Enhanced Oil Recovery :: News :: ChemistryViews Page 1 of 2

Enhanced Oil Recovery

Author: Nancy McGuire
Published: 28 May 2015
Copyright: Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
Source / Publisher: Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects/Elsevier

Related Articles
News: World's Largest Carbon Capture Plant
News: Carbon Capture Project Launched
News: Superabsorbent Polymer For Oil Spill Treatment
News: Emissions Recovery System
During fracking operations, foam is injected into an extraction site to plug side pores and keep the oil
flowing in the main recovery channel. This also helps prevent water from contaminating the recovered oil.
Polymers form stable foams; however, their viscosity makes it difficult to force them into small pores. Polymer
foams become less viscous and eventually break down at temperatures higher than 85 C. Gel-enhanced
polymer foams overcome many of these problems, providing effective plugging and stability.

Guang Zhao and colleagues, China University of Petroleum, Qingdao, evaluated the performance of foams
enhanced with comb-polymer gels in high-temperature reservoirs using laboratory experiments and oilfield
tests. Comb-polymer gels form viscoelastic shells around foam bubbles, protecting them against shrinkage
and drainage and improving their stability. The comb polymer gel increases the solution viscosity, but
decreases its surface tension. This reduces the foam volume but increases the thickness and strength of the
film.

Oilfield tests in high-temperature reservoirs (100 C) showed that the gel-enhanced foam increased oil
production and decreased water contamination.

Enhanced foam stability by adding comb polymer gel for in-depth profile control in high temperature
reservoirs,
Guang Zhao, Caili Dai, Yanhui Zhang, Ang Chen, Zhihu Yan, Mingwei Zhao,
Colloids Surf., A 2015, 482, 115124.
DOI: 10.1016/j.colsurfa.2015.04.041

Article Views: 816

http://www.chemistryviews.org/details/news/7972991/Enhanced_Oil_Recovery.html 2015/11/12
 Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 482 (2015) 115124

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical and

Engineering Aspects
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/colsurfa

Enhanced foam stability by adding comb polymer gel for in-depth

prole control in high temperature reservoirs
Guang Zhao , Caili Dai , Yanhui Zhang, Ang Chen, Zhihu Yan, Mingwei Zhao
State Key Laboratory of Heavy Oil Processing, China University of Petroleum, Qingdao 266580, Shandong, PR China

h i g h l i g h t s g r a p h i c a l a b s t r a c t

A long-term stability of gel enhanced (a) and (b): morphology of conventional aqueous foam; (c) and (d) morphology of gel enhanced foam.
foam was prepared for in-depth
prole control in high temperature
reservoirs.
Stability mechanisms of gel enhanced
foam by comb polymer gel were stud-
ied.
Enhanced oil recovery mechanisms of
gel enhanced foam were proposed.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: A long-term stability of gel enhanced foam as an in-depth prole control agent in high temperature
Received 17 February 2015 reservoirs was successfully prepared by adding comb polymer gel. The increased viscosity of gel brings
Received in revised form 12 April 2015 a negative effect on surface tension which reduces the gel enhanced foam volume. In turn, the increased
Accepted 22 April 2015
viscosity could enhance the thickness and strength of foam lm which increases foam stability and
Available online 4 May 2015
plugging capacity in porous media. The morphology results show that the gel enhanced foam has a
thicker bubble lm which enhances its foam stability. The effect of injection mode, gasliquid ratio, gas
Keywords:
injection velocity and formation permeability on the plugging capacity was investigated by single sand-
Gel enhanced foam
In-depth prole control
pack experiments. When the gasliquid ratio and gas injection velocity were respectively set at 1:1 and
Stability 0.5 ml/min, co-injection of gel enhanced foaming solution and gas could obtain a better plugging capacity
Plugging capacity in high permeability sand-packs. Parallel sand-pack experiments show that the prole improvement
Oileld application capacity of high formation permeability ratio is much better than that of low formation permeability
ratio. The visual simulation experiment was also conducted to illustrate the owing behavior of gel
enhanced foam. By Jiamin effect or Jamin superimposed effect, directly plugging and bridging in the
large pore space, the gel enhanced foam can effectively reduce the permeability of porous media in high

Corresponding authors. Tel.: +86 532 86981183.

E-mail addresses: zhaoguang.sdau@163.com (G. Zhao), daicl306@163.com
(C. Dai).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfa.2015.04.041
0927-7757/ 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
116 G. Zhao et al. / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 482 (2015) 115124

permeability zones and divert uid into low permeability zones, thus increases the swept volume. The
treatment has been successfully used in Henan oileld of China which provides a reference to water
production control in other similar high temperature oilelds.
2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Foam has been widely used for water production control in oil
recovery operations [14]. When being injected into formation, the
foam can increase apparent viscosity of gas and reduce gas mobil-
ity in high permeability zones. The present of foam could improve
oil swept volume effectively by pluging throat pores in high per-
meability zones and diverting uid into low permeability zones
[5,6]. Additionally, foam is usually formed by surfactant which may
decrease oil-water interfacial tension and improve oil displacement
efciency [7,8]. Thereby, the studies on the application of foam have
attracted great attention in oileld industry.
Aqueous foams are the initial conventional foams for oil recov-
ery applications. However, the interfaces of aqueous foams are
only stabilized with surfactants which can be easily collapsed
when being transported through porous media in the formation.
Therefore, aqueous foams are not applicable for long-term water
production control treatments. To obtain the long-term stability of Fig. 1. Schematic of foam generation apparatus.

