Effect of temperature on ti o2 nanoparticle stabilized sds co2 foam
1. NAME: WAN MOHD SHAHARIZUAN B. MAT LATIF
SUPERVISOR: IR. DR. MOHD ZAIDI B. JAAFAR
831107115535 / MY131031
UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY, MALAYSIA
“The effects of temperature on
Titanium Dioxide (TiO2)
nanoparticles stabilized Sodium
Dodecyl Sulfate (SDS) CO2 foam”
3. 1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 CO2 GAS FLOODING PROBLEMS:
- Early breakthrough of CO2 and viscous fingering.
- Unfavorable mobility ratio and poor sweep efficiency.
- Gravity override.
>>>Improve by WAG or CO2 foam flooding.
4. 1. INTRODUCTION
1.2. PROBLEM OF FOAM FLOODING:
- Instable in high temperature.
- Foam drainage by gravity, capillary forces and shear stress.
- Inter bubble gas diffusion (due to non-uniform size).
- Lost of surfactant due to adsorption and retention.
5. 1.3. OBJECTIVES OF STUDY:
- To study the effect of SDS and TiO2 concentration on
surface tension.
- To study the effect of elevated temperature on CO2 foam
stability.
- To determine the optimum concentration of TiO2
nanoparticles and to compare between the CMC values of
SDS (without nanoparticle).
6. 1.4. SCOPE OF STUDY:
- Foam generated in cylindrical Perspex (5.3 cm x 58.4 cm).
- CO2 gas flow rate used was 20 ml/min.
- Achieved foam quality was 70% (wet foam).
- Brine salinity was 10,000 ppm.
- Foam stability method used was half-life determination.
- Did not include the effect of different salinity, different
type of surfactant, different type of nanoparticle, different
gas flow rate, effect of divalent ions and the oil recovery
experiment.
7. 2. LITERATURE REVIEW:
Year Researcher Title Parameter Result
2012 Yu et al. Generation of
Nanoparticle-
Stabilized
Supercritical
CO2-foams.
(CMTC 150849)
1. CD 1045.
2. CaCO3
nanoparticle
with 0.5 wt%
3. Up to 60oC.
1. CO2 foam stability decreased with elevated
temperature.
2. At 60oC, no foam observed.
3. IFT between CO2 and water increased with elevated
temperature.
2013 Hendraningr
at et al.
Effect of Some
Parameters
Influencing
EOR Process
using Silica
Nanoparticles:
(SPE 165955)
1. SiO2 with
0.05 wt%.
2. Up to 80oC.
1. Temperature influenced the oil recovery with Nano-
EOR.
2. However, the mechanism due to temperature is rather
complicated and not clearly understood yet.
3. It might be decreasing IFT/ intensity of Brownian
movement increase/ reduction of oil viscosity and the
particle size.
8. Year Researcher Title Parameter Result
2014 Sun et al. Utilization of
Surfactant-Stabilized
Foam for EOR by
Adding Nanoparticles.
1. SDS.
2. SiO2 with 1
wt%.
3. Up to 80oC.
1. Half-life decreased with elevated
temperature.
2. Half-life at 60oC and 80oC is 37 and 29
minutes.
3. SDS-SiO2 displaced more oil compared to
SDS only and water flooding.
2014 Hendraningr
at and
Torsaeter
Unlocking the potential
of metal oxides
Nanoparticle to EOR .
(OTC-24696-MS)
1. Al2O3, SiO2 and
TiO2
nanoparticles.
2.Temperature up
to 80oC.
1. Oil recovery experiment.
2. TiO2 has highest oil recovery, followed by
SiO2 and Al2O3.
2014 Mo et al. Study Nanoparticle
Stabilized CO2
Foam for Oil Recovery
at Different Pressure,
Temperature and Rock
Samples
1. SiO2
nanoparticles with
0.5 wt%
concentration.
2.Temperature up
to 60oC.
1. Oil recovery increased from 25 oC to 45oC,
due to viscosity reduction.
2. However, only slightly increased in oil
recovery from 45oC to 60oC, due to foam
stability decreased.
9. SUMMARY OF LITERATURE VIEW:
1. Oil recovery increased with foam stability.
2. Foam stability decreased with elevated temperature.
3. Nanoparticles increased the foam stability.
4. However, only one paper had studied the effect of
nanoparticles in increasing the foam stability at elevated
temperature (SiO2 by Sun et al., 2014).
10. 3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:
1. Measured the surface tension to determine the CMC of SDS
(from 9 selected concentration; 0.005, 0.01, 0.025, 0.05, 0.1,
0.2, 0.23, 0.5 and 1 wt%).
2. SDS-CO2 foam stability test (at four selected concentrations;
0.025, 0.5, 0.23 and 0.5 wt%.
3. Tested at four temperatures; 25oC, 40oC, 60oC and 80oC.
4. TiO2-SDS-CO2 foam stability test at five selected TiO2
concentrations; 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4 and 0.5 wt%.
12. 4. RESULT AND DISCUSSIONS:
0
10
20
30
40
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Surfacetension/mN/m
SDS concentration/wt %
SDS concentration vs. Surface Tension
SDS only
SDS+0.1 wt%
TiO2
At below CMC, the surfactant molecules are loosely integrated into the water structure with a monolayer
forming at the interface.
