservoir Conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper presents preliminary results from a laboratory study designed to measure gas-water interfacial tension (IFT) at high-pressure/high-temperature (HP/HT) reservoir conditions. We used a pendant drop method with computer-aided image processing and analysis to measure gas-water IFT for several dry gas mixtures at pressures from 1,000 psia to 20,000 psia and temperatures of 300°F and 400°F. For our study, we define a dry gas as one that remains in the single hydrocarbon (gas) phase during the entire isothermal pressure depletion path from the reservoir through surface conditions. We also evaluated the effects of two common nonhydrocarbon contaminants (i.e., carbon dioxide and nitrogen) on the gas-water IFT behavior. Gas mixtures contained up to 20 mol% of either CO2 or N2 each. Finally, we evaluated the effects of total dissolved solids content in the connate water. All IFT measurements were made with either distilled water or synthetic brine with total dissolved solids concentrations of 100,000 ppm NaCl. Study results demonstrate the complex interactions between pressure and temperature as well as gas and water compositions on gas-water IFT. Specifically, we observed the following behavior in the measured IFT: temperature has a significant impact on gas-water IFT. Increasing the temperature from 300°F to 400°F tended to decrease the IFT for all pressures and gas compositions; the effects of CO2 varied depending on pressure, temperature, and concentration. For a given temperature, the presence of CO2 in the gas decreased the IFT at higher pressures; however, the pressure at which this trend was observed varied. Generally, higher concentrations of CO2 resulted in lower IFTs over a much greater pressure range than for the gases with lower CO2 concentrations; the effects of N2 also varied depending on pressure, temperature, and concentration. For lower N2 concentrations, we observed higher IFTs over the entire pressure range than for the gas with no N2. However, the gases with higher N2 concentrations had higher IFTs for the low pressure range only; the presence of total dissolved solids in the water caused the gas-water IFT to be higher than the values measured with distilled water. Higher concentrations of NaCl dissolved in the water caused greater increases in IFT for all pressures, temperatures and gas compositions evaluated in the study.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 teacher head, 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".