foam in high permeability zones, polymers and polymer gels have

been used as the external phase to increase foam stability [913].
When polymers have been added into surfactant solution, the vis-
cosity of liquid phase increases which decreases liquid drainage
rate, thus enhances foam stability. Compared with aqueous foams,
polymer enhanced foam obtains a better gas blocking capability,
greater decay half-life, and larger residual resistance factor after
defoaming [1416]. However, the stability of polymer enhanced
foam could be conned by the limited increased viscosity of poly-
mers. As polymer enhanced foam owing in porous media, the
viscosity would gradually reduce due to shear degradation and
dilution caused by contacting with reservoir minerals and uids
[17,18], especially after a long-term water ooding. In addition,
the viscosity of polymers signicantly reduces with increasing tem-
perature [19], and polymers are usually degraded when reservoir
temperature is higher than 85 C. All above may result in instable
foam and nally failed water production control treatments in high
temperature reservoirs.
Currently, using polymer gels as an external phase is another
important method to improve foam stability. The gel enhanced
foam behaves as polymer enhanced foams at the initial of injection
stage. But the viscosity of gel enhanced foaming solution gradu-
ally increases when transporting in porous media. The increased
viscosity will form a viscoelastic shell which improves the ow-
ing resistance of water on foam lm and reduces liquid drainage
rate, then enhances foam stability. After gelation, bubbles are rmly
trapped within the high viscosity gel lm in porous media which
improves plugging capacity in high permeability zones. Due to
the high viscosity, the gel enhanced foam still behaves as a vis-
coelastic gel even after the bubble defoaming which ensures a high
plugging capacity [20,21]. It can be an effective method for sta-
bilizing the foam and controlling water production. In this paper,
a gel enhanced foam system based on comb polymer was stud-
ied for in-depth prole control in high temperature reservoirs.
There are few reports about foaming properties and in-depth pro-
le control capacity of this gel enhanced foam systems in high
temperature reservoir. So in this research, the foaming perfor-
mance, the effect of injection mode, gasliquid ratio, gas injection
velocity and formation permeability on the plugging capacity, for-
mation permeability ratio on prole improvement capacity, and
the owing behavior of gel enhanced foam in porous media are
systematically studied. In addition, oileld test is also conducted
to conrm that using gel enhanced foam is an effective in-depth
prole control technology for water production control in high
temperature reservoirs. Through the laboratory experiments and
oileld tests, we hope the work can be a further promotion and
application for water production control in other similar mature
oilelds.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Materials
Comb polymer with a hydrolysis degree of 26.8% and an aver-
age molecular weight of 23,000,000 g/mol was provided by Hengju
Co. Ltd., China. The phenolic resin cross-linker was purchased from
Yuguang Co. Ltd., China. A high temperature surfactant HN-1 used
to generate foam was provided by Henan oileld, China. Nitrogen
gas with a purity of 99.98% was provided by Tianyuan Co. Ltd., China.
The crude oil was provided by Henan oileld of China, and the vis-
cosity is 125 mPa s at 70 C. The salinity of brine is 2380 mg/L, and
used in all experiments.
2.2. Experimental methods
2.2.1. Performance of gel enhanced foam experiments
A modication of Ross-mile method was used to evaluate the
performance of gel enhanced foam. The foam generation device is
consisted of conventional glass column with a length of 55.0 cm and
inner diameter of 4.0 cm, which is tted with a porous sand core
placed at the base of the column (Fig. 1). 20 ml of foam solution
was injected into the glass column. To generate foam, nitrogen was
sparged through the foam solution via the porous sand core. After
the foam was formed, the initial foam volume was immediately
recorded, which was used to describe foaming capacity. Gener-
ally, the foam stability was characterized by the defoaming time
(decay half-life), which is dened as a time required for obtaining
half of the solution surface free of bubbles. All the foam tests were
performed at 100 C.
 G. Zhao et al. / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 482 (2015) 115124 117

Fig. 3. The visual simulation experimental apparatus.

was calculated as P2 /P1 or P3 /P1 to characterize the prole control

capacity of gel enhanced foam.