In the region of the CMC, the surfactant water structure is saturated with monomers and surfactant molecules
begin to build their own structure called micelles in the bulk solution. The monolayer at the interface also
reaches saturation.
The number of monomers adsorbed at the surface remains the same but the micelles will increase as the
concentration increases above the CMC.
(Liu et al., 2005).
Due to adsorption of SDS by the TiO2 nanoparticle, the concentration of SDS decreased, thus increased the
surface tension.
13. Where,
Qb = Foam quality, %
Vg = Volume of gas, ml = 20 ml/min x 3 min = 60 ml
VL = Volume of liquid, ml = range from 20 ml to 30 ml
DETERMINATION OF FOAM QUALITY:
Qb = Vg ×100%
Vg+VL
When VL = 20 ml, When VL = 30 ml,
Qb = 60 x 100% = 75% Qb = 60 x 100% = 67%
80 90
Thus, foam quality within range of 67~75% (wet foam).
14. 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
25 40 60 80
Halflife/min
Temperature/oC
Temperature vs. Half life
Half life 0.025 wt%
Half life 0.05 wt%
Half life CMC 0.23 wt%
Half life 0.5 wt%
15. y = -2.002ln(x) + 32.926
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
20 40 60 80
Surfacetension/mN/m
Temperature/oC
0.025 wt%
0.05 wt%
CMC 0.23
wt%
CMC + 0.1
wt% TiO2
Temperature vs. SDS Surface
As the temperature raised, the kinetic energy of molecules increased,
resulted in a decreased in attractive forces between the molecules which in
turn reduced the surface tension of the surfactant solutions (Sharma and
Shah, 1985).
17. EXPLANATION:
1. Foam stability increased with TiO2 concentration until reached
0.3 wt% (optimum).
2. As the particle concentration is low, there are not enough
particles to attach completely at the interface around the CO2
bubbles and when the particle concentration increase, more
particles could be adsorb at the CO2 bubbles interface, which
stabilize the produced CO2 foam.
3. However, when the TiO2 nanoparticle was further increased up
to 0.5 wt%, the half-life of the generated CO2 foam suddenly
decreased.
4. It is believe that particle concentration occur in the highly
concentrate nanoparticle dispersions, which inhibit the CO2
foam generations (Yu et al., 2012).
18. Based on the above table, the ratio of half-life foam stability at optimum
concentration of TiO2 (which was 0.3 wt%) over CMC value only (without
nanoparticle) obtained at 25oC, 40oC, 60oC and 80oC were 1.67, 1.67,
1.68 and 1.40 only respectively, while the average was 1.60.
19. 5. CONCLUSIONS
Objectives Conclusions
i. To study the effect of SDS and TiO2
concentration on surface tension
The surface tension was decreased with SDS concentration.
The determined CMC was 0.23 wt%.
It was obvious that the presence of only 0.1 wt% of TiO2 decreased the surface
tension rather than increased.
The surface tension was decreased with elevated temperature.
ii. To study the effect of elevated
temperature on CO2 foam stability.
The foam stability was decreased with elevated temperature.
However, the foam stability test of CMC and above CMC at elevated
temperature showed slightly increased only, which indicated that the
determination of CMC was very important for the optimum concentration of
SDS.
iii. To determine the optimum
concentration of TiO2 nanoparticles
and to compare between the CMC
values of SDS (without nanoparticle).
.
TiO2 increased the foam stability at all tested concentrations and temperatures.
The optimum concentration of TiO2 obtained was 0.3 wt% (3000 ppm). In
addition, the concentration of TiO2 that above 0.3 wt% showed decreased in
the half-life foam stability test.
The ratio between the optimum concentrations of TiO2 and CMC value
(without nanoparticle) obtained was 1.60 only
20. 6. RECOMMENDATIONS:
i. To use smaller gas flow rate, such as 1 ml/min and longer
stirrer period.
ii. To conduct the experiment with constant temperature during
the experiment, especially at the high temperature as 80oC and
above.
iii. To compare with other surfactants, such as AOS or Triton X-
100 and other nanoparticles, such as SiO2 and Al2O3.
iv. To study the effect of nanoparticles towards wettability.
v. To compare between CO2 foam, WAG and FAWAG in the oil
recovery experiment on the elevated temperature.
21. 7. REFERENCES:
Yu, J. J., An, C., Mo, D., Liu, N. and Lee, R. (2012). Study of
Adsorption and Transportation Behavior of Nanoparticles in
Three Different Porous Media. Society of Petroleum Engineers
(SPE): Richardson, TX; paper SPE 153337.
Sun, Q., Li, Z., Li, S., Jiang, L., Wang, J. and Wang. P. (2014).
Utilization of Surfactant-Stabilized Foam for Enhanced Oil
Recovery by Adding Nanoparticles. Energy Fuels (28): 2384-
2394.
Hendraningrat, L. and Torsaeter, O. (2014). Unlocking the Potential of
Metal Oxides Nanoparticles to Enhance the Oil Recovery.
Paper OTC-24696-MS presented at the Offshore Technology
Cconference Asia. March 25-28. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia,
