Surfactants as Demulsifiers

By

Khairul Fikri Bin Noor Rashid (11720)

Lecturer: Mazlin Bt Idress

Dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of

The requirements for the

Bachelor of Engineering (Hons)

(Petroleum Engineering)

MAY2011

Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS

Bandar Seri Iskandar

31750 Tronoh

Perak Darul Ridzuan

 CERTIFICATION OF APPROVAL

Surfactants as Demulsifiers

By

Khairul Fikri Bin Noor Rashid

A project dissertation submitted to the

Petroleum Engineering Programme

Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS

In partial fulfillment of the requirement for the

Bachelor of Engineering (Hons)

(Petroleum Engineering)

Approved by,

(Mazlin Bt Idress)

UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI PETRONAS

TRONOH, PERAK

May20ll
 ABSTRACT

In oil production, the generation of heavy oil/water emulsion can result in significant
drop in the production rate due to the high viscosities of the emulsions. The strong
agitation and mixing that takes place at the inlet of the well bore together with the
presence of the naturally existing emulsifying agents in the crude contribute to the
formation of emulsion. Water and oil emulsion formation presents an on-going
production issue receiving considerable technical consideration. The formation of
emulsion is ultimately cause economics problem, both in terms of expensive chemicals
used and due to the daily production losses.

Effective separation of oil and water become an essential operation in order to ensure
not only the quality of the crude oil is obtained but also the quality of separated water at
the lowest cost. Due to these remarkable issues, there are number of methods that could
be applied in order to mitigate these problems such as injection of surfactants into the
formation and also surface treatment in order to disrupt the interfacial film and enhance
the speed for emulsion breaking (chemical demulsification). Downhole demulsification
of crude oil increases well production by reducing vertical flow pressure loss. There are
also other major treatments like heating or electrocoalesence but they seem not so
practical and effective.

The objective of this project is to identit)' and compare the results of different surfactants
onto the emulsion particles. These will cover lots of samples to be tested during the
separation test experiments. The results will show the effect of different surfactants on
the rate of separation of crude oil and water from the emulsion. The better the separation,
the better the demulsifier is. In spite of the volume of separation, the quality of the crude
oil and water also been focused along running the experiments. Results of such trials
have been discussed in this project that shows promising success.

Ill
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First and foremost, my highest appreciation also goes to my Final Year Project (FYP)
supervisor, Mrs. Mazlin Bt Idress. She has been very dedicated to couch me and is
willing to share his valuable knowledge with me. I could have not survived in this
project alone without the kind help and his guidance from the very beginning.

This dissertation would not have been possible without the guidance and the help of
several individuals who in one way or another contributed and extended their valuable
assistance in the preparation and completion of this study. To all individuals who helped
me in any way but whose names are not mentioned here, I sincerely thank you all for the
endless support, guidance and patience.

Last but not the least, my farnily and the. one above all of us, the omnipresent God, for
answering my prayers for giving me the strength to plod on despite my constitution
wanting to give up and throw in the towel, thank you so much Dear Lord.

I hope all the things that I learned here will be useful in my education and life in the
future at large.

IV
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

CERTIFICATION OF APPROVAL .•.•.......•.•••.•.•.•...•....•.•••..•........•..........•.................... I

CERTIFICATION OF ORIGINALITY .....•••...••..........•............•.•..........••.................... 11

ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................... III

ACKNOWLEGMENT.................................................................................................. IV

1. INTRODUCTION•..•.........••••................•.••....•..••...•....•....••...••...... 1

1.1. BACKGROUND OF STUDY ........................................................... .!

1.2. PROBLEM STATEMENTS .............................................................. 8
1.3. OBJECTIVES .............................................................................. 8
1.4. SCOPE OF STUDY .......................................................................9
2. LITERATURE REVIEWS •.......•.•....•..•....•.....••.•.......••.......••....... 10

2.l.PROPERTIES OF EMULSIONS ....................................................... .IO

2.2. FACTORS AFFECTING EMULSIONS STABILITY .............................. 12
2.3.DEMULSIFICATION..................................................................... 15
2.4. TREATMENT METHODS FOR SURFACTANTS ................................. 19
3. METHODOLGY ...•...•.•.....•....••.......••..•....•••........•.........•.......•••..21

3.1. PROJECT FLOW ACTIVITIES ....................................................... 21

3.2. PROJECT FLOW CHART ............................................................ .30
3.3. GANTT CHART ........................................................................ .31
3.4. TOOLS AND EQUIPMENTS ......................................................... 32
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION....•......•.....•..........•......................•..33

4.1. VOLUME OF DEMULSIFIERS ...................................................... 34

4.2. CONCENTRATION OF DEMULSIFIERS .......................................... 35
4.3. COMPARISON OF SURFACTANTS ................................................ 37
4.4. COMPARISON OF DEMULSIFIERS ................................................ 38
5. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION ....•..•......••..•...•..•....•...• 41

6. REFERENCES •••..•...•••....•...•.......•.••......•..........••.......•••........•.... 42

7. APPENDICES ..••................•........••....•............•••...•..••.........••...•. 44

v
tiST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

FIGURES

Figure 1.1: Photo Micrographs of Emulsions ..................................................................... .2