Fig. 2. Schematic of sand-pack ooding apparatus. 2.2.4. Parallel sand-pack experiments

2.2.2. Sand-pack ooding apparatus
A sand-pack ooding apparatus (Fig. 2) was used in single and
parallel sand-pack experiments. The foaming agent and injection
water were delivered by high-pressure piston pump, while the
nitrogen gas injection volume and rate were controlled by a gas
owmeter. The foaming agent and nitrogen gas were mixed in a
foam generator, and then the formed foam was injected into sand-
packs. The sand-packs were subsequently placed in an oven until
the gel enhanced foam was formed, then water ooding again and
recorded the injection pressure. Different permeability of sand-
packs with 45 cm in length and 2.5 cm in diameter were used in all
experiments. The physical parameters of sand-packs are presented
in Tables 1 and 2.
2.2.3. Single sand-pack experiments
The effects of injection mode, gasliquid ratio, gas injection
velocity and formation permeability of gel enhanced foam were
evaluated in single sand-pack experiments. The procedures of sin-
gle sand-pack experiments are as follows: (1) ll the pack with sand
and weigh the dry core; (2) saturate the core with brine and weigh
the wet core, then calculate its permeability and pore volume. The
pressure in this step was recorded as P1 ; (3) inject 1.0 pore volume
(PV) of gel enhanced foaming solution into the sand-pack and place
it into an oven at 100 C until the foam was formed. The pressure in
this step was recorded as P2 ; and (4) ood water until the injection
pressure reaches stability. The pressure was recorded as P3 in this
process. In these single sand-pack experiments, resistance factor
Parallel sand-pack experiments were carried out to evaluate
the prole improvement capacity of gel enhanced foam. A high
permeability sand-pack and a low permeability sand-pack were
used to simulate a heterogeneous formation in the experiments.
When conducting on this experiment, 1.0 PV of gel enhanced foam
solution was injected into the sand-pack. Then, the sand-pack was
placed at 100 C for 28 h. Sequentially, water ooding was con-
ducted until the pressure and produced uid reached a stable
condition. The produced uid was recorded to characterize the pro-
le improvement capacity. The higher the water cut of the low
permeability is, after prole control treatment, the better the pro-
le improvement capacity is.
2.2.5. Visual simulation experiment
The etched glass model was used to study the owing behav-
ior of gel enhanced foam. The etched glass model was prepared by
laser etching, and channels with different sizes were distributed
in the model. The size of the etched glass model in the experiment
was 8 cm 8 cm 0.6 cm. Both of the edges were sealed except two
pores on the diagonal of the model, which were used to simulate
as an injection well and an oil well. The experimental owing chart
is shown in Fig. 3. The procedures of the experiment were as fol-
lows: (1) saturate brine in the model; (2) saturate oil in the model;
(3) ood water until the produced water cuts up to 98%; (4) inject
three-phase foam through a foam generator into the visual model;
and (5) ood water until the produced water cuts is up to 98% again.
3. Results and discussion

3.1. Performance of gel enhanced foam

Table 1
Core parameters for single sand-pack experiments.
3.1.1. Effect of surfactant concentration
Sand-pack no. Diameter (cm) Length (cm) Porosity (%) Permeability (mD) Surfactant concentration was critical for the performance of
1 2.5 45 32.6 1186 conventional aqueous foam and gel enhanced foam. It directly
2 2.5 45 33.7 1239 affects foam volume, decay half-life and stability of foam systems.
3 2.5 45 31.6 1062 In the experiments, two foam systems with a gasliquid ratio of 1:3
4 2.5 45 32.6 1186
were studied, and the gel enhanced foam (surfactant + 0.3% comb
5 2.5 45 33.2 1135
6 2.5 45 33.5 1273 polymer + 0.6% phenolic resin cross-linker) was determined after
7 2.5 45 33.5 1273 gelled for 14 h at 100 C. Fig. 4a and b, respectively, shows that
8 2.5 45 32.8 1162 both of the two foam systems and gel enhanced foam with high
9 2.5 45 33.4 1189 surfactant concentration have larger foam volume and longer decay
10 2.5 45 32.9 1043
11 2.5 45 31.5 636
half-life than those with low surfactant concentration. The increas-
12 2.5 45 33.5 1273 ing in surfactant concentration reduces the solution surface tension
13 2.5 45 33.8 3820 and increases the foam dispersity, thus results in a lower drainage
14 2.5 45 34.8 6110 rate. The experiments also show the foam decay half-life barely
15 2.5 45 35.7 10,190
increases while the foam volume decreases when the surfactant
118 G. Zhao et al. / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 482 (2015) 115124

Table 2
Core parameters for parallel sand-pack experiments.

Sand-pack no. Diameter (cm) Length (cm) Porosity (%) Permeability (mD) Permeability Ratio

