Capillary breakup extensional rheometry of associative and hydrolyzed polyacrylamide polymers for oil recovery applications
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".