Figure 12: Hydrophobic and Hydrophilic Groups of Surfactant ....................................... .3
Figure 1.3: Hydrophobic head and Hydrophilic tail ........................................................... .3
Figure 1.4: Mechanism of emulsion stabilization by asphalthenes ...................................... 6
Figure 1.5: Emulsion resolution after addition of demu1sifier ............................................. 7
Figure 2.1: Droplet Size Distribution of Petroleum Emulsions ......................................... 10
Figure 2.2: Viscosities of very tight emulsions ................................................................. .!!
Figure 2.3: Sterle repulsion between two water droplets .................................................. .12
Figure 2.4: Effect of pH and demulsifier concentration on emulsion stability .................. 14
Figure 2.5: Film drainage in the presence of demulsifiers ................................................. l7
Figure 3.1: Emulsion sample .............................................................................................25
Figure 3.2: Water Separation by Demulsifiers ................................................................... 29
Figure 3.3: Project Flow Chart .......................................................................................... .30
Figure 4.1: Water Separation by SDS 1000ppm ............................................................... .34
Figure 4.2: Crude Oil Separation by SDS 1000ppm ......................................................... .35
Figure 4.3: Water Separation by SDS ............................................................................... .36
Figure 4.4: Crude Oil Separation by SDS ......................................................................... .36
Figure 4.5: Water and Crude oil Separation of3ml Surfactant Loading .......................... .37
Figure 4.6: Water and Crude oil Separation of 5ml Surfactant Loading .......................... .37
Figure 4.7: Water Separation by Demulsifiers .................................................................. .39
Figure 4.8: Crude Oil Separation by Demulsifiers............................................................ .39
Figure 4.9: Demulsifier F Performance ............................................................................ .40

TABLES

Table 1.1: Degree of Kinetic Stability ................................................................................. 2

Table 3.1: Descriptions ofDemulsifiers ............................................................................22
Table 3.2: Water and Crude Oil Separation ....................................................................... 25
Table 3.3: Gantt Chart ....................................................................................................... .31
Table 4.1: Details ofDemulsifiers .................................................................................... .33
Table 4.2: Water and Crude Oil Separation by Demulsifiers ........................................... .38

VI
 CHAPTER!

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of study

1.1.1 Emulsion

An emulsion is a thermodynamically unstable system consisting of at least two

immiscible liquid phases, one of which is dispersed as globules in the other liquid phase,
stabilized by the presence of emulsifying agene. Stable water in oil emulsions can occur
at many stages during the production and processing of crude oils. The formation of
these emulsions is mainly caused by high shear rates and zones of turbulence
encountered at different points of production facilities especially at the wellhead in the
choke valve5• These emulsions are generally stabilized by the presence of resins,
asphaltenes, waxes and solids which play the role of natural emulsifier4 •

Emulsions are part of a more general class of two-phase systems of matter called
colloids1• Although the terms colloid and emulsion are sometimes used interchangeably,
emulsion tends to imply that both the dispersed and the continuous phase are liquid. In
an emulsion, one liquid (the dispersed phase) is dispersed in the other (the continuous
phase).

There are three types of emulsion which are simple emulsions (macro emulsions),
multiple emulsions and micro emulsions3 . Simple emulsions can be divided into 0/W
emulsion (droplets of oil dispersed in water) and W/0 emulsion (droplets of water
dispersed in oil) while multiple emulsions are W/0/W or 0/W/0 emulsions. In the oil
industry, W/0 emulsions are more common and 0/W emulsions are sometimes referred
as reverse emulsion. Multiple phases like W/0/W or 0/W/0 are more complex and
consist of tiny droplets suspended or trapped in big droplets which suspended in a
continuous phase.

1
 Dissertation

• •
.
•
, ••

Water-in-oil emulsion
. .• . .
·' •
••
Oil-in-water emulsion

water-in-oil-in-water emulsion

Figure 1.1: Photo Micrographs of Emulsions

Produced oil-field emulsions are classified based on their degree of kinetic stability as
follows3 :

Table 1.1: Degree of Kinetic Stability

Loose emulsions It will separate in short time (few minutes). The

separated water is referred as 'free water'
Medium emulsions It will separate in matter of ten minutes
Tight emulsions It will fully or partially separate in matter of hours
or even days

This kinetic stability is a consequence of small droplet size and the presence of an
3
interfacial film around water droplets . It is attained by stabilizing agents and these
stabilizers will suppress the mechanisms of emulsion formation such as sedimentation,
aggregation, coalescence, phase inversion and etc. (Refer to Literature Review). The
stability of the emulsion is basically related to the ease of water separation (measured in
time) and the dosage of demulsifier used.

2
 Dissertation

1.1.2 Surfactants (Chemical EOR)

Surfactant is a surface active agent but do not necessarily lower interfacial tensions
significantly. A surfactant will aggregate (self-assembles) in water or other solvent to
4
fonn various microstructures such as micelles or bilayers •

The usage of surfactant categorized under chemical EOR (tertiary recovery). Tertiary
recovery is injection of fluids or chemicals not initially present in reservoir such as
polymers and surfactants. This type of recovery objectively to increase the amount of oil
that can be recovered thus be produced. Generally the main objective of EOR is to
increase displacement efficiency. The relative penneability, which in turns depends on
saturation, EOR involves mobility control that can change oil and water viscous and
interfacial tension.

Each surfactant molecule has a hydrophilic (water-loving) head and a hydrophobic

(water-hating) tail that repels water. Hydrophilic consist of nonionic polar groups such
as hydroxyl portion of alcohol molecules while hydrophobic consist of nonpolar
moieties such as repeating carbon-hydrogen (Clli) units or carbon fluorine (CF2) units.

, ........