16 2.5 45 30.6 407 2.16

17 2.5 45 32.7 878
18 2.5 45 30.2 372 7.43
19 2.5 45 33.4 2765

concentration is more than 0.3%. It could be attributed to the limited
number of sites available on the gaswater interface. When all the
available sites are occupied, no further surfactant molecules can be
attached to the gaswater interface, the adsorption and desorption
balance is achieved. Therefore, the foam volume and decay half-life
will not increase.
However, the volume of gel enhanced foam is lower than that of
aqueous foam. Compared with the aqueous foam, the gel enhanced
foam decay half-life is signicantly further improved (Fig. 4a) but
decreases foam volume (Fig. 4b). The gel as the external phase is a
viscosity system which can form a viscoelastic shell around the bub-
ble surface that protects bubbles against shrinkage and drainage.
Although the gel improves foam surface elasticity, it also brings
adversely effect on the gel enhanced foam volume in the foaming
process. Due to the larger viscoelastic resistance in the solution,
the nitrogen gas transports slowly which reduces the bubble size,
and then decreases foam volume of gel enhanced foam. In turn, this
property contributes to the foam stability by inhibiting the escape
of gas from bubbles and the thinning of foam lm. Thereby, the
gel enhanced foam is still compact after aging 30 min at 100 C
which ensures its highly effective stabilization in porous media.
Consequently, the gel enhanced foam is a better choice for in-depth
control in high water cut oilelds.
3.1.2. Effect of gel viscosity
Fig. 4 above shows the gel enhanced foam has a better foaming
performance and a longer stability than aqueous foam. The driving
force may be attributed to the increased viscosity of gel enhanced
foam. In this experiment, the gel viscosity on the foaming perfor-
mance and surface tension was studied. Fig. 5 shows that the foam
decay half-life increases while the foam volume decreases with
increasing gelation time. However, the foam decay half-life and
volume would not change when the gelation time reaches 28 h.
It can be related to the system viscosity and surface tension. In the
initial stage, the foam systems have a lower viscosity and surface
tension (Fig. 6) which could bring surfactant molecules adsorbed
at the gaswater interface easily. Therefore, the lower surface ten-
sion causes a larger foam volume of gel enhanced foam and the
lower viscosity brings a longer decay half-life. However, as the sys-
tem viscosity increases, the surface tension rises up which leads to
a weak foaming capacity and instability of gel enhanced foam. In
turn, the increased viscosity could change the foam surface elastic-
ity and affect the surfactant molecules arrangement, then further
affect the foaming performance and stability. But the foam vol-
ume decreased signicantly when the gel system was formed. The
increased in viscosity would provide an increased resistance to
surfactant motion which could slow the transport of surfactant
molecules, thus reduce foam volume [22,23]. Whereas the surfac-
tant molecules adsorbed at gaswater interface are still active in
this stage, so the gel enhanced form has a good foaming capac-
ity and stability. In addition, the increased viscosity can form a
viscoelastic shell which protects bubbles against shrinkage and

Fig. 4. Effect of surfactant concentration on conventional aqueous foam and gel

enhanced foam. (a) Effect of surfactant concentration on foam volume; and (b) effect
of surfactant concentration on decay half-life. Fig. 5. Effect of gelation time on foam volume and decay half-life.
 G. Zhao et al. / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 482 (2015) 115124
Fig. 6. Effect of gelation time on viscosity and surface tension of gel enhanced foam.
decreases the foam drainage velocity. The increased viscosity can
make up for the adverse effects of increased surface tension on the
foaming performance and stability. Consequently, the foam sys-
tems have a good foam capacity and stability when the gel viscosity
increases.
3.2. Foam morphology
The morphology is studied to conrm that the comb polymer gel
affects the foam stability by trinocular metallurgical microscope.
Fig. 7. Morphology of conventional aqueous foam and gel enhanced foam, respectively. (a) and (b) Conventional aqueous foam with the only 0.3% surfactant; (c) and (d) gel
enhanced foam (0.3% surfactant + 0.3% comb polymer + 0.6% phenolic resin cross-linker).
119
Fig. 7 shows the morphology of conventional aqueous foam and
gel enhanced foam, respectively. The results show that conven-
tional aqueous foam only with surfactant is loose and non-uniform
with different sizes of bubbles (Fig. 7a). During the foam process,
the bubbles will easily merge into larger bubbles and form one sin-
gle large bubble to minimize their surface area. But the lm of the
formed large bubble is very thin (Fig. 7b), and can be easily ruptured,
resulting in instability foam systems. However, the foam turns com-
pact and uniform when being added comb polymer gel (Fig. 7c), and
the foam lm becomes thicker. The comb polymer gel can form a
viscoelastic shell around the bubble surface that protects bubbles
against shrinkage and coalescence, thus reduces the highly ener-
getic interfacial area and decreases the free energy of the system
[24]. As a result, the stability of gel enhanced foam increases.
3.3. Plugging capacity of gel enhanced foam
In order to have a better application of gel enhanced foam, the
injection mode, gasliquid ratio, gas injection velocity and forma-
tion permeability were systemically evaluated in the experiments.
3.3.1. Effect of injection mode on plugging capacity
Co-injection and alternately injection modes were designed
to study the effect of injection mode on plugging capacity. In
co-injection mode, gel enhanced foam was generated by a foam
generator before being injected into sand-pack; in co-injection
mode, alternately injection of 0.25 PV foaming solution and 0.25 PV
nitrogen gas for two rounds. 1.0 PV of foaming solution and nitro-
gen gas were injected into sand-pack in both of the two modes. The
120 G. Zhao et al. / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 482 (2015) 115124

Fig. 8. Effect of injection mode on plugging capacity.

