Ahmed Abdulhamid Mahmoud1, Salaheldin Elkatatny1,2, Abdulaziz Al-Majed1,2, Mustafa Al Ramadan1,2. 1. Department of Petroleum Engineering and Geosciences, King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals, Dhahran 31261, Saudi Arabia. 2. Center for Integrative Petroleum Research, King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals, Dhahran 31261, Saudi Arabia.
Abstract
Oil-well cement physical characteristics considerably change after being carbonated by a CO2-rich solution. In this study, the influence of graphite particles in the characteristics of oil-well cement reacted with a CO2-rich solution at 130 °C and 10 MPa for 10 days was studied. After 10 days of carbonation, incorporating 0.2% by weight of cement (BWOC) of graphite into the cement slurry decreased the carbonation depth by 29.8% as confirmed by the direct measurement and the micro-computerized tomography scan technique. The addition of 0.2% BWOC of graphite also reduced the cement matrix permeability by 31.4% and increased its compressive strength by 16.4% and tensile strength by 23.8% compared to the sample without graphite. The decrease in the cement matrix portlandite concentration and permeability of the samples prepared with graphite contributed to promote the cement matrix carbonation resistance. The microscopic images also proved that the incorporation of graphite delayed the leaching of calcium carbonate, and this is also attributed to decreasing the cement strength deterioration.
Oil-well cement physical characteristics considerably change after being carbonated by a CO2-rich solution. In this study, the influence of graphite particles in the characteristics of oil-well cement reacted with a CO2-rich solution at 130 °C and 10 MPa for 10 days was studied. After 10 days of carbonation, incorporating 0.2% by weight of cement (BWOC) of graphite into the cement slurry decreased the carbonation depth by 29.8% as confirmed by the direct measurement and the micro-computerized tomography scan technique. The addition of 0.2% BWOC of graphite also reduced the cement matrix permeability by 31.4% and increased its compressive strength by 16.4% and tensile strength by 23.8% compared to the sample without graphite. The decrease in the cement matrix portlandite concentration and permeability of the samples prepared with graphite contributed to promote the cement matrix carbonation resistance. The microscopic images also proved that the incorporation of graphite delayed the leaching of calcium carbonate, and this is also attributed to decreasing the cement strength deterioration.
In the last decades, global
warming has significantly increased
because of the increase in greenhouse gas emission into the atmosphere
as a result of the enduring use of fossil fuels as an energy source.[1,2]Many previous studies identified CO2 produced from
different
human activities as the major reason of increasing the intensity of
global warming.[3] According to Ding et al.[4] and Rao et al.,[5] CO2 emission is the source of most of the unfavorable impacts
of global warming. The increase in CO2 concentration resulted
in the global temperature increase from the middle of the 19th century
to 2016 by 1 °C.[6]Geologic carbon
sequestration is an efficient method that injects
CO2 into suitable deep geologic formations.[7−9] The success of these projects is affected by the rigidity of the
underground formation, caprock, and the cement layer.About
20% of hydrated oil-well cement is portlandite, which is
one of the least stable hydration products in a corrosive environment.