Figure 1.2: Hydrophobic and Figure 1.3: Hydrophobic head and

Hydrophilic Groups of Surfactant Hydrophilic tail

From Figure 1.3, a micelle, the hydrophobic tails of the surfactant molecules remain on
the inside of the micelle due to unfavourable interactions. The polar "heads" of the
micelle, due to favourable interactions with water, fonn a hydrophilic outer layer that in
effect protects the hydrophobic core of the micelle. The compounds that make up a
3
 Dissertation

micelle are typically amphiphilic in nature, meaning that not only are micelles soluble in
protic solvents such as water but also in aprotic solvents as a reverse micelle.

Surfactants may be divided into few groups which are ionic surfactants, ziwitteronic
surfactants and also nonionic surfactants2 • These classifications are based solely on the
presence of formally charged groups in its head. A nonionic surfactant has no charged
group in its head. The head of ionic surfactant carries a net charge whether positive
(cationic) or negative (anionic). If a surfactant contains a head with two oppositely
charged groups, it is termed zwitteronic. Some commonly encountered surfactants of
each type include2 :

• Ionic
• Anionic: based on permanent anions (sulfate, sulfonate, phosphate) or pH-dependent
anions (carboxylate):
o Sulfates (Alkyl sulfates, Alkyl ether sulfates)
o Sulfonates (Docusates, Sulfonate)
o Phosphates (Alkyl aryl ether phosphate, Alkyl ether phosphate)
o Carboxylates (Alkyl carboxylates, Sodium lauroyl sarcosinate and
Carboxylate fluorosurfactants)

• Cationic: based on permanently charged quaternary ammonium cation:

o Alkyltrimethylarnmonium salts: cetyl trimethylammonium bromide (CTAB),
cetyl trimethylammonium chloride (CTAC)
o Cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC)
o Polyethoxylated tallow amine (POEA)
o Benzalkonium chloride (BAC)

• Zwitterionic (amphoteric): based on primary, secondary or tertiary amines or

quaternary ammonium cation with:
o Sulfonates:
• CHAPS (3-[(3-Cholamidopropyl)dimethylammonio]-1-
propanesulfonate);

4
 Dissertation

• Sultaines: cocamidopropyl hydroxysultaine;

o Carboxylates:
• Amino acids
• Imino acids
• Betaines: cocamidopropyl betaine;

• Nonionic
o Fatty alcohols (Cetyl alcohol, Stearyl alcohol, Cetostearyl alcohol and Oleyl
alcohol)
o Polyoxyethylene glycol alkyl ethers
• Octaethylene glycol monododecyl ether,
• Pentaethylene glycol monododecyl ether;
o Polyoxypropylene glycol alkyl ethers
o Glucoside alkyl ethers (Decyl glucoside, Laury! glucoside, Octyl glucoside)
o Polyoxyethylene glycol octylphenol ethers
o Polyoxyethylene glycol alkylphenol
o Glycerol alkyl esters:
o Polyoxyethylene glycol sorbitan alkyl esters

1.1.3 Emulsification

A stable emulsion consisting of two pure liquids cannot be prepared; to achieve stability,
a third component, an emulsifying agent must be present. Generally, the introduction of
an emulsifying agent will lower the interfacial tension of the two phases. Emulsions are
thermodynamically unstable and the droplets have tendency to coalesce. To stabilize the
droplets, emulsifying agents or emulsifiers are needed.

Natural occurring emulsifiers in the crude oil include asphalthenes and resins, organic
acids and bases. These compounds are believed to be the main constituents of interfacial
films which form around water droplets in an oilfield emulsion3 • Mechanical stabilizers
should also been taken into account because it can lead to the formation of emulsion.
The example of mechanical stabilizer is fine solids. These fine solids found in clay
5
 Dissertation

particles, sand, asphaltenes and waxes, corrosion products, mineral scales and drilling
muds. Emulsification formation processes are also influenced by fluid mixing, shear,
turbulence diffusion, surfactant aggregation, steric stabilization, temperature and
pressure11 •

•• -
Weter droplet
+

-- Asphll ..no Stablhzod

•
... ..
•,. • -_.
water droplet

Droplets rft&st coelct11CCnce

• ••• " •, • • • due to •teric:lcolloidal .Ubilization

Figure 1.4: Mechanism of emulsion stabilization by asphaJthenes

1.1.4 Demulsification

Demulsification is the process of breaking crude oil emulsion into two phases which are
oil and water phases3 . The process of demulsification is based on modifying the interface
properties of the stable emulsion bubbles so as to cause the bubbles to coalesce and form
a continuous phase'. The oil producer is interested in two aspects of demulsification
which are;

a. The rate or the speed at which the separation takes place

b. The amount of water left in the crude oil after separation

Demulsifiers also known as emulsion breakers are functionally neutralized the natural
surface-active agents. Demulsifiers will break the emulsifying rigid films, promote
coalescence and accelerate oil water separation. Demulsifiers are chemicals that contain
solvents (benzene, toluene, xylene, short-chain alcohols, heavy aromatic naptha),
surfactants flocculants and wetting agents3 • Interfacial tension can be reduced by using

6
 Dissertation

surfactants which enhance stability of emulsion and promote the creation of small
droplets. Studies have concluded that emulsion stability is not totally dependent on the
11
interfacial tension value but on the interfacial film properties •

o ~
0

Figure 1.5: Emulsion resolution after addition of demulsifier

In the oil industry crude oil emulsions must be separated almost completely before
undergoing transportation process. Emulsion separation into oil and water involve
destabilization of emulsifying films around water droplets. This process is accomplished
by using any or combination of the methods below:

• Reduce flow velocity that creates gravitational separation of oil, water and gas.
(using large volume separators and desalters)

• Add chemical demulsifiers like surfactants

• Increase the temperature of emulsion

• Apply electrical fields that promote coalescence

• Change the physical characteristics of emulsions

(All these methods will be discussed in details in Chapter 2 - Literature Review)

7
 Dissertation

1.2 Problem Statement

Produced water occurs in two wars; some of the water mar be produced as free water
and other may be produced in the form of emulsions. Emulsions are difficult to treat and
will cause many operational problems such as tripping of separation equipment in gas-
oil separating plants, production of off-spec crude oil, and creating high pressure drop
along the flow lines.

