MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2904788522 · doi:10.1002/cjce.23431

Alkaline‐ionic liquid slug injection for improved heavy oil recovery

2018· article· en· W2904788522 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Ahmed Tunnish, Ezeddin Shirif, Amr Henni

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques
Canadian institutionsPetroleum Technology Research CentreUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIonic liquidAlkali metalChemistryChlorideBrinePulmonary surfactantSodiumEnhanced oil recoverySurface tensionChromatographyInorganic chemistryChemical engineeringOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Chemical flooding has a great potential for improving the recovery factor of heavy oil, especially for reservoirs in which thermal techniques are not applicable. In this novel study, chemical flooding experiments of alkali and alkali + ionic liquid (AIL) mixtures were performed using unconsolidated sand packs. The aim was to investigate the effect on the recovery factor (RF) of combining an alkali, Na 2 CO 3 , and four different imidazolium‐based ionic liquids (1‐ethyl‐3‐methylimidazolium acetate [EMIM][Ac], 1‐ethyl‐3‐methyl imidazolium chloride [EMIM][Cl], 1‐butyl‐3‐methylimidazolium bis(trifluoromethylsulphonyl)imide [BMIM][Tf 2 N], and 1‐dodecyl‐3‐methylimidazolium chloride [DMIM][Cl]). The obtained data show that as the ionic liquid concentration and slug size increase, the recovery factor (RF) was found to increase. The study also demonstrates that ionic liquids (ILs) are better in improving heavy oil than recovery than a well‐known surfactant, sodium dodecyl sulphate (SDS). IFT measurements were performed for the Pelican oil used with brine and with [DMIM][Cl], and [EMIM][Ac]. The surface tension (SFT) and zeta potential (ZP) were also measured and correlated to the improvement in the RF. The study shows that in the presence of Na 2 CO 3 , the ionic liquid type, concentration, and slug size are important parameters in enhancing heavy oil recovery.

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 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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.589

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicEnhanced Oil Recovery TechniquesFrench-language works237,207