Viscoelastic Behavior of Crude Oil-Gum Emulsions in Enhanced Oil Recovery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The experimental study of the Creep-recovery examination is necessary to understand the viscoelastic behavior of crude oil-Xanthan gum emulsions. The experimental measurements and analysis of these tests were completed using RheoStress RS100 under controlled stress CS-mode. Rheometers with CS-mode allow for a useful and direct technique for the experimental measurements of creep and recovery stages. This investigation covers a wide range of crude oil concentration of 0–75% by volume, Xanthan concentration range of 0–104 ppm, and two types of Xanthan gums are used and investigated. The creep-recovery measurements of crude oil-Xanthan gums emulsions were extensively investigated. It was important to find the linear viscoelastic range for the examined crude oil-Xanthan gum emulsions. The experimental measurements and analysis of the creep-recovery examinations showed that the linear viscoelastic range was up to 1 Pa. The experimental investigation showed that the higher the concentration of the used gum and crude oil, the lower the compliance of the emulsions. For the Xanthan concentrations of less than 103 ppm, the crude oil-gum emulsion exhibited viscous behavior. However, for the Xanthan concentration of higher than 103, the examined emulsions displayed viscoelastic behavior.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".