It has always been a challenging task to efficiently break up this emulsion to separate the
oil droplet from the water phase or vice versa. The most practical method nowadays are
by applying chemical to the wellbore but the result are not sustained in a long period of
time and also cause enviromnental problems. Some chemicals had proven to be a good
demulsifier but in future these chemicals will lead to other problems like scale
precipitation and paraffms that will cause declining in production.

1.3 Objectives

Due to the problems that stated above, these are the objectives that being drawn
throughout this project and hopefully being achieved.

• To obtain the result of the usage of different surfactants and chemicals on the
emulsion stability.
• To recommend the best demulsifier by evaluating the performance of different
surfactants and chemicals.

8
 Dissertation

1.4 Scope of study

Techniques of emulsion breaker have advanced si~ificantly, over the past few years.
There are several methods available currently including thermal, mechanical, electrical
and chemical methods. The scope of study will focus on the chemical method which
includes research from books and journals on the use of different kind of surfactants and
chemicals as demulsifier. After doing some data gathering and analysis, the project will
be continued by experiments to obtain the necessary results and findings. These will
involve few analytical calculations, theories and literature reviews and laboratory
experiments. At the end of these studies, the best combination of chemicals (demulsifier)
of handling the emulsions will be recommended.

9
 Dissertation

Chapter2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Properties of Emulsions

Oilfield emulsions. life chl!facteri?ed tty several properties like appearance, basic
sediment and water (BSW), size of droplet, bulk and interfacial viscosities,
conductivities and etc. Some of the properties are described below3.

• Drop Size and Drop size Distribution

Produced emulsions generally have droplet size of greater than O.l11m and can exceed up
to 50 11m. Distribution of droplet size can be viewed in Figure 2.1. Sunil Kokal et a/ 3
reported that the droplet size distribution in an emulsion depends on a number of factors
including the 1FT, shear, nature of emulsifying agents, presence of solids, and bulk
properties of oil and water. By rule of thumb, the smaller the average size of the water
droplets, the longer the residence time required to separate the emulsions.

.----------------------·
Medium Emu!siQI"!

Loose Emulsion

1 10 100
Droplet diameter (microns)

Figure 2.1: Droplet Size Distribution of Petroleum Emulsions

10
 Dissertation

• Viscosity ofEmulsions

Viscosity of emulsions is higher than either viscosity of oil or water. This is because
emulsions show non-Newtonian behaviour due to droplet 'crowding' or structural
3
viscosity .

100000
~
.& 10000-
~
·m
fOOO-
§ "'•
50'!,

-I
> 100 ~
40%

Q. 10 ..!
~
1
I
0 ,1 10 100 1000 10000
Shear Rate (1/a)

Figure 2.2: Viscosities of very tight emulsions at 125°F at different water cut percentage

This figure indicates that emulsion exhibit Newtonian behavior up to only 30% water
cut. Beyond this limit, the slope of the curves starts to deviate from zero indicating non-
Newtonian behavior. The behavior of non-Newtonian will result to decline in viscosity
with increasing shear rates. From the graph, the very high viscosities achieved as water
cut increases up to 80%. Up to 80% water cut, the emulsion is water in oil emulsion, at
80% the emulsion inverts to oil in water emulsion and at last, at water cut above 90%
multiple emulsions occur (water in oil in water). The viscosity of emulsion depends on a
number of factors3 :

• Viscosities of oil and water

• Volume fraction of water dispersed

• Droplet size distribution
• Temperature
• Shear rate
• Amount of solids present

11
 Dissertation

2.2 Factors Affecting Stability of Emulsions

There are few important factors that will affect the stability of emulsions including:

• Heavy polar fraction in crude oil

These include asphalthenes, resins and oil soluble organic acids like carboxylic acid.
Sunil Kokal et al reported that these compounds are the main constituents of the
interfacial films surrounding the water droplets that give the emulsions their stability.

Asphalthenes have surface active characteristics that making them as a good emulsifier.
The accumulation of asphalthenes at the interface results in the formation of rigid film 3.
When this rigid film is formed, it will automatically act as a barrier to drop coalescence.
For two drops to coalesce together, the film has to be drained and ruptured. The presence
of asphalthenes will retard the drainage of the film. The primary mechanism involved in
this retardation is the steric repulsion or hindrance caused by the high molecular weight
material in the film 3•

Wat&' droplel

01

Figure 2.3: Sterle repulsion between two water droplets that retards film drainage and

coalescence

From the above figure, it shows steric repulsion produced by the interaction between the
non-polar or hydrophobic groups (water-love). This steric repulsion will maintain or
sustain the interface at a distance to prevent coalescence to be occurred. This will also
result in the increment in interfacial viscosity and apparent viscosity of oil in the film
between the water droplets.

12
 Dissertation

Resins are complex high molecular weight compounds that are not soluble in
ethylacetate but are soluble in n-heptane3• Resins have strong tendency to associate with
asphalthenes and they will form a micelle that will stabilize the emulsions well. The
asphalthene-resin ratio in crude oil is really crucial and responsible for the stability of
emulsions.