This is the reason why the oil-well cement corrodes easily after interacting
with CO2[10] and later on results
in a deterioration in the cement layer strength and permeability caused
by the formation of microcracks.[11,12]The
impact of the carbonation process on the cement matrix stability
was investigated by several previous studies.[13−16] The outcomes of these studies
supported the hypothesis that the addition of certain complementary
materials that are able to decrease the cement portlandite content,
and the concentration of the hydration products of high Ca/Si content,[17] or the reducing the cement permeability;[18] could lead to mitigating the cement carbonation-induced
degradation.Although the use of fly ash and pozzolanic materials
significantly
decreased the concentration of portlandite in the hydrated cement
matrix,[19,20] the rheological characteristics of the cement
slurry were negatively affected by incorporating these materials,
and the use of high concentrations resulted in increasing the microcracks.[7] Another disadvantage of using pozzolanic materials
is that they have a high content of Al2O3 that
leads to ettringite formation.[21] The reduction
in the water-to-cement ratio had also been considered by other studies
as an effective way to increase the cement stability against carbonation;
however, the low water content could negatively impact the cement
matrix integrity by forming microcracks.[22]Recently, Mahmoud and Elkatatny[23] suggested
the use of nanoclay to enhance the stability of the oil-well cement
against carbonation. The outcomes indicate that the use of nanoclay
at a concentration of 1.0% by weight of cement (BWOC) is able to decrease
the portlandite content and permeability of the hydrated cement, which
considerably ameliorates its carbonation resistance. However, the
nanoclay particles considerably raised the plastic viscosity of the
cement slurry; therefore, it reduced its pumpability.The effectiveness
of incorporating the amorphous-nanosilica-latex
(ANL) in enhancing the cement resistance to the carbonation process
was studied by Xu et al.[24] Their outcomes
proved that incorporating the ANL into the cement slurry affected
the cement hydration process and enabled the conversion of the low
Ca/Si ratio hydration products of portlandite that have low stability
in acidic conditions to more stable hydration products. The cement
samples prepared with the ANL also have low permeability caused by
the film formed by the latex and the pore-filling effect of the nanosilica.Abid et al.[2] evaluated the use of two
agricultural wastes of the palm oil fuel ash and rice husk ash with
the cement and compared their ability to improve the cement carbonation
resistance with that provided by the addition of the nanosilica. The
authors reported that the efficiency of the agricultural waste in
enhancing the carbonation resistance is significantly less than that
of the nanosilica. They reported that the ability of the nanosilica
in enhancing the cement carbonation resistance is caused by its ability
to quickly increase the cement compressive strength compared to the
waste materials that work as retarders.The improvement in the
cement carbonation resistance caused by
the addition of various amounts of polypropylene fiber (PPF) was investigated
by Mahmoud and Elkatatny.[25] The results
showed that 0.125% BWOC is the optimum concentration of the PPF that
considerably decreased the carbonation depth and increased the cement
strength compared to the decrease in the case of using the neat cement.Graphite powder is a low-cost product that is mainly mined in China,
India, and Brazil.[26] Several recent studies
evaluated the effect of the graphite particles in different properties
of the cement paste and matrix.[27−30]In this study, the carbonation resistance of
the graphite-modified
cement reacted with a CO2-rich solution at 130 °C
and 10 MPa for 10 days was examined. The alteration in the properties
of the cement matrix and the mechanism responsible for improving graphite-based
oil-well cement stability against carbonation were also studied.
Materials and Methods
Materials
The
procedures of the American
Petroleum Institute (API) standards[31],[32] were followed in this work to
make four cement slurries having different concentrations of graphite.
The first slurry was the control sample, which was prepared using
the Saudi Class G cement, a defoamer, silica flour, a friction-reducing
agent, a fluid loss additive, and an expandable agent that were mixed
with 44% BWOC of water. The control sample did not contain graphite.
The other three samples prepared, Gr1, Gr2, and Gr3, contained the
additives used to make the control sample in addition to 0.1, 0.2,
and 0.3% BWOC of graphite, respectively, as indicated in Table . Class G cement and
the other additives except graphite were supplied by Halliburton.
The selection of these concentrations of graphite was based on the
initial screening that was based on the change of the compressive
strength with graphite concentration. The results of that analysis
indicated that the use of more than 0.3% of graphite reduced the cement
matrix compressive strength considerably; therefore, the maximum concentration
of 0.3% of graphite was considered in this study.
Table 1
Cement Slurries’ Composition;
All Components Are in % BWOC
slurries
components
control sample
Gr1
Gr2
Gr3
silica flour
35%
dispersant
(CFR 3)
0.8%
expandable agent (MicroBond HT)
1.0%
fluid loss controller
(HALADVANC 344)
0.2%
fluid loss controller (HALADVANC 414)
0.5%
defoamer
4.70E-07%
graphite
0%
0.1%
0.2%
0.3%
The graphite powder used in this study was obtained from Saudi
Arabia. This powder is currently used in Saudi Arabia as an additive
to the drilling fluid to mitigate the drilling fluid loss. The graphite
powder used in this work has an average particle size (D50) of 46.6 μm as indicated in Figure , which shows the volume percentage and cumulative
distribution of the graphite powder particles as a function of the
particle size. The graphite powder and Class G cement were also characterized
by X-ray fluorescence (XRF) analysis to investigate their elemental
composition. As indicated in Table , the graphite powder consists mainly of carbon (>90%),
while Saudi Class G cement has no carbon and consists of 72.1% calcium
and 12.1% silica.
