Capillary breakup extensional rheometry of associative and hydrolyzed polyacrylamide polymers for oil recovery applications
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT High molecular weight polymers used for heavy oil recovery exhibit viscoelasticity that can influence the oil recovery during chemical enhanced oil recovery. Different polymers having similar molecular weight and shear rheology may have different elongation flow behavior depending on their extensional properties. Displacing slugs are more likely to stretch than shear in tortuous porous media. Therefore, it is critical to seek an analytical tool that can characterize extensional parameters to improve polymer selection criteria. This article focuses on the extensional characterization of two polymers (hydrolyzed polyacrylamide and associative polymer) having identical shear behavior using capillary breakup extensional rheometer to explain their different porous media behavior. Maximum extensional viscosity at the critical Deborah number and Deborah number in porous media classified the associative polymer as the one having high elastic‐limit. Extensional characterization results were complemented by significantly higher pressure drop, marginally increased oil recovery of associative polymer in porous media. © 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2018 , 135 , 46253.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it