Waxes are the hi~ molecular wei~t paraffin substances present in the crude oil that
crystallize out when the oil is cooled below its cloud poinf. Waxes itself cannot form
emulsions but when it get interact with asphalthenes, it helps to stabilize the emulsions.

• Solids

Fine solid particles also contribute to the formation of emulsions. The effectiveness of
these solids in stabilizing emulsions depends on factors such as particle size, inter-
pllrticle interactions and the wettability of solids3 . Solid pllrticles help in formation of
emulsions by diffusing to the oil-water interface and prevent coalescence. To act as
emulsion stabilizers, the size of the particles should be smaller than the emulsion
droplets size.

Regarding the wettability factor, the solid should be wetted by both water and oil phases
in order to create emulsion. As example if the solid is oil wet, thus water in oil emulsion
will be result. This oil wet characteristic will prevent the water droplet to be coalesced
and so do happen to water wet in opposite situation. Examples of oil-wet solids are
asphalhenes and waxes while for water-wet solids; inorganic scales, clays and sand.

• Ten7J1erature

Temperature affects the physical properties of oil, water, interfacial films, and surfactant
solubilities in the oil and water phase3. The most important effect of temperature is on
the viscosity of emulsions which will be decrease with every single increase in

13
 Dissertation

temperature. Temperature will increase thermal energy of a system, thus will increase
the number of drop collisions.

• Droplet size

Emulsion droplet sizes ran~e from less tban a microns to over 50microns. Basically, tbe
smaller the droplet size, the more stable it will be. For water to separate from emulsions,
tbe water droplets have to coalesce with each other and the smaller tbe droplet size, more
time consuming to reach tbe separation phase.

• pH

pH influences the type of emulsion formed3 . Acid or low pH generally produces w/o
emulsions whereas high pH will produce o/w emulsions.

100
;g 80
!.'!
.,
~
(/)
60

! 40
~ 20
* 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
pH

Figure 2.4: Effect of pH and demulsifier concentration on emulsion stability

This figure shows the effect of pH on emulsion stability and it results that tbe optimum
pH for no demulsifier solution is 10 while the addition of demulsifier will promise
almost 100% water separation at pH ranges from 2-12. It concludes tbat demulsifier
speed up the demulsification process within one day.

14
 Dissertation

2.3 Demusification

2.3.1 Destabilizin~ Emulsions

Produced oil-field emulsions possess a degree of kinetic stability. This stability arises
from the formation of interfacial film around the water droplets. To break the emulsion,
the interfacial film has to be destroyed and lead to the coalescence of the droplets. The
factors that enhance the emulsion breaking include; increasing temperature, reducing
agitation or shear, increasing residence time, solids removal, and by controlling of
emulsifying agents.

2.3.2 Mechanisms Involved in Demulsification

Demulsification is the separation of an emulsion into its component phases. It can be

seen clearly with two step processes which are flocculation or aggregation and
coalescence.

• Flocculation or Aggregation - the situation when the droplets will clump

together and forming aggregates. Coalescence at this stage may be happened if
the interfacial film around the water droplets is weak. The rate of flocculation
depends on a number of factors including watercut, temperature, viscosity of the
oil, and the density difference between the oil and watel.

• C(}alesc?nc? - tltis. is tltll scx:ond mllP in thll dtlmulsifi<;ation pro<;ess.. During

coalescence, water droplets will fuse and coalesce together to form a larger drop.
It involves interfacial film thinning leading to film rupture 11 • This is an
irreversible process that leads to a decrease in number of water droplets and
eventually to complete demulsification. Coalescence is enhanced by a high rate
of flocculation, absence of mechanically strong films, high interfacial tension,
low oil and interfacial viscosities, high watercuts and high temperature.

15
 Dissertation

2.3.3 Demulsification Methods

All the methods that have been introduced (refer to Chapter 1) can be divided into four
different groups which are; thermal methods, mechanical methods, electrical methods
and chemical methods. The most common methods for emulsion treatment are the
application of heat and appropriate chemical demulsifie~. The author will briefly discuss
and explain about all types of methods but the one that will be used throughout this
project is chemical methods.

• Thermal Methods - by heating the emulsion, it will speed up the breaking and
separation process because it reduces the viscosity of oil and increase the water
settling rates. Increase in temperature result in the destabilization of the rigid film
due to decrease in interfacial viscosity. When the emulsion is been heated,
thermal energy of the system will increase, thus the frequency of coalesce to
occur also increased.

• Mechanical Methods - there are lot of equipments that available as emulsion

breaker. These include free water knock out drums, two and three phase
separators, desalters and settling tanks. This method is surface based prevention
or separation.

• Electrical Methods - it is generally theorized that water droplets have a charge

associated and when an electric field is applied, the droplets move about rapidly
and collide with each othe~. This electric field also disturbs the interfacial rigid
film by rearranging the polar molecules and weakening the tight film and
enhances coalescence.

Electrostatic dehydration is ~enerally used in coJ1junction with other methods

like chemical and heat addition. It is very seldom that this method is used alone
in breaking the emulsions.

16
 Dissertation

• Chendca/AidhodS

This is the most common method for breaking the emulsions and this method is also
called as demulsifiers. These chemicals are designed to neutralize the effect of
emulsifying agents that stabilize the emulsions3. Demulsifiers are surface active
compounds and when it mixed with emulsion, it will rupture or weaken the rigid film
and coalesce will occur.

Sunil Kokal et a/ reported that the optimum emulsion breaking with demulsifier
requires; proper selected chemical for the given emulsion, adequate quantity of this
chemical, adequate mixing of the chemical in the emulsion, sufficient retention time
in emulsion treaters, and addition of heat, electric grids, coalescers to completely
resolve the emulsions.