Fig. 9. Effect of gasliquid ratio on plugging capacity.

injection velocity and gasliquid ratio were set at 1 ml/min and

1:1, respectively. No. 1 of sand-pack was injected in co-injection
mode while No. 2 of was injected in alternately injection mode
in this experiment. Fig. 8 shows the resistance factor of the two
injection modes in injection stage is signicantly higher than that
of in water ooding stage. The results of the two injection modes
indicate that the gel enhanced foam has a good plugging capac-
ity. However, there is a signicant difference between these two
injection modes. The foam quality may be the driving forces for
the differences. For co-injection mode, the gas can be sufciently
mixed with the liquid that passes through a foam generator which
produces uniform foam before injected into sand-packs. The Jiamin
effect [25] will occur when the foam transports through the nar-
row throat in the sand-pack which causes a rising pressure and high
resistance factor. In alternately injection mode, the foam was only
formed in the sand-pack, and the initial increased resistance factor
occurred due to the viscosity of polymer in the foaming solution.
Both of the two resistance factors further increased after the gel
enhanced foam formed in the water ooding stage. The increased
resistance factor can be attributed to the owing resistance gener-
ated by Jiamin effect. Additionally, the gel is a viscoelastic system
which can bridge across throat even when the bubbles burst. There-
fore, the resistance factor is still in a high level after a long term of
water ooding.
the size of formed bubble is usually smaller when the gasliquid
ratio is lower than 1:1. Due to the large viscoelastic resistance in
lower gasliquid ratio solution, the nitrogen gas ows slowly and
can be easily trapped by the viscoelastic solution, thereby reduces
the bubble size, but enhances foam stability. Although these bub-
bles can effectively plug the small pore throats by Jamin effect
or Jamin superimposed effect, the bubbles may easily transport
through large pore throats and result in a weak plugging capac-
ity. Consequently, the resistance factor of foam with a gasliquid
ratio of 0.5:1 is smaller than that of foam with a gasliquid ratio of
1:1 in the water ooding stage.
3.3.3. Effect of gas injection velocity on plugging capacity
No. 710 of sand-packs were used to study the effect of gas
injection velocity on gel enhanced foam plugging capacity in this
experiment. The gasliquid ratio was set at 1:1, and 1.0 PV of gel
enhanced foam was injected into sand-packs. Fig. 10 shows that
the higher gas injection velocity has a larger resistance factor in
the injection stage but a lower resistance factor in the water ood-
ing stage. In the injection stage, the higher gas injection velocity

3.3.2. Effect of gasliquid ratio on plugging capacity

The effect of four different gasliquid ratios on gel enhanced
foam plugging capacity was studied in this section. The foaming
solution was used as liquid phase, and the gas phase was nitrogen
gas. The co-injection velocity was set at 1 ml/min, and No. 36 of
sand-packs were used in this experiment. Fig. 9 shows that all of
the co-injection modes with different gasliquid ratios can increase
resistance factor more or less in both injection and water ooding
stages, and the optimum gasliquid ratio for injection of the gel
enhanced foam was 1:1. The gasliquid ratios are ranged accord-
ing to their effect on the plugging capacity in the following order:
1:1 > 0.5:1 > 1.5:1 > 2:1. Generally, the higher the gasliquid ratio
is, the larger the bubble is. During foam forming process, the sur-
factant molecules adsorb on the gaswater interface and form a
foam layer at the top of the column. The larger gasliquid ratio
could cause more gas wrapped in a bubble, resulting in a larger bub-
ble and a thinner foam lm. The bubbles could easily burst when
transporting in sand-pack. Therefore, the injection modes with high
gasliquid ratio usually have a weak plugging capacity. However, Fig. 10. Effect of gas injection velocity on plugging capacity.
 G. Zhao et al. / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 482 (2015) 115124 121

Fig. 11. Effect of permeability on plugging capacity.