Figure 1
The particle size distribution of the graphite powder
used in this
study.
Table 2
The Elemental Composition
of Saudi
Class G Cement and Graphite
elements
Na
Mg
Al
Si
S
Cl
K
Ca
C
Ti
Mn
Fe
Zn
Sr
Saudi Class G cement
0.00
1.33
2.37
12.1
2.43
0.00
0.00
72.1
0.00
0.39
0.05
9.08
0.00
0.15
graphite
1.26
0.21
0.39
4.86
0.15
0.61
0.24
1.11
90.4
0.15
0.17
0.26
0.13
0.06
The particle size distribution of the graphite powder
used in this
study.SEM images of samples:
(a) control sample and (b) sample Gr2. The
control sample is dominated by portlandite, while CSH products dominate
sample Gr2.
Methodology
All samples prepared in this study
were analyzed using the X-ray
diffraction (XRD) technique. As shown in Figure , samples Gr1 and Gr2 prepared with 0.1 and
0.2% BWOC of graphite, respectively, have considerably low portlandite
concentrations as proven by the reduction in the portlandite peaks
at 2θ’s of 18.01, 34.10, 47.12, and 50.81°. The
quantitative analysis indicated that the control sample and samples
Gr1, Gr2, and Gr3 have portlandite concentrations of 24.5, 19.9, 18.7,
and 21.7%, respectively. This confirms the transformation of the high
portlandite concentration in samples Gr1 and Gr2 to calcium silicate
hydrates (CSH), where these samples have a portlandite content 4.6
and 5.8% less than the portlandite content of the control sample,
respectively.
Figure 3
The XRD patterns for all samples after 24 h of curing.
The XRD patterns for all samples after 24 h of curing.The domination of portlandite in the control sample
and CSH in
sample Gr2 was also confirmed by the scanning electron microscope
(SEM) imaging technique. As indicated by the SEM images of Figure , the large portlandite
particles are distributed among the control sample (Figure a), while the CSH products
are distributed among sample Gr2 with a little presence of portlandite.
Since the stability of portlandite in the CO2-rich environment
is lower than most of the CSH products, it is anticipated that the
cement resistance to the carbonation could be improved after incorporation
of graphite into the cement slurry.[33]
Figure 2
SEM images of samples:
(a) control sample and (b) sample Gr2. The
control sample is dominated by portlandite, while CSH products dominate
sample Gr2.
The use of graphite with a higher concentration, i.e., greater
than 0.2%, as in the case of sample Gr3 that was prepared to have
0.3% of graphite, leads to particle agglomeration, which leads to
the formation of a cement matrix with an irregular structure that
is expected to have low strength. This behavior was noticed before
after incorporating high concentrations of nanoclay particles into
the cement slurry.[34,35]The original compressive
and tensile strength and permeability
of cement matrices representing all the four cement formulations under
study were evaluated after 24 h of preparation and before exposing
the samples to the CO2-saturated solution. After that,
samples representing all formulations under study were reacted with
CO2 after being submerged into deionized water using the
high-pressure, high-temperature (HPHT) reaction vessel in Figure . The vessel temperature
was allowed to increase to 130 °C within 4 h after injecting
CO2 into the vessel, while the pressure of the vessel was
allowed to raise to 10 MPa and controlled at this level using the
pressure relief valve. Then the samples were reacted for 10 days with
the CO2-saturated solution; finally, they were removed
to study the change in their properties.
Figure 4
The HPHT reaction system.
The HPHT reaction system.The following section discusses the procedures
followed to evaluate
the changes in the cement properties and the specifications of the
samples used for every test; as discussed before, some of these properties
were evaluated before and after the carbonation process (i.e., compressive
strength, tensile strength, and permeability), while the carbonation
depth, carbonation area, and change in the microstructure of the cement
were evaluated after cement carbonation.
