Performance comparison of novel chemical agents in improving oil recovery from tight sands through spontaneous imbibition
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 Tight sands are abundant in nanopores leading to a high capillary pressure and normally a low fluid injectivity. As such, spontaneous imbibition might be an effective mechanism for improving oil recovery from tight sands after fracturing. The chemical agents added to the injected water can alter the interfacial properties, which could help further enhance the oil recovery by spontaneous imbibition. This study explores the possibility of using novel chemicals to enhance oil recovery from tight sands via spontaneous imbibition. We experimentally examine the effects of more than ten different chemical agents on spontaneous imbibition, including a cationic surfactant (C12TAB), two anionic surfactants (O242 and O342), an ionic liquid (BMMIM BF4), a high pH solution (NaBO 2 ), and a series of house-made deep eutectic solvents (DES3–7, 9, 11, and 14). The interfacial tensions (IFT) between oil phase and some chemical solutions are also determined. Experimental results indicate that both the ionic liquid and cationic surfactant used in this study are detrimental to spontaneous imbibition and decrease the oil recovery from tight sands, even though cationic surfactant significantly decreases the oil–water IFT while ionic liquid does not. The high pH NaBO 2 solution does not demonstrate significant effect on oil recovery improvement and IFT reduction. The anionic surfactants (O242 and O342) are effective in enhancing oil recovery from tight sands through oil–water IFT reduction and emulsification effects. The DESs drive the rock surface to be more water-wet, and a specific formulation (DES9) leads to much improvement on oil recovery under counter-current imbibition condition. This preliminary study would provide some knowledge about how to optimize the selection of chemicals for improving oil recovery from tight reservoirs.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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 it