I '

r Nlllr.ll Su1act¥rt

Figure 2.5: Film drainage in the presence of demulsifiers which displace the natural
surfactants

Destabilization is accomplished by reducing the interfacial tension at the emulsion

interface. In order to destabilize the interfacial film surrounding the dispersed water,
a demulsifier should have strong attraction to the interface, have balanced
partitioning between the water and the oil phase, be able to diffuse through the
emulsion efficiently and be able to promote film thinning11 •

17
 Dissertation

After concentrating at the interface, it should weaken the stabilizing agent and attract
other droplets strongly to form floes or aggregates 14• In some emulsions, fine solids
such as iron sulfide, silt, clay will act as stabilizing agents, thus in spite of the
demulsifier should weaken the interfacial film, it also has to destabilize such
emulsions by changing the wettability of the solids to be dispersed either in water or
oil phase.

Demulsifiers additivies have been developed using organic compounds such as

surfactants and solvents and also inorganic materials such as salts and acidsu. One of
the common chemicals used are from alcohol gropus like nonyl phenol and t-butyl
phenol. Other than these common demulsifiers, there are also blended chemicals as
demulsifier since it is known that a single chemical compound cannot possess all the
features to be a good demulsifier and solve any emulsion problems just by using one
type of chemical.

Therefore, the industries have come out with blended chemicals as demulsifiers and
still running the experiments to obtain the best combination of chemicals. The
examples of formulated demulsifiers 14 are A - blend of xylene, toluene, naphthalene
and light aromatic naptha, B - Oxyalklated alkyl phenol/formaldehyde resin in
aromatic solvents in 1, 2, 4 - trimethylbenzene, naphthalene, naptha with diesel and
C - Blend of light aromatic naptha, 1,2,4 - trimethyl benzene aliphatic alcohols,
alkyl benzene sulphonic acid, alkylbenzene and light aromatic naptha.

In this project, the main components that will be used to become demulsifiers are the
surfactants. There are two types of surfactants that will be tested; both from ionic
surfactant groups which are from sulfates and sulfonates. These two surfactants are
Sodium Dodecyl Sulfate and Alkyl Benzene Sulfonate. In addition, the above
chemicals will be taking into consideration since these chemicals have been chosen
and proposed by industries, therefore they might be used as minor catalyst in these
surfactant solutions.

18
 Dissertation

2.4 Treatment Methods for Surfactants

The use of surfactant in the field can vary from very expensive treatment such as
surfactant flooding onto the reservoir, to moderate cost as in stimulation and wettability
reversal treatment and to a low cost as in surface injection of surfactant to break down
the produced emulsion'.

2.4.1 Formation Injection

This is the most practical and common method used worldwide. A typical treatment
would be to inject surfactant with diesel as a carrier fluid. However this method has
dis~:~dvl\lltages in terms of emulsion destabilization and also the incompatibilities with the
naturally occurring surfactants in reservoir itself. If using the wrong surfactant or
surfactant concentration, it can lead to development of emulsion. This may explain why
in some cases of surfactants treatments, the result becomes worsen.

2.4.2 Chemical Injection into Gas Lift Line

Another phase of emulsion formation will be occurred at the entry point of ~as lift
systems. There will be maximum energy in the form of agitation generated at this point.
ThC< folJ:I:lation of thC< C<fliU!~!on at th!s point wUI incre~:~se the weight of flllid 1:11'14 Ci:lll~e~
backpressure on the formation thus will increase the drawdown and reduce the
production rate.

One case study at Bahrain field, the surfactant was injected into the gas-lift stream at the
wellhead using high pressure injection pump. As gas enters the tubing through gas lift
mandrel, the emulsion occurred is broken down. However, the rate for surfactant
injection should be optimized and it is based on trial and error.

2.4.3 Solid Surfactant

There are heavy wax-based surfactant sticks that are 2" diameter and 18" length and can
be dropped into the wellbore periodically which will dissolve along the flow from top of
tubing to the perforation area. The dissolving process will reduce the interfacial tension
between water and oil hence improving oil water separation in tubing.

19
 Dissertation

2.4.4 Surface Treatments

There is also one of the most common methods where surfactants will be injected to the
flowing stream at the wellhead or at the well manifold to improve oil-water separation.
In wintertime, flowing stream is further circulated into oil heater to improve separation
since temperature is one of the accelerated properties. This method is also on trial and
error basis.

20
 Dissertation

Chapter3

METHODOLOGY

3.1 Project Flow Activities

3.1.1 Theoretical Studies and Literature Reviews

From the theoretical studies, facts and theories related to emulsion formation and
destabilization will be obtained and collected. Literature sources such as experimental
studies, journals and reference books will be the main sources to identify the concept of
emulsions formation, diagnosing the different cases of emulsions occurrence, and
<liff~r~J!t t~c;:lmiqq~s fqr ~J!ll!lsiQns p~v~ntiqn. All tlw f!l<;ts th!lt r~l!it~<l tq th~ s<;Qp~ qf
studies will be reviewed and further on will be analyzed. This part is very crucial since
this is the kick point of this project that will determine next approaches or procedures.

3.1.2 Data Analysis and Interpretations

ln this section, further dis.cussilln and analysis will be completed regarding the available
techniques to be used as emulsions prevention which will focus more on surfactants
treatment. The using of surfuctants to the emulsions breaker will be the major concern in
this section. The selection of chemicals and surfactants for testing purposes will be done
accon:ling to tl\e several criteria such as properties of these chemicals, effectiveness and
adaptability to the hydrocarbon in the formation or wellbore. With the aid of these
theories, the experiments might be continued to obtain the performance of these
surfactants.