Carbonation
Depth and Carbonated Area
The effect of graphite addition
on the carbonation depth and carbonated
area of the cement samples was studied using samples with a diameter
of 3.81 cm and a length of 7.62 cm. After carbonation, the carbonation
depth inside the samples was evaluated using the direct measurement
and the micro-computerized tomography (CT) scan technique. After scanning
the samples with the CT technique, they were cut at the middle to
obtain two small samples with a length of 3.81 cm, and then the carbonation
depth measurement was conducted at eight different points along the
circumference of every sample. These points are equally apart; so
at every 45°, one measurement was taken. The average of these
eight measurements is considered as the carbonation depth. The approximate
uncarbonated and carbonated areas were then calculated as a percentage
of the total core sample area.
Microstructure
The optical microscope
was used to study the microstructure of all samples under study to
determine the changes in the carbonated region and to investigate
the capability of graphite to minimize these changes and to affect
the calcium leaching process.
Permeability
Measurement
The permeability
of the solidified samples was measured following the Hagen–Poiseuille
law[36,37] and using samples with a diameter and length
of 3.81 and 1.52 cm, respectively, before and after carbonation of
samples.
Compressive Strength
Measurement
The compressive strength was tested before and
after carbonation
for all samples under study using cubical specimens with edges of
5.08 cm and following the API standard[32] and ASTM standard.[38] The measurement
was performed on three specimens of every sample, and then the average
of the three measurements was considered as the representative compressive
strength for that sample.
Tensile Strength Measurement
The
tensile strength was also tested before and after carbonation. Samples
with a diameter of 3.81 cm and a length of 2.29 cm were used for this
measurement. The tensile strength was determined indirectly using
the Brazilian tensile strength measurement method. For this, every
sample was loaded at two opposite points along its circumference until
it fails, and then the maximum load the sample resists (P) with the sample length (l) and diameter (d) was substituted into eq to calculate the Brazilian tensile strength.[39] For tensile strength measurement, also three
measurements were conducted in three different specimens representing
every sample, and then the average strength of the three measurements
was reported as the average tensile strength.where σt is
the Brazilian tensile strength in MPa; P denotes
the maximum load the sample resists in N; and d and l are the sample’s dimension of diameter and length
in mm, respectively.
Results
and Discussion
Carbonation Depth and Carbonated
Area
The real cores in Figure compare the carbonation depth of all samples (control
sample,
Gr1, Gr2, and Gr3). Sample Gr2 was the best in preventing cement carbonation,
and it showed the minimum carbonation depth compared to the others.
This indicates that adding 0.2% BWOC of graphite was capable to maximize
its ability to resist the CO2-saturated solution attack.
Figure 5
Carbonation
depth of the control, Gr1, Gr2, and Gr3 samples submerged
into the CO2-rich solution at 130 °C and 10 MPa for
10 days. The average carbonation depths of the control sample and
samples Gr1, Gr2, and Gr3 are 2081, 1600, 1460, and 1788 μm,
respectively.
Carbonation
depth of the control, Gr1, Gr2, and Gr3 samples submerged
into the CO2-rich solution at 130 °C and 10 MPa for
10 days. The average carbonation depths of the control sample and
samples Gr1, Gr2, and Gr3 are 2081, 1600, 1460, and 1788 μm,
respectively.The measured carbonation depth
of different samples after 10 days
of carbonation is compared in Figure . The carbonation depth inside the control sample is
2081 μm; incorporating 0.1% BWOC of graphite into sample Gr1
reduced the carbonation depth to 1600 μm, which is 23% less
than that of the control sample. As mentioned earlier, sample Gr2
has the smallest carbonation depth of only 1460 μm, which is
29.8% smaller than that of the control sample. Sample Gr3 experienced
a carbonation depth of 1788 μm; although it is 14.1% smaller
than that of the control sample, it is 22.5% greater than the carbonation
depth of sample Gr2.
Figure 6
The carbonation depth inside the control, Gr1, Gr2, and
Gr3 samples
after reacting with the CO2-rich solution at 130 °C
and 10 MPa for 10 days.
