About

Log in?

DTU users get better search results including licensed content and discounts on order fees.

Anyone can log in and get personalized features such as favorites, tags and feeds.

Log in as DTU user Log in as non-DTU user No thanks

DTU Findit

Journal article

Comparative analysis of experimental methods for quantification of small amounts of oil in water

From

Department of Civil Engineering, Technical University of Denmark1

Section for Geotechnics and Geology, Department of Civil Engineering, Technical University of Denmark2

Department of Chemical and Biochemical Engineering, Technical University of Denmark3

During core flooding experiments where water is injected into oil bearing core plugs, the produced fluids can be sampled in a fraction collector. When the core approaches residual oil saturation, the produced amount of oil is typically small (can be less than a few microliters) and the quantification of oil is then difficult.

In this study, we compare four approaches to determine the volume of the collected oil fraction in core flooding effluents. The four methods are: Image analysis, UV/visible spectroscopy, liquid scintillation counting, and low-field nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectrometry. The procedure followed to determine the oil fraction and a summary of advantages and disadvantages of each method are given.

Our results show that all four methods are reproducible with high accuracy. The NMR method was capable of direct quantification of both oil and water fractions, without comparison to a pre-made standard curve. Image analysis, UV/visible spectroscopy, and liquid scintillation counting quantify only the oil fraction by comparing with a pre-made standard curve.

The image analysis technique is reliable when more than 0.1 ml oil is present, whereas liquid scintillation counting performs well when less than 0.6 ml oil is present. Both UV/visible spectroscopy and NMR spectrometry produced high accuracy results in the entire studied range (0.006-1.1 ml). In terms of laboratory time, the liquid scintillation counting is the fastest and least user dependent, whereas the NMR spectrometry is the most time consuming. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V.

All rights reserved.

Language: English
Year: 2016
Pages: 459-467
ISSN: 18734715 and 09204105
Types: Journal article
DOI: 10.1016/j.petrol.2016.09.009
ORCIDs: Fosbøl, Philip Loldrup , Shapiro, Alexander , Thomsen, Kaj and Fabricius, Ida Lykke

DTU users get better search results including licensed content and discounts on order fees.

Log in as DTU user

Access

Analysis