Abstract
Emulsions have been widely used in many industrial applications, and emulsion flooding is applied as an effective chemical enhanced oil recovery technique and used for acid treatment of the reservoir rocks. Most of the techniques used for supplying emulsions to the oil fields are batch preparation methods, which generate a batch of emulsion by using homogenizers or by circulation of water and oil with pumps. Emulsion generated through these methods suffers from separation with time, losing its main properties, making it inefficient, less cost-effective, time and power consuming. This paper investigates a novel method for fully controlled in-line generation technique providing fresh and on-demand emulsion to be used instantaneously in the oil field. This method is based on using Liquid–liquid ejector with control valves for mixing water with oil generating a fresh and stable emulsion instead of using a premixed batch of stored emulsion. The performance of the ejector for generation of invert and direct emulsion is studied experimentally. Diesel and water were used as the two liquids forming surfactant-stabilized emulsion. Emulsion stability, external phase, droplet size distribution and emulsion rheology are also investigated experimentally of the generated emulsions. The results showed that the fully controlled ejector is an efficient device for in-line emulsion generation of both water-in-oil (Invert) and oil-in-water (Direct) emulsions at specific and required ratio. For water salinty of 10 g/l or less, the external phase was always water phase, while for salinity of more than 15 g/l the continuous phase of the resulted emulsion is always oil.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Fingas, M.; Fieldhouse, B.; Mullin, J.: Water-in-oil emulsions results of formation studies and applicability to oil spill modelling. Spill Sci. Technol. Bull. 5(1), 81–91 (1999)
Binks, B.P.: Modern Aspects of Emulsion Science. The royal society of, Chemistry (1998)
Saber, M.; Abbassi, R.; Roayaei, E.; Ali, M.: Emulsion flooding for enhanced oil recovery: interactive optimization of phase behavior, microvisual and core-flood experiments. J. Ind. Eng. Chem. 29, 382–391 (2015)
Demikhova, I.I.; et al.: Emulsion flooding for enhanced oil recovery: filtration model and numerical simulation. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 143, 235–244 (2016)
Feng, H.; et al.: Experimental study on a fi ne emulsion fl ooding system to enhance oil recovery for low permeability reservoirs. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 171(March), 974–981 (2018)
Silva, M.; et al.: Study of the stability and homogeneity of water in oil emulsions of heavy oil. Fuel 226, 278–285 (2018)
Khalid, M.; Sultan, A.; Noui-mehidi, M.N.; Al-sarkhi, A.: Effect of Nano-Clay Cloisite 20A on water-in-oil stable emulsion flow at different temperatures. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 106595 (2019)
Briggs, T.R.; DuCassé, F.R.; Clark, L.H.: Experiments on emulsions. IV. J. Phys. Chem. 24(2), 147–160 (2005)
Davies, J.T.: A physical interpretation of drop sizes in homogenizers and agitated tanks, including the dispersion of viscous oils. Chem. Eng. Sci. 42(7), 1671–1676 (1987)
Taisne, L.; Walstra, P.; Cabane, B.: Transfer of oil between emulsion droplets. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 184(2), 378–390 (1996)
Narsimhan, G.; Goel, P.: Drop coalescence during emulsion formation in a high-pressure homogenizer for tetradecane-in-water emulsion stabilized by sodium dodecyl sulfate. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 238(2), 420–432 (2001)