21
 Dissertation

3.1.3 Experimental Setup and Procedures

The experimental work was performed under constant temperature 28°C (room
temperature) and water content approximately 70% volume. The demulsifiers tested will
be varies from I 000 to 5000 ppm concentration and 2 to 5 ml of volume. While the
emulsion sample per test will be fixed as 5ml in volume. The test will be conducted and
the results will be taken in 15minutes, 30minutes, 1hour, 2hours and 24hours. There are
six demulsifiers that been tested and the details will be listed in the table below:

Table 3.1 : Descriptions ofDemulsifiers

Demulsifier A Toluene
Demulsifier 8 Phenol
Demulsifier C Sodium I"" .... J Sulfate (SDS)
Demulsifier D Alkyl Benzene Sulfonate (AOS)
SDS + 0.05ml toluene + 0.05ml
Demulsifier E phenol
AOS + 0.05ml toluene + 0.05ml
Demulsifier F phenol

3.1. 3.1 Preparation of Emulsion Samples

Emulsion will be made by mixing 70ml ofNaOH solution 0.9wt% (emulsion stabilizer)
and 30m! of crude oil. This mixture will be agitated by mixer for 5-10 minutes. This
sample will be kept in a funnel for 30 minutes to allow the free water to settle. The
bottom valve of the funnel was then opened to let the free water out to obtain pure
emulsion. At the end of this part, water and crude oil content in emulsion will be
calculated by using below formulas.

Volume ofNaOH solution (ml) = x

Volume of crude oil (ml) = y

Total mixture (ml) = x + y

22
 Dissertation

Vol ofNaOH solution drained off (ml) =a

Vol of crude drained off(ml) = b

Vol of emulsion (ml) =Total mixture - (a+ b)

Water content in emulsion (ml) = (x- a) I (vol of emulsion)

Crude oil content of emulsion (ml) = Vol of emulsion - Water content in emulsion

Therefore, from the above calculation we could approximate the volume of water
content and also the volume of crude oil content in the pure emulsion. These data are
very important to be noted since it will be used at the end of calculation in order to
measure water separated and crude oil separated.

3.1. 3.2 Preparation ofDemulsifier Solution

There are two surfactants from ionic groups will be. tested in this project which are
Sodium Dodecly Sulfate (SDS) and Alkyl Benzene Sulfonate (AOS) and the other two
chemical bases which are phenol and toluene. These two surfactants have been chosen
due to the availability in the market and both surfactants are for testing purposes rather
than other surfactants which are not so compatible for testing.

SurfactMts s.olution will be prepared according to specified concentrations. which are

I OOOppm, 2000ppm, 3000ppm, 4000ppm and 5000ppm. These concentrations have been
drawn according to the recent tested surfactants in tertiary recovery whilst for secondary
recovery, basically the surfactant concentration will be around hundreds ppm.
Meanwhile for- toluene and phenol, they will be diluted in a range of 1OOppm to 500ppm.
Each demulsifier will be prepared in 50ml of volume to ease the retesting purposes later
on.

The formulas to prepare the surfactant solutions are like below;

23
 Dissertation

X ppm=

[(amount of surfactant/toluene/phenol in grams) I (amount of distilled water in ml)] *

(106)

3.1.3.3 Samples Testing

After the emulsion and demulsifier solution have been prepared, then sample testings
can be started. The emulsion approximation of 5ml in volume will be placed in 1Om! test
tubes and later oil the demulsifiers were added to the test tubes according to their
concentrations and volumes. The tubes then were put in a centrifuge running at 2000rpm
for a period of 10 minutes to ensure fully mixing between emulsion and demulsifiers.

The volumes of each of the separated oil and water phases were measured and taken in
periodic of time 15minutes, 30minutes, I hour, 2hours and 24hours. These periodic of
time taking were drawn in order to measure and obtain which demulsifier will give fast
reaction result (in 15 minutes) and highest separation result (in 24hours). Finally, all
these factors will put into consideration and the best deinulsifieF will be chosen based on
their best performance.

3.1.3.4 Data Calculation and Analysis

The data that will be collected are the final vo.lume of water c.olurnn and crude oil
colunm in the test tubes. All these volumes will be calculated and the values will be in
percentage forms. The details of the calculation will be presented on the next section and
they differ according to different demulsifiers. The table below is an example of
spreadsheet data obtained;

Table 3.2: Water and Crude Oil Separation

Vol ofEmulsion (ml) 5.0

Estimated Vol of Water (ml) 3.5
Estimated Vol of Crude (ml) 1.5
Vol ofDemulsifier tested (ml) 5.0

24
 Dissertation

, ~
--
Water Seperatioa
Sodium Dodecyl Sulfate (SDS) 0.25h 0.5h 1h 2h 24h
1000ppm 5.71% 8.57% 10.00% 11.43% 34.29%
2000ppm 5.71% 7.14% 10.00% 12.00% 34.29%
3000ppm 14.29% 19.43% 21.43% 25.71% 38.57%
4000ppm 14.29"/o 15.71% 22.86% 28.57% 45.71%
5000ppm 8.57% 14.29% 18.29% 25.71% 51.43%
Crude... .
Sodium Dodecyl Sulfate (SDS) 0.25h 0.5h lh 2h 24h
IOOOppm 8.00% 10.00% 10.00% 15.33% 24.00%
2000ppm 8.00% 10.00% 9.33% 16.67% 26.00%
3000ppm 9.33% 9.33% 10.00% 18.00% 28.00%
4000ppm 9.33% 11.33% 12.00% 19.33% 30.00%
5000ppm 10.67% 12.00% 12.67% 20.00% 32.67%

The procedures of getting the volume of the water and crude are by reading from the
l Om! measuring cylinder.