The carbonation depth inside the control, Gr1, Gr2, and
Gr3 samples
after reacting with the CO2-rich solution at 130 °C
and 10 MPa for 10 days.Figure compares
the uncarbonated and carbonated areas for all samples. As indicated
in this figure, the carbonated area inside sample Gr2 is 14.7%, which
is the lowest followed by Gr1 (16.1%), Gr3 (17.9%), and finally the
control sample, which has the highest carbonated area of 20.7% of
the total core sample’s area.
Figure 7
The uncarbonated and carbonated areas
inside the control, Gr1,
Gr2, and Gr3 samples submerged into the CO2-rich solution
at 130 °C and 10 MPa for 10 days.
The uncarbonated and carbonated areas
inside the control, Gr1,
Gr2, and Gr3 samples submerged into the CO2-rich solution
at 130 °C and 10 MPa for 10 days.This considerable decrease in the carbonation depth and area of
the samples prepared with graphite is caused by the reduction in portlandite
and the increase in CSH products in these samples as explained in Figure . The elevated stability
of CSH products in the acidic environment reduces the acidic brine
invasion into the graphite-based samples especially sample Gr2, which
has the lowest portlandite content as proven in Figure .From the previous discussion, we
can conclude that increasing the
graphite content up to 0.2% BWOC increased the stability of the cement
matrix in the CO2-saturated environment. The use of 0.2%
BWOC of graphite is the optimum in improving the cement stability
inside the CO2-rich solution. Increasing the graphite content
to more than 0.2% led to deteriorating the cement matrix and reduced
its resistance to the carbonation process as indicated by the increase
in the carbonation depth and carbonated area shown in Figures and , respectively.Figure compares
the carbonation depth of the control sample and sample Gr2 using micro-CT
images taken at different locations inside these samples (from top
to bottom); both vertical and horizontal projections for both samples
are compared in this figure. Comparing the projection of the different
slices taken for both samples proves that sample Gr2 was more stabilized
into the CO2-rich environment as indicated by the low carbonation
depth in both vertical and horizontal views of sample Gr2 (Figure b) in comparison
with the control sample (Figure a).
Figure 8
Micro-CT scan results for the (a) control sample and (b)
Gr2. The
average carbonation depths of the control sample and sample Gr2 are
2081 and 1460, respectively.
Micro-CT scan results for the (a) control sample and (b)
Gr2. The
average carbonation depths of the control sample and sample Gr2 are
2081 and 1460, respectively.
Permeability
Figure compares the permeability of the samples
before and after interacting with the acidic solution. The results
in Figure prove that,
originally, the control sample’s permeability of 0.0075 millidarcy
is higher than the permeability of the samples including graphite
particles, and sample Gr2 has the lowest original permeability of
0.0055 millidarcy, which is 26.7% less than the permeability of the
control sample. The reduction in the original permeability of the
samples incorporating graphite particles that have less concentration
of portlandite and higher CSH content compared with the control sample
(as explained earlier in Figure ) is caused by the reduction in the permeability of
CSH caused by the high curing temperature as explained by Jeong et
al.[40]
Figure 9
The change in the permeability of the
control, Gr1, Gr2, and Gr3
samples after 10 days of interacting with the CO2-saturated
solution at 130 °C and 10 MPa.
The change in the permeability of the
control, Gr1, Gr2, and Gr3
samples after 10 days of interacting with the CO2-saturated
solution at 130 °C and 10 MPa.After carbonation, the permeability of all samples was decreased;
the control sample permeability was 0.0051 millidarcy, which is reduced
to 0.0035 millidarcy by incorporating 0.2% BWOC of graphite into sample
Gr2 that has a permeability 31.4% smaller than the control sample
permeability. This reduction in the permeability of the samples with
graphite is caused by the pore filling of these small particles, while
the decrease in the permeability of all samples after being reacted
with the CO2-saturated solution is attributed to two facts:
The first is because of curing the samples at a higher temperature
(130 °C) while reacting them with the CO2-saturated
solution[40] compared to the curing at 75
°C during the first 24 h. The second reason is the formation
of CaCO3 during carbonation, which is insoluble in water,
and it densifies the cement matrix and fills the cement matrix pores,
therefore reducing its permeability.Several previous studies
also considered permeability reduction
as a mechanism that could improve the cement carbonation resistance.