can form large bubbles which are easily stranded and plug the big
pore throats, then increase the owing resistance in the sand-packs.
Therefore, the resistance factor increases. However, larger bubbles
usually have thin foam lms which bring instability of gel enhanced
foam. It may cause larger bubbles burst when ows through small
pore throats, resulting in a slightly decrease of resistance factor in
the water ooding stage. Although the low gas injection velocity
(<0.5 ml/min) has a smaller resistance factor in the injection stage,
the resistance factor signicantly rises after water ooding. The
gas can fully contact with foaming solution and form small vis-
coelastic bubbles in low gas injection velocity. The small bubbles
decrease the owing resistance when transports in sand-pack in the
initial stage, resulting in a weak plugging capacity. But the thick-
ness of foam lm further increases after the gel formed. The gas
was strongly trapped in bubbles by the thick lm which enhances
the stability of gel foams. Consequently, the gel enhanced foam can
be stable in the sand-pack. By directly plugged and Jamin super-
imposed effect in the pore throats, the gel enhanced foam can
effectively plug the high permeability zones in sand-pack at the
lower gas injection velocity condition.
Fig. 12. Prole improvement capacity for permeability ratio of 2.16:1 and 7.43:1,
respectively. (a) Permeability ratio of 2.16:1; and (b) permeability ratio of 7.43:1.
3.3.4. Effect of formation permeability on plugging capacity
No. 1115 of sand-packs were used to study the effect of forma-
tion permeability on gel enhanced foam plugging capacity in this 3.3.5. Effect of formation permeability ratio on prole
experiment. The gas injection velocity and gasliquid ratio were improvement capacity
set at 0.5 ml/min and 1:1, respectively. The experimental results The prole improvement capacity serves as an important
were shown in Fig. 11. It can be seen that the resistance factor parameter in characterizing prole control treatments. A high per-
increases with the formation permeability in the co-injection and meability sand-pack and a low permeability sand-pack were used
water ooding stage. The larger the formation permeability is, the to simulate a heterogeneous formation in the experiments. The
larger the resistance factor is. It can be attributed to the selective larger the permeability ratio is, the more serious the formation
mobility reduction of gel enhanced foam [26,27]. The gas moves heterogeneity is. The gas injection velocity and gasliquid ratio
more quickly in high permeability zones than in low permeabil- were set at 0.5 ml/min and 1:1, respectively. 0.5 PV of gel enhanced
ity zones. It makes the bubbles more easily be trapped in the high foam was injected into sand-packs, and No. 16-19 of sand-packs
permeability zones, and then form a high ow resistance. Addition- were used in the experiments. Fig. 12a and b shows that the
ally, more small bubbles can be generated by living behind lamella water production changes through the whole injection stage and
division and snap-off [28] when the gel enhanced foam transports water ooding stage. During the early stage of gel enhanced foam
through pore throats, which further increases owing resistance in injection, almost all of the injected water was produced from the
the sand-pack. These properties of gel enhanced foam contribute high permeability sand-pack, and the produced water cut nally
to improve plugging capacity when conducting on prole control reached 100%, resulting in an invalid circulation of injection water.
treatment. As a result, the high resistance factor will bring larger However, the water production of high permeability sand-pack
owing resistance in high permeability zones which makes the fol- suddenly decreases and more water was gradually produced from
lowing water divert into low permeability zones, thus enhances the low permeability sand-pack after being injected 0.5 PV of gel
swept volume. enhanced foam, especially after aging for 28 h at 100 C. When gel
122 G. Zhao et al. / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 482 (2015) 115124

Fig. 13. Visual simulation results in etched glass model. (a) Jiamin effect and Jamin superimposed effect; (b) emulsication effect; (c) squeezing effect; and (d) dragging
effect.

enhanced foam is injected into physical models, the foam solu-
tion preferentially enters the high permeability zones. It can be
considered the selective plugging capacity of gel enhanced foam.
When the pore throat size is much smaller than the bubble size,
the bubbles would be trapped at the entrance of pore throat and
directly plug the high permeability channel. When the pore throat
size is a little larger than the bubble size, two or more bubbles
would bridge across the pore throats and effectively reduce the
permeability of the porous media in the high permeability zones.
Additionally, the Jamin effect would also increase water owing
resistance when the bubbles pass through the pore throats. By
directly plugging, bridging and Jamin effect, the gel enhanced foam
can divert the following water into the low permeability zone, thus
improves formation prole. The experimental results further show
that the prole improvement capacity of high permeability ratio is
better than that of the low permeability ratio. The larger the per-
meability ratio is, the more easily the foam preferentially enters
the high permeability zones. Therefore, the foam can effectively
plug high permeability zones. However, for the low permeability
ratio of sand-packs, the foam inevitably enters the low permeability
sand-packs and brings slightly harm to non-target zones, and then
decreases the prole improvement capacity. Consequently, the gel
enhanced foam is better for the in-depth prole improvement of
seriously heterogeneous formation.
3.4. Flowing behavior and oil recovery capacity in visual model
Fig. 13 shows the owing behavior of gel enhanced foam in
the etched glass model. When gel enhanced foam is injected, the
foam preferentially enters the high permeability channels. Through
Jiamin effect or Jamin superimposed effect (Fig. 13a), directly plug-
ging (Fig. 13b and c) and bridging (Fig. 13c) in the large pore space,
the foam can block thief-zones and bring owing resistance in high
permeability zones, and then divert following water into adjacent

Table 3
The contrast of injection status between after and before prole control.

Well no. Before treatment After treatment

Injection Water injection Pressure index Full degree Injectivity Injection Water injection Pressure index Full degree Injectivity
pressure (m3 d1 ) (MPa) index pressure (m3 d1 ) (MPa) index
(MPa) (m3 d1 MPa) (MPa) (m3 d1 MPa)

