2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.jngse.2015.09.070
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Experimental study of some important factors on nonwetting phase recovery by cocurrent spontaneous imbibition

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
27
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 61 publications
(33 citation statements)
references
References 55 publications
2
27
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, when the non-wetting phase viscosity was constant with increasing wetting phase viscosity, it is observed that the final oil recovery had no significant change for both glassbead-packing and quartz-sand-packing (Meng et al, 2016). Hamidpour et al (2015) reported the similar observation by use of limestone samples. It is proposed that the imbibition rate decreased with increasing wetting phase viscosity and the capillary number may be consistent for different wetting phase viscosities, which results in the similar final oil recovery Chatzls et al, 1988).…”
Section: Fluid Viscositysupporting
confidence: 69%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, when the non-wetting phase viscosity was constant with increasing wetting phase viscosity, it is observed that the final oil recovery had no significant change for both glassbead-packing and quartz-sand-packing (Meng et al, 2016). Hamidpour et al (2015) reported the similar observation by use of limestone samples. It is proposed that the imbibition rate decreased with increasing wetting phase viscosity and the capillary number may be consistent for different wetting phase viscosities, which results in the similar final oil recovery Chatzls et al, 1988).…”
Section: Fluid Viscositysupporting
confidence: 69%
“…However, they also did not give the characteristic length to account for the different boundary conditions. Hamidpour et al (2015) conducted the one-dimensional and multi-dimensional imbibition experiments with sandstone and limestone partly covered by water. The experimental results were used to verify analytical and numerical models but they also did not give the reliable characteristic length to scale up their imbibition data.…”
Section: Combination Of Co-and Counter-current Imbibitionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For this boundary condition, oil can only be produced by counter-current imbibition. In addition, oil production is linear with square root of imbibition time for conventional core (Hamidpour et al, 2015). However, more studies show that the time exponent for linear correlation (Meng, 2017).…”
Section: Core Scale Of Spontaneous Imbibition With Different Boundarymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Pooladi-Darvish and Firoozabadi [37] analyzed the difference of counter-current imbibition and cocurrent imbibition after water breakthrough in the cores with different permeabilities. Some scholars [28,[38][39][40][41][42] have studied the effects of core wettability, initial water saturation, interfacial tension (IFT), fluid viscosity ratio, soaking time, and permeability on dynamic imbibition. Hammond and Unsal [43] simulated and developed the correlation between the displacement pressure and the imbibition rate during the dynamic imbibition process.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%