Volume of crude oil after

demulsi fication

Emulsion left I
Volume of water+ demulsifier after
demulsification

Figure 3.1: Emulsion Sample

Estimation Volume ofCrude Oil and Water after Demulsijication

When dealing with toluene and phenol (oil based catalysts), there will be addition or
errors in volume of crude oil after separation and same goes to volume of water after
separation when dealing with SDS and AOS solutions (water based catalysts). Here

25
 Dissertation

initial volume of demulsifier should not be neglected because it will affect final volume
of water and crude oil.

Below is an example of calculation for water and crude oil separation using SDS
solution. This method of calculation applied to sample testings using SDS and AOS
solution.

Before Separation;

Emulsion tested (-70% WC) = Sml Expected water content= 3.5ml

SDS added = 5ml Expected crude oil content = 1.5 ml

Mter separation;

Oil column = !.2m!

Water+ SDS column = 7.2 ml

Remaining emulsion = 1.6 ml

Therefore, percentage of water and crude oil separated are;

%water separated= (7.2ml- 5ml) I (3.5ml) = 62.86%

%crude oil separated= (!.2m!) I (1.5ml) = 80.00%

Below is an example of calculation for water and crude oil separation using phenol. This
method of calculation applied to sample testings using toluene and phenol.

Before Separation;

Emulsion tested (-70% WC) = Sml Expected water content= 3.5ml

Toluene added= 1m! Expected crude oil content = 1.5 ml

Mter separation;

Oil+ toluene column (1/2) = 1.80 ml

26
 Dissertation

Water+ toluene column (112) = 3.65 ml

Remaining emulsion= 0.55 ml

Approx crude oil separated= (1.8ml- 0.5* lml) = 1.3 ml

Approx water separated= (3.65ml- 0.5*lml) = 3.15 ml

Therefore, percentage of water and crude oil separated are;

%water separated= (3.15ml) I (3.5ml) = 90.00%

%crude oil separated= (1.3ml) I (l.Sml) = 86.67%

3.1.3.5 Modification ofDemulsifier Solution

Due to the. application of phenol and toluene in a large amount of quantity will cause
contamination to the crude oil and also caused environmental problems, thus
modification of demulsifier has been made. Combination of demulsifiers will be made in
this following order.

Demulsifier E = SDS + 0.05ml toluene+ 0.05ml phenol (blended)

Demulsifier F = AOS + 0.05ml toluene + 0.05ml phenol (blended)

For above demulsifiers, the method of calculating for water and crude oil separation is
same like SDS and AOS method. This is because the volume of toluene and phenol
added are very small and assumes to be negligible.

Below is an example of calculation for water and crude. oil separation using Demulsifier
F solution. This method of calculation applied to sample testings using Demulsifier E
and Demulsifier F solution.

Before Separation;

Emulsion tested (-70% WC) = 5ml Expected water content= 3.5ml

Demulsifier added = 5ml Expected crude oil content = I .5 ml

27
 Dissertation

After separation;

Oil column = 1.28ml

Water+ SDS column= 8.10 ml

Remaining emulsion = 0.62 ml

Therefore, percentage of water and crude oil separated are;

%water separated= (8.lml- 5ml) I (3.5ml) = 88.57%

%crude oil separated= (1.28ml) I (1.5ml) = 85.33%

3.1.3.6 Result Analysis and Finalization

For this section all the data will be analysed and at the end the best demulsifier will be
known due to the best capabilities to separate water and crude oil from the emulsion.
Each demulsifier tested will give different values and therefore with the aid of graphs we
could see clearly which demulsifier promised best results. Some demulsifiers might be
good in separating the wateF from emulsion but not to erode oil separation. Thus, the
highest separation obtained for both water and crude oil and also considered about the
environmental impact, one demulsifier will be chosen. Example of graph for the results
is like below;

28
 Dissertation

Water Separation by Demulsifiers

100.00%
90.00%
80.00%
70.00% - + - No Demulsifler

.. Ql
IIIII
ftl 60.00%
cQl 50.00%
- Demulsifier A

Demulsifier B
...u
Ql 40.00%
1:1. - Demulsifier C
30.00%
Demulsifler D
20.00%
Demulsifier E
10.00%
0.00% DPmulsifler F

IL n me Periodic

Figure 3.2: Water Separation by Demulsifiers

29
 Dissertation

3.2 Project Flow Chart

Preparation of
emulsion ("'70%WC)

-l/
Preparation of
demulsifier solution

J.__/
Samples Testing

J L

Data calculat ion and

analysis
1

Modification of
Demulsifier Solution

Result analysis and

finalization

Documentation

Figure 3.3: Project Flow Chart

30
 Dissertation

3.3 Gantt Chart

5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14

emulsion

Demulsifier
Solution
(SDS,AOS,toluene
and phenol)

Samples testing
Data
and analysis

Demulsifier
Solution

and finalization

Progress report

Interim Report

Oral presentation

31
 Dissertation

3.4 Tools and Equipments

In this experiment, there are only few apparatus and chemicals used. Below are the lists
and the pictures of each apparatus and chemicals;

Measuring Cylinder lOrn! Measuring Cylinder 1OmJ Beaker 200