Comparing the reduction in the samples’ permeability measurements
in Figure with the
carbonation depths in Figure , it is clear that these results are matched.
Cement Carbonation at the Microstructure Level
After
injection of the CO2 into the formation, carbonic
acid is produced because of the dissolution of CO2 into
the formation of brine as illustrated in eq . When the originally formed carbonic acid
attacks the portlandite, the formation of calcite, which is a white
color compound that is non-soluble in water, will take place as indicated
in eq . This region
dominated by calcite is called the carbonated region, which will keep
moving toward the center of the cement core as long as there is a
continuous source of CO2. The formation of calcite and
the increase in the thickness of the carbonated layer are anticipated
to raise the strength and lower the permeability of the cement matrix
because of the high calcite density.Leaching of the originally
formed calcite is expected in the case where there is a continuous
source that continually provides the system with CO2 as
is the case for the GCS projects as shown by eq . This leaching process at the end will result
in forming a new layer in the outermost part of the cement matrix
(far from the center) that is called the leached layer. This layer
will have higher porosity and permeability and lower strength compared
to the carbonated and uncarbonated (intact) cement layer. This leached
layer is responsible for the deterioration of the cement properties
in the CO2-rich environment.Figure compares
the microscopic images of the control sample and sample Gr2 that was
prepared to have 0.2% BWOC of the graphite particles. The figure indicates
that the uncarbonated region of both samples is dominated by dark
gray color. As illustrated in Figure , for both the control sample and sample Gr1, the transition
region (the region between the carbonated and uncarbonated regions)
has two colors: a dark gray region that represents the uncarbonated
section and a second region dominated by white color. The source for
this white color that also dominated that carbonated region is the
formation of calcite as illustrated earlier.
Figure 10
The microscopic images
taken at different locations inside the
(a) control sample and (b) Gr2 sample reacted with the CO2-saturated solution at 130 °C and 10 MPa for 10 days.
The microscopic images
taken at different locations inside the
(a) control sample and (b) Gr2 sample reacted with the CO2-saturated solution at 130 °C and 10 MPa for 10 days.As shown in Figure , the carbonated region is divided into
two regions. The first region
is the carbonated region 1, which is close to the intact area at the
center of the core; this region is dominated by calcite in both the
control sample and sample Gr1 as proven by the presence of the white
color precipitate. The second region is the carbonated region 2, which
is closer to the boundary of the sample core, as indicated in Figure a for the control
sample; this region experienced a reduction in the white color that
indicates leaching of the calcite, while for sample Gr2, the carbonated
region 2 is dominated by the white color precipitate (calcite) as
indicated in Figure b. This confirms that leaching of calcite did not take place in sample
Gr2.The reductions in the portlandite concentration (Figure ) and the permeability
(Figure ) of the cement
matrix
for sample Gr2 compared with the control sample are the major factors
that raised the cement matrix efficiency to resist calcite leaching
and carbonation.
Compressive Strength
The compressive
strength of the control sample and the graphite-based samples before
and after interacting with the acidic solution for 10 days is compared
in Figure . It is
clear that, before carbonation, the compressive strength of all samples
prepared with graphite is greater than the control sample compressive
strength.
Figure 11
The compressive strength of the control, Gr1, Gr2, and Gr3 samples
after 10 days of interacting with the CO2-saturated solution
at 130 °C and 10 MPa.
The compressive strength of the control, Gr1, Gr2, and Gr3 samples
after 10 days of interacting with the CO2-saturated solution
at 130 °C and 10 MPa.After the carbonation process, the compressive strength of all
samples (including the control sample) was increased, and still, the
graphite-based samples had a compressive strength greater than the
control cement (Figure ). The control sample had a compressive strength of 83.7 MPa,
which was increased by 16.4% to reach 97.4 MPa after incorporating
0.2% BWOC of graphite into sample Gr2. The compressive strength of
sample Gr3 was 85.1 MPa, which is only 1.7% higher than that of the
control sample; it is also 12.6% less than that of sample Gr2.The increase in the cement samples’ compressive strength
after carbonation compared to that before carbonation is attributed
to two reasons: first, the high-temperature conditions under which
the samples were cured during the carbonation process and second,
the formation of CaCO3 during the carbonation process.
