A Phase-Behavior Study for <i>n</i>-Hexane/Bitumen and <i>n</i>-Octane/Bitumen Mixtures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Steam/solvent coinjection has been studied as a potential method to improve the efficiency of conventional steam-assisted gravity drainage (SAGD) for bitumen recovery. This research is part of an experimental program for phase behavior of Athabasca-bitumen/solvent mixtures. This paper presents a new set of experimental data for phase equilibrium, viscosity, density, and asphaltene precipitation for 11 mixtures of Athabasca bitumen with n-hexane and 10 mixtures of the same bitumen with n-octane. Phase-boundary measurements were conducted at temperatures up to 160°C and pressures up to 10 MPa. The bitumen sample used in this research was studied in our previous research, in which the same bitumen was not effectively diluted by n-butane because of the coexistence of a butane-rich liquid with a bitumen-rich liquid phase. In this research, the liquid/liquid separation of hydrocarbons was not observed for n-hexane/bitumen (HB) and n-octane/bitumen (OB) mixtures for the range of temperatures and pressures tested, even at solvent concentrations higher than 90 mol%. This observation indicates that the amount of solvent available near the edge of a steam chamber is expected to be entirely used for bitumen dilution beyond the chamber edge in coinjection of steam with heavier hydrocarbon solvents, such as n-hexane and n-octane. Experiments for asphaltene precipitation at atmospheric pressure showed a larger amount of precipitates with n-hexane than with n-octane at a given solvent concentration higher than 50 wt%. For solvent concentrations less than 50 wt%, no asphaltene precipitation was observed for both solvents with the bitumen sample tested in this research.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".