MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139463812 · doi:10.1115/1.1879044

Surfactant-Enhanced Treatment of Oil-Based Drill Cuttings

2004· article· en· W2139463812 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Energy Resources Technology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDrilling and Well Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPulmonary surfactantDrill cuttingsChemistryContact angleAlcoholPulp and paper industryChemical engineeringOrganic chemistryMaterials scienceDrilling fluidDrillingEngineeringMetallurgyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Surfactant-enhanced washing of oil-based drill cuttings was evaluated as a technology of benefit to domestic oil producers. Laboratory studies showed the branched C14-C15 alcohol propoxylate sulfate to be a promising surfactant for liberating oils from these drill cuttings. Low concentrations (∼0.1% by weight) of this surfactant produced ultra-low oil-water interfacial tensions (IFTs), thereby allowing the rollup/snap-off mechanisms to liberate drilling oil (C16, C18 alpha olefins) from the cuttings. Surfactant-enhanced washing was compared between oil-based drill cuttings, Canadian River Alluvium (CRA), and silica, showing that the hydrophobic nature of the oil-based cuttings limited the amount of oil removed. The Ca++ content of the cuttings promoted surfactant abstraction by the cuttings, thereby increasing the hydrophobicity and oil retention by the cuttings. For this reason, three components were added to produce a robust system: (1) branched C14-C15 alcohol propoxylate sulfate, (2) octyl-sulfobetaine, and (3) builder (Na2SiO3). The Na2SiO3 builder was added to promote Ca++ sequestration, thereby decreasing the Ca++ available for precipitating the surfactant. The octyl-sulfobetaine helps mitigate high hardness and high hydrophobicity by acting as a lime soap dispersing agent (LSDA). Surfactant losses were minimized and oil removal was maximized by using all three components. When washing with this three-component formulation, oil removal was relatively independent of operating conditions such as bath-cuttings contact time and agitation energy; minimizing the contact time and agitation has the added benefit of reducing the fines production during washing operations. When washing with the three-component formulation, the oil was liberated from the cuttings as a free phase layer, sans surfactant and sans solids. The final (post washing) oil content of oil-based cuttings was in the range of 2% to 5%, which is below treatment standards for these cuttings. In addition, greater than 85% of the initial branched C14-C15 alcohol propoxylate sulfate remained in the bath after washing, which minimizes the need for make-up surfactant when the wash water is reused.

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.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.888
Threshold uncertainty score0.626

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.179
Teacher spread0.176 · 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