AN31 3.4 80 1.58 41.6 63.7 2.6 82 8.6 85.7 126.6

Mi76 11.8 100 9.09 75.1 48.9 10.3 101 13.2 95.3 151.0
AN20 7.6 85 6.53 76.0 33.2 14.7 95 15.1 86.0 71.9
AN42 1.9 95 0.20 7.7 153.8 15.0 132 13.8 85.8 256.4
AN39 9.5 34 8.66 90.1 15.2 14.9 31 13.2 64.5 40.3
AN44 12.5 64 10.10 92.5 50.8 15.0 62 12.8 94.3 138.9
 G. Zhao et al. / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 482 (2015) 115124
low permeability zones, thereby enhance oil recovery. During the
owing process, the foam can be deformed and pass through pore
throats easily (Fig. 13a and c), which brings squeezing effect and
dragging effect on the residual oil. As the foam moves, the residual
oil could be easily driven out (Fig. 13c and d). Additionally, due
to the surfactant in the gel enhanced foam, the residual oil can
be emulsied and dispersed in the high permeability zones. The
emulsication effect can decrease the mobility of the aqueous dis-
placing phase and reduce interfacial tension between oil and water
[29,30], thereby decreases the owing resistance of viscous oils and
enhances oil recovery.
4. Field application
The gel enhanced foam as an in-depth prole control agent
has been successfully applied in Henan oileld of China. Six injec-
tion wells were selected for the prole control treatment. Up to
December 2011, the injection pressure and oil production of these
six injection well groups decreases signicantly. Well testing data
show that the formation heterogeneity was serious, and the high
reservoir temperature (up to 100 C) also brings difculties to in-
depth prole control. In December 2011, using gel enhanced foam
for the in-depth prole control treatments were conducted on these
six injection wells. During the treatment process, about 5431 m3 of
gel enhanced foaming solution and 8.39 105 m3 of nitrogen were
co-injected into these six injection wells, and then shut off for 2
days for the gel enhanced foam fully formed in the high perme-
ability zones. Five parameters, including injection pressure, water
injection, pressure index, full degree and injectivity index, are usu-
ally used to describe the prole control capacity [31,32]. Generally,
the higher the values of these ve parameters are after the in-depth
prole control treatment, the better the prole control capacity is.
The in-depth prole control treatment results are shown in Table 3.
After the in-depth prole control treatment, almost all of the ve
parameters of these six injection wells increased, indicating that
the gel enhanced foam has plugged the high permeability zones
and improved formation prole. Up to May 2013, the oil production
of these six injection wells has increased by 556.8 t and the injec-
tion water has decreased by 3.34 104 m3 . The results indicate that
injection of gel enhanced foam as an in-depth prole control agent
is an effective treatment for high water cut reservoirs.
5. Conclusions
In this study, the gel enhanced foam is selected as an in-depth
prole control agent for water production control in high tem-
perature reservoir. Compared with the foam of a pure surfactant
solution, adding comb polymer gel increases solution viscosity but
decreases surface tension. Although the increased viscosity of gel
brings a negative effect on the surface tension and decreases the gel
enhanced foam volume, the increased viscosity may enhance the
thickness and strength of foam lm, thus increases foam stability
and plugging capacity in porous media. Compared with conven-
tional aqueous foam, the gel enhanced foam has a thicker bubble
lm which enhances foam stability. The injection mode, gasliquid
ratio, gas injection velocity and formation permeability affect the
plugging capacity of gel enhanced foam. By Jiamin effect or Jamin
superimposed effect, directly plugging and bridging in the large
pore space, the co-injection with reasonable gasliquid ratio and
gas injection velocity can obtain a better plugging capacity in high
permeability sand-packs. Due to the selective plugging capacity
of gel enhanced foam in the formation, the prole improvement
capacity of high formation permeability ratio is much better than
that of lower formation permeability ratio. The treatment has
been successfully applied prole control in Henan oileld of China.
123
Almost all of the parameters, including injection pressure, water
injection, pressure index, full degree and injectivity index, increase
when conducting on gel enhanced foam treatment. Additionally,
the decrease of oil production and water cut is oblivious, indicat-
ing this technology is useful for water production control in high
temperature oilelds.
Acknowledgements
This work was sponsored by National Natural Science Foun-
dation of China (No. 51174221), Science Funds for Distinguished
Young Scholar of Shandong Province (No. JQ201013), Innovative
Research Team in University (No. IRT1294), China Scholarship
Council (No. 201406450008).
References
[1] T.W. Patek, Field applications of steam foam for mobility improvement and
prole control, SPE Reserv. Eval. Eng. 11 (1996) 7986.
[2] S.Y. Li, Z.M. Li, B.F. Li, Experimental study and application of tannin foam for pro-