Besagni, G.: Ejectors on the cutting edge: the past, the present and the perspective. Energy 170, 998–1003 (2019)
Cao, X.C.; Wan, J.Q.; Song, L.Y.: Experimental study of plate freezer with the ejector. Procedia Eng. 121, 1238–1244 (2015)
Thongtip, T.; Aphornratana, S.: Development and performance of a heat driven R141b ejector air conditioner: application in hot climate country. Energy 160, 556–572 (2018)
Śmierciew, K.; Gagan, J.; Butrymowicz, D.: Application of numerical modelling for design and improvement of performance of gas ejector. Appl. Therm. Eng. 149, 85–93 (2019)
Sharma, D.; Patwardhan, A.; Ranade, V.: Effect of turbulent dispersion on hydrodynamic characteristics in a liquid jet ejector. Energy 164, 10–20 (2018)
Perry, B.T.; Bullock, S.A.: Apparatus for Forming Emulsions of Oil and Water,” 1,578,187 (1926)
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Saudi Aramco Oil Company for their financial support under grant #CER02447.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendices
Appendix
Summary of Ejector Experiments
# | Motive, % | Suction, % | Motive surfactant, % | Suction surfactant, % | Water TDS g/l | External Phase | Remarks |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ej.01 | Water, 41.5% | Diesel, 58.5% | – | U108, 10% | 9.02 | Water | Stable |
Ej.02 | Water, 36.2% | Diesel, 63.8% | – | U108, 10% | 2.19 | Water | Less stable than Ej.1 |
Ej.03 | Diesel, 56.5% | Water, 43.5% | U108, 10% | – | 18 | Diesel | Separated to 2 sub-emulsions |
Ej.04 | Diesel, 56.5% | Water, 43.5% | U108, 10% | – | 16 | Diesel | Separated to 2 sub-emulsions |
Ej.05 | Diesel, 56.1% | Water, 43.9% | U108, 10% | – | 30 | Diesel | Separated to 2 sub-emulsions |
Ej.06 | Diesel, 47.6% | Water, 52.4% | Closite20, 0.62% | – | 10 | – | Three layers of diesel-emulsion-water |
Ej.07 | Diesel, 49.4% | Water, 50.6% | Closite20, 0.62% | OFD16-017, 0.33% | 15 | – | Three layers of diesel-emulsion-water |
Ej.08 | Diesel, 51.8% | Water, 48.2% | U108, 2.5% | OFD16-017, 0.33% | 15 | Diesel | Separated to 2 layers of sub-emulsions and 1 layer of water |
Ej.09 | Diesel, 56.2% | Water, 43.8% | U108B, 10% | – | 10 | Water | Stable |
Ej.10 | Diesel, 60% | Water, 40% | U108B, 10% | – | 30 | Diesel | Separated to 2 sub-emulsions |
Ej.11 | Diesel, 55.3% | Water, 44.7% | U108B, 10% | – | 50 | Diesel | – |
Ej.12 | Water, 44% | Diesel, 56% | – | U108B, 10% | 50 | Diesel | – |
Ej.13 | Diesel, 54% | Water, 46% | U108B, 9% | 30 | Diesel | Separated to 2 sub-emulsions | |
Ej.14 | Water, 58.6% | Diesel, 41.4% | – | U108B, 5% | 30 | Oil | Three layers of diesel-emulsion-water |
Ej.15 | Water, 55.2% | Diesel, 44.8% | – | U108B, 10% | 30 | Oil | Stable |
Ej.16 | Water, 61.5% | Diesel, 38.5% | – | U108B, 10% | 30 | Oil | Three layers of diesel-emulsion-water |
Ej.17 | Water, 45.9% | Diesel, 54.1% | – | U108B, 5% | 30 | Oil | Stable |
Ej.18 | Water, 43.6% | Diesel, 56.4% | – | U108B, 3% | 30 | Oil | Stable |
Ej.19 | Water, 43.6% | Diesel, 56.4% | – | U108B, 2% | 30 | Oil | Less stable than Ej.18 |
Ej.20 | Water, 47.4% | Diesel, 52.6% | – | U108B, 10% | 30 | Oil | Stable |
Ej.21 | Water, 60% | Diesel, 40% | – | U108B, 10% | 30 | Oil | Stable |
Ej.22 | Water, 50% | Diesel, 50% | – | ARMEEN2C, 1% | 30 | Oil | Unstable |
Ej.23 | Water, 46% | Diesel, 54% | – | ARMEEN2C, 2.5% | 30 | Oil | Unstable |
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Al-sarkhi, A., Salim, O., Mohamed, NM. et al. Controlled In-Line Generation of Stable Oil–Water Emulsions for Enhanced Oil Recovery. Arab J Sci Eng 47, 12169–12182 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13369-022-06664-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13369-022-06664-1