CaCO3 is a dense component that leads to densifying the
cement matrix and hence increasing its strength. The compressive strength
of the graphite-based samples outperformed that of the control sample
after the carbonation process because of the early start of the leaching
process in the control sample compared to the graphite-based samples
as discussed earlier and shown in Figure .
Tensile Strength
The measured tensile
strength of the samples considered in this study was evaluated before
and after interacting with the acidic solution for 10 days. The result
of the tensile strength change is shown in Figure . The tensile strength of the samples incorporating
graphite particles outperformed the control sample tensile strength
before and after being reacted with the CO2-rich solution
(Figure ). Before
carbonation, the control sample had a tensile strength of 2.91 MPa,
which was increased with the addition of graphite particles to reach
3.30 MPa for sample Gr2, which was an increment of 13.4% compared
to the control sample.
Figure 12
The tensile strength of the control, Gr1, Gr2,
and Gr3 samples
after 10 days of exposure to the CO2-saturated solution
at 130 °C and 10 MPa. The inserted photos are the real cores
of the samples crushed under the tensile force after being exposed
to the CO2-rich solution.
The tensile strength of the control, Gr1, Gr2,
and Gr3 samples
after 10 days of exposure to the CO2-saturated solution
at 130 °C and 10 MPa. The inserted photos are the real cores
of the samples crushed under the tensile force after being exposed
to the CO2-rich solution.After carbonation, the tensile strength of all cement samples increased.
The control sample tensile strength reached 3.32 MPa, and sample Gr2
that contained 0.2% BWOC of graphite had a tensile strength of 4.11
MPa, which is 23.8% higher than that of the control sample. Blending
of 0.3% BWOC of graphite with the cement reduced the cement tensile
strength before and after carbonation (Figure ).The increase in the tensile strength
of the samples exposed to
the CO2-rich solution compared to their tensile strength
before carbonation is also because of the influence of the high temperature
at which the samples were cured during the carbonation process, as
well as the formation of CaCO3 during the carbonation process.
The tensile strength of the graphite-based samples outperformed that
of the control sample after the carbonation process because of the
early start of the leaching process in the control sample compared
to the graphite-based samples as discussed earlier and shown in Figure .The inserted
photos in Figure are for the real core samples crushed under the tensile
force after interacting with the CO2-rich solution. The
inserted photos indicate that the fracture surface of the control
sample is much rougher compared with the fracture surface of the samples
incorporating graphite; this confirms the domination of the control
sample with microcracks compared with the graphite-based samples.
The propagation of these microcracks during control sample carbonation
leads to the formation of a rough fracture surface when the sample
is exposed to tensile force as explained earlier in the study conducted
by Li et al.[41]
Conclusions
The influence of adding the graphite particles on the properties
of oil-well cement that underwent a CO2 sequestration environment
for 10 days at 130 °C and 10 MPa was studied before and after
carbonation. After 10 days of carbonation, the following conclusions
can be drawn:Blending of 0.2%
BWOC of graphite into the cement slurry
improved the cement matrix ability to resist the carbonation process.
The carbonation depth of the control sample was 2081 μm, and
it was decreased to 1460 μm for the sample with 0.2% BWOC of
graphite. This was also proven by the micro-CT scan performed along
the whole length of 7.62 cm cement samples.The carbonated area of the cement sample prepared without
graphite was 20.7% of the total sample area, while that of the sample
with 0.2% BWOC of graphite was 14.7%. The microscopic images proved
that calcium leaching was delayed by the addition of graphite particles.Incorporation of 0.2% BWOC of graphite maintained
the
matrix permeability at 31.4% less than that of the control sample.
The compressive strength and tensile strength of this sample were
13.4 and 23.8% higher than those of the sample without graphite, respectively.The reductions in the portlandite concentration
and
the permeability of the cement matrix for the samples having 0.2%
BWOC of graphite are the major factors that raised the cement matrix
efficiency to resist calcite leaching and carbonation.