le modication in cyclic steam stimulated well, J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 118 (2014)
8898.
[3] Q. You, Y.F. Wang, W. Zhou, Z.Y. Qi, F.L. Zhao, Study and application of gelled
foam for in-depth water shutoff in a fractured oil reservoir, J. Can. Petrol. Tech-
nol. 48 (2009) 5155.
[4] D.M. Wang, J.C. Chen, Q. Li, J.Z. Wu, W.X. Wu, Y.Q. Zhang, First ultra-low inter-
facial tension foam ood eld test is successful, in: SPE Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition, 2001.
[5] R.F. Li, W. Yan, S. HLiu, G. Hirasaki, C.A. Miller, Foam mobility control for sur-
factant enhanced oil recovery, SPE J. 15 (2010) 928942.
[6] X.Q. Wang, M.Z. Dong, W. Zhou, Polymer/gel enhanced foam ood for improv-
ing post-water ood heavy oil recovery, in: SPE Heavy Oil Conference, Canada,
2013.
[7] J. Ali, R.W. Burley, C.W. Nutt, Foam enhanced oil recovery from sand packs,
Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 63 (1985) 101111.
[8] M.S. Stefan, M.N. Nhut, P.N. Quoc, Laboratory investigation of low-tension-gas
ooding for improved oil recovery in tight formations, SPE J. 15 (2013) 851866.
[9] C. Huh, W.R. Rossen, Approximate pore-level modeling for apparent viscosity
of polymer-enhanced foam in porous media, SPE J. 13 (2008) 1725.
[10] S.Y. Chen, G.Q. Jian, Q.F. Hou, S.L. Gao, Y.S. Luo, Y.Y. Zhu, W.J. Li, Effect of oil on
the stability of polymer enhanced foams, Int. J. Oil Gas Coal Technol. 6 (2013)
675688.
[11] P.B. Bernard, S.H. Tommy, Aqueous foams stabilized solely by silica nanoparti-
cles, Angew. Chem. 117 (2005) 37883791.
[12] H.S. Yousef, B. Tayfun, Stabilization of nanometal catalysts and their interaction
with oleic phase in porous media during enhanced oil recovery, Ind. Eng. Chem.
Res. 53 (2014) 84648475.
[13] A. Kantzas, D.F. Marentette, K. Allsopp, Utilization of polymer gels, polymer
enhanced foams, and foamed gels for improving reservoir conformance, J. Can.
Pet. Technol. 38 (1990) 18.
[14] F.R. Wassmuth, L.H. Hodgins, L.L. Schramm, S.M. Kutay, Screening and coreood
testing of gel foams to control excessive gas production in oil wells, in: SPE/DOE
Improved Oil Recovery Symposium, 2010.
[15] R.D. Sydansk, Polymer-enhanced foams part 1: laboratory development and
evaluation, in: SPE Advanced Technology Series, 1994.
[16] R.D. Sydansk, Polymer enhanced foam workover, completion, and kill uids.
US 5706895 A, 1998.
[17] J.F. Argillier, A. Dupas, R. Tabary, I. Henaut, P. Poulain, R. David, A. Thierry,
Impact of polymer mechanical degradation on shear and extensional viscosi-
ties: toward better injectivity forecasts in polymer ooding operations, in: SPE
International Symposium on Oileld Chemistry, 2013.
[18] L.J.Z. Pacelli, Prediction of polymer viscosity reduction in pores using an exact
depletion prole, in: SPE European Formation Damage Conference, 2001.
[19] M.L. Samuelson, V.G. Constien, Effects of high temperature on polymer degra-
dation and cleanup, in: SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, 1996.
[20] C. Romero, J.M. Alvarez, A.J. Muller, Micromodel studies of polymer-enhanced
foam ow through porous media, in: SPE/DOE Improved Oil Recovery Sympo-
sium, 2002.
[21] L.B. Romero-Zeron, A. Kantzas, Flow visualization studies of the effect of foamed
gel microstructure on gas-blockage effectiveness and its importance on foamed
gel trapping in porous media, in: Canadian International Petroleum Conference,
2002.
[22] S. Johan, Emulsions and Emulsion Stability: Surfactant Science, CRC, Press, Tay-
lor & Francis Group, Boca Raton, 2006.
[23] T.A. Siebert, S. Rugonyi, Inuence of liquid-layer thickness on pulmonary sur-
factant spreading and sollapse, Biophys. J. 95 (2008) 45494559.
[24] T.N. Hunter, R.J. Pugh, G.V. Franks, G.J. Jameson, The role of particles in stabi-
lizing foams and emulsions, Adv. Colloid Interface Sci. 137 (2008) 5781.
[25] R. Wright, Jamin effect in oil production, AAPG Bull. 17 (1993) 15211526.
124 G. Zhao et al. / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 482 (2015) 115124
[26] J.S. Tsau, R.B. Grigg, Assessment of foam properties and effectiveness in mobil-
ity reduction for CO2 -foam oods, in: International Symposium on Oileld
Chemistry, 1997.
[27] H.J. Bertin, O.G. Apaydin, L.M. Castanier, A.R. Kovscek, Foam ow in heteroge-
neous porous media: effect of crossow, in: SPE/DOE Improved Oil Recovery
Symposium, 1998.
[28] R. Liontas, K. Ma, J.H. George, S.L. Biswal, Neighbor-induced bubble pinch-off:
novel mechanisms of in situ foam generation in microuidic channels, Soft
Matter 9 (2013) 1097110984.
[29] A. Mandal, A. Samanta, A. Bera, K. Ojha, Characterization of oilwater emul-
sion and its use in enhanced oil recovery, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 49 (2010)
1275612761.
[30] L. Zhao, A.F. Li, H.J. Xie, Y.L. Zhao, Z.M. Si, Q.Q. Gu, Q. Wang, Impact of ultra-
low interfacial tension on enhanced oil recovery of ultra-low permeability
reservoir, Adv. Pet. Explor. Dev. 4 (2012) 4954.
[31] F.L. Zhao, Pressure index decision-making technique and its application pro-
gresses, J. China. Univ. Pet. 35 (2011) 8288.
[32] F.L. Zhao, Principle of EOR, China University of Petroleum Press, Dongying, 2006.