| Literature DB >> 35566916 |
Shijie Zhu1,2, Xinsheng Xue1,3, Jian Zhang1,3, Shilun Zhang1,3, Zhezhi Liu2.
Abstract
Polymer flooding is one of the most important enhancing oil recovery (EOR) technologies in the world. With the optimization of polymer synthesis, the performance of polymer solutions has been greatly improved, which can adapt to more complex oil and gas reservoirs. However, with the continuous improvement of the properties of polymer solutions, the elastic property of polymer solutions is significantly improved, and the rheological law has also changed. This series of changes affects the application of polymer flooding reservoir numerical simulation technology. Therefore, constructing an accurate description model and precise limitation conditions is particularly important. The rheological curve with a wide shear range (0.1~10,000 s-1) and the viscoelasticity of the two polymers (partially hydrolysed polyacrylamide (HPAM) and dendritic hydrophobic association polymer (DHAP)) were analyzed and tested by a rotating rheometer. The results showed that under the experimental conditions, the rheological curve of both polymers can be described by the Carreau rheological model. Meanwhile, the structural viscosity of the hydrophobically associating polymer solution (DHAP) greatly improved the elasticity of the solution and led to the change of elastic modulus. Considering the influence of elastic characteristics on the rheological curve, the relaxation time spectrum derived from small vibration experimental data was used to limit the characteristic relaxation time, that is, the value range of λ. It was observed that the experimental data were highly matched with the nonlinear regression fitting curve of the Carreau rheological model. Therefore, the relationship between different test parameters should be fully considered while studying the rheological constitutive equation of viscoelastic fluid, so as to optimize and improve the equation of it.Entities:
Keywords: characteristic relaxation time; constitutive equation; dendrimer hydrophobically associating polymer; rheology; viscoelasticity
Year: 2022 PMID: 35566916 PMCID: PMC9101456 DOI: 10.3390/polym14091747
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Polymers (Basel) ISSN: 2073-4360 Impact factor: 4.329
Comparison of dendritic polymer solutions with other polymers.
| Research Scholar | Research Content |
|---|---|
| Shijie Zhu [ | Partially hydrolysed polyacrylamide (HPAM) and dendritic hydrophobic association polymer (DHAP) are compared with independently synthetic dendrimer polymers |
| Leiting Shi [ | HAWP is compared with independently synthetic dendrimer polymers |
| Neha [ | Influence of excluded volume interactions on the dynamics of dendrimer and star polymers in layered random flow is analysed |
| Haipeng Xing [ | The effects of different bendy structures on the performance of the polymer solution are compared |
Figure 1The complete rheological curve of the polymer solution (x axis—shear rate; y axis—shear viscosity).
Figure 2The molecular formula of HPAM.
Figure 3The molecular formula of DHAP.
Figure 4The elastic and viscous modulus of the HPAM.
Figure 5The viscous and elastic moduli of DHAP at different concentrations.
Figure 6The first normal stress difference of DHAP and HPAM at different concentrations.
Dynamic modulus of polymers at different concentrations.
| Type | HPAM | DHAP | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Concentration, mg/L | Formulas | Fitting accuracy | Formulas | Fitting accuracy |
| 1000 | G* = 0.1152f0.7606 | R2 = 0.9974 | G* = 0.4468f0.1985 | R2 = 0.9923 |
| 1400 | G* = 0.2298f0.6465 | R2 = 0.9955 | G* = 0.9689f0.1414 | R2 = 0.9972 |
| 2000 | G* = 0.3956f0.5209 | R2 = 0.9966 | G* = 2.3758f0.1541 | R2 = 0.9945 |
| 2500 | G* = 0.6459f0.4677 | R2 = 0.9973 | G* = 2.6475f0.1562 | R2 = 0.9961 |
| Note | G* within the study | 0.1~1 Pa | G* within the study | 0.27~2 Pa |
The relaxation spectral characteristics of the two polymers.
| Type | HPAM | DHAP | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Concentration | 1000 | 1400 | 2000 | 2500 | 1000 | 1400 | 2000 | 2500 |
| 0.01 | 5.12 | 6.27 | 3.21 | 5.04 | 4.42 | 6.67 | 4.30 | 10.14 |
| 0.1 | 0.18 | 0.05 | 0.89 | 1.28 | 8.87 × 10−9 | 0.12 | 1.55 | 1.06 |
| 1 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 0.28 | 0.46 | 0.13 | 0.26 | 0.60 | 0.72 |
| 10 | 0.01 | 0.04 | 0.13 | 0.25 | 0.19 | 0.30 | 1.02 | 1.21 |
| 100 | 5.9 × 10−10 | 1.65 × 10−9 | 4.83 × 10−9 | 1.68 × 10−9 | 0.15 × 10−7 | 0.01 × 10−6 | 5.95 × 10−6 | 5.94 × 10−6 |
The polymer relaxation time range was studied within the concentration range.
| Polymer Type | 1000 mg/L | 1400 mg/L | 2000 mg/L | 2500 mg/L |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HPAM | λ < 0.01 | λ < 0.01 | 0.01 < λ < 0.1 | 0.01 <λ < 0.1 |
| DHAP | 0.5 < λ < 1 | 0.5 <λ < 1 | 1 < λ < 2 | 1 < λ < 2 |
Figure 7The viscosity curve of the HPAM.
Figure 8Rheological curve before and after degradation (2500 mg/L).
Figure 9Effect of shearing on microstructure of HPAM [11].
Figure 10DHAP viscosity curves at different concentrations.
Calculation results of the two polymer solutions (Carreau–Yasuda model).
| Polymer | Concentration, mg/L |
|
| λ |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HPAM | 1000 | 852.9 | 4.4 | 0.002 | 0.155 | −0.250 |
| 2000 | 2499 | 4.8 | 0.005 | 0.176 | −0.306 | |
| 2500 | 7542.9 | 5.3 | 0.008 | 0.152 | −0.253 | |
| DHAP | 1000 | 3250.5 | 5.5 | 0.869 | 0.420 | 0.131 |
| 2000 | 6710 | 15.4 | 1.46 | 0.391 | −0.589 | |
| 2500 | 16,890 | 17.2 | 1.687 | 0.443 | 0.215 |