Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Group U2: Kyle Demel Keaton Hamm Bryan Holekamp Rachel Houk

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Group U2: Kyle Demel Keaton Hamm Bryan Holekamp Rachel Houk"— Presentation transcript:

1 Group U2: Kyle Demel Keaton Hamm Bryan Holekamp Rachel Houk

2 Presentation Topics  Introduction  Research Article ◦ Background ◦ Experiment ◦ Applications ◦ Summary  Further Applications  Additional Research

3 Enhanced Recovery Techniques  Gas injection  Ultrasonic stimulation  Waterflooding/Water injection

4 Wetting http:// in_oil_on_brass_surface.JPG n_oil_on_glass_surface.JPG Ability of liquid to maintain contact with a surface Adhesive forces determine contact angle http://

5 Research Article  “Experimental study and mathematical model of nanoparticle transport in porous media” ◦ Binshan Ju, Tailiang Fan -The following information and graphics are from the listed article unless cited otherwise.

6 Research Topics  Studied two-phase fluid flow through sandstone (which has low permeability)  Experimented with wetting using polysilicon nanoparticles to achieve better flow through oil reservoirs for enhanced recovery  Developed mathematical model for flow through random porous media oduction/technology_images/4350/1972_big_web.jpg

7  Two classes by wettability  LHPN-lipophobic hydrophilic polysilicon nanoparticles  HLPN-hydrophobic lipophilic polysilicon nanoparticles

8  Particle size from 10 to 500 nm  Mean size ~ 70 nm  Roughly spherical  Pore throat size from 0.5 to 5,000 nm  Pore chambers from 5,000 to 63,000 nm

9  Large PN can block pore throats  Smaller PN can bridge to block pore throats  PN can also adsorb to pore walls  Wettability of porous material can be altered by adsorption of PN Pore throat HLPN Pore Wall

10  (A) Wetting angle much larger than π/2  (B) Wetting angle much smaller than π/2

11  Sandstone cores are taken from drilling wells in H.Z.J. oil field in China  Effective permeability is measured before and after treatment with HLPN  Effective permeabilities increase 1.6 to 2.1 times


13  Mass balance is solved for pressure differential  Velocity is determined by Darcy’s law  PN concentration distribution is obtained from the convection- diffusion-adsorption equation  Calculate new values for porosity, absolute permeability, and relative permeability and iterate

14  Using hydrophobic lipophilic polysilicon nanoparticles (HLPN) made the surfaces oil-wet  Tested on sandstone  Used as a method to maintain reservoir pressure  Constraints on high and low flow rates ◦ Must be economical ◦ Cannot damage reservoir Application: Water Injection

15  The porosity and permeability decline as injection volume increase due to particle adsorption onto pore walls  Water injection capacity increases from 0-1.8 PV and then starts to decrease, indicating a possible saturation of the core with particles Application: Water Injection s/Chastek-Hudson-L-patchy-Fig2d-300c_1.jpg

16 Optimum at 1.8 PV Application: Water Injection

17  Used lipophobic hydrophilic polysilicon nanoparticles to make the reservoir water-wet  Goal to recover more oil by using water to “push” the oil out Application: Enhanced Oil Recovery http://

18 Application: Enhanced Oil Recovery The relations between oil recovery and injecting volume of LHPN.

19 Comparison of Experiment and Model The comparison of permeability ratios between experimental and numerical results.

20 Summary of Article Analysis of method to enhance oil recovery –studied two-phase fluid flow –experimented with wetting Nanoparticles of 10 to 500 nm Pore radii of sandstone was 6 to 63,000 nm –from mercury injection tests Wettability of surface sandstone changes by adsorbing nanoparticles –LHPN –HLPN

21 Summary of Article Nanoparticles can be adsorbed on pore surfaces and reduce the pore radii –changes wettability of surface Sandstone’s effective permeability of water increases from 1.6 to 2.1 times original value The mathematical model, numerical results, and experimental data match each other HLPN can enhance water injection capacity LHPN can improve oil recovery

22 Applications of Nanoparticle Transport Water injection Oil recovery Aerosol instruments Microelectronics Xerography Pharmaceuticals Atmospheric dispersion

23 Additional Research Needed Address assumptions –one-dimensional flow under isothermal conditions –negligible force of gravity –constant viscosity and density of fluids –all fluids behave as Newtonian fluids Wettability effects in other materials Improvements to nano- particles n/photos/1363757046.shtml

24 More Reservoir Nanotechnology Improve oil and gas production Produce lighter and stronger equipment Reduce pollution of processing Increase types of smart fluids –advanced drag reduction –wettability alteration –anticorrosive coatings –magnetic properties Introduce new sensors –temperature and pressure ratings –fluid-flow monitoring and recognition

25 Reservoir Nanotechnology Future Short-term: –Enhance gas-to-liquids technology –Improve LNG quality and recovery Mid-term –Develop superpipelines –Transport compressed natural gas Long-term –Process methane hydrates –Integrate electric plants and processing plants

26 Questions?

27 Rebuttal Group from U2

28 Rebuttal from Group U2: Group U2: -Kyle Demel -Kyle Demel -Keaton Hamm -Keaton Hamm -Bryan Holekamp -Bryan Holekamp -Rachael Houk -Rachael Houk

29 We agree that: –The article was appropriate (A+) –The introduction was good –Slides contained adequate information –The pictures complemented the topic –Adequate eye contact was given Improvements for us to work on: –Focus less on detailed equations –Do a better job clarifying the logic and purpose of the nanotechnology –Make graphics bigger –Have less text in some slides Improvements for critiques: –Include better/more pictures –Do not just repeat what we said; explain how we can improve; –Find motivation to actually critique ong%20equations/tsukmeibols/humor- penguin-logic.jpg

30 Review by Group U1- Kamal, John, Robert, Rodrigo to U2 The group did a fine job picking an appropriate article on the subject, but there was a lot of confusion at first as to what the technology actually did. They seemed to have a hard time explaining that to us. The introduction to the topic was good, and they provided a lot of information about why there is a need for better recovery processes. They had some good pictures that helped accentuate the topic and then there were some pictures that were really generic. After the Q&A session we had a better idea of how the technology works, and the group did a good job overall.

31 Group 3: Krista Melish James Kancewick Phillip Keller Mike Jones

32 PRESENTATION REVIEW  Good presentation format  Introduction, article, applications, further research  Moderate amount of eye contact  One of the presenters looked mostly at the slides during presentation  Adequate use of figures  Inconsistency in font sizing  Some cases having the font size too small  Low to moderate use of “filler phrases”  Such as “like” and “uhhhh”  Overall Grade: 90 MATERIAL REVIEW  Article relevant to the application of nanotechnology in reservoir engineering  Use of hydrophobic lipophilic polysilicon nanoparticles (HLPN) made the surfaces oil-wet  Goal to recover more oil by using water to “push” the oil out  Questions for further research:  What are the disposal methods for hydrophobic lipophilic polysilicon nanoparticles ?  What are the effects of HLPN on materials other than sandstone?


34 T HE P RESENTATION Nanoparticles can be used to enhance the percentage of oil recovered from the ground. This is done by changing the wettability of the oil reservoir, making it easier for water injection techniques to be used. Effective use of images to describe concepts. Slides contained the information necessary to understand the topic. M AIN P OINTS

35 Nanotechnology in reservoir engineering  Review of Team U2 by Team U5 – Jaynesh Shah, Greg Pudewell, Edwin L. Youmsi Pete and John Pack.

36 Oral and Quality of Slides Review  The speakers did a good job of speaking without many pauses or filler words  They were knowledgeable on the subject, showing they did a lot of research  The slides had a consistent theme  Try n0t reading off the slides as much  At times, a bit wordy

37 Technical Review  The presentation was a bit confusing technically  Good use of technical jargon  Paper selection was relevant and recent  There were a lot of equations  Highlight the important ones

38 Of the lecture presented by Group U2 - Kyle Demel, Keaton Hamm, Bryan Holekamp, Rachel Houk Reviewed by Group U6 - Pavitra Timbalia, Michael Trevathan, Jared Walker

39  Great use of illustrations; they had them on almost every slide.  They all dressed nicely and were knowledgeable about their topic. They also maintained eye contact with the audience.  There were too many equations presented for us to understand the most relevant ones.

40  The technology presented was using nanoparticles which were either hydrophobic or lycophobic to increase production of oil in a reservoir. The particular particle used would depend on a specific situation.  Further research is needed to determine the effects of the nanoparticles on the casing and tubing.  Applications could include using this technology in other formations besides sandstone.

Download ppt "Group U2: Kyle Demel Keaton Hamm Bryan Holekamp Rachel Houk"

Similar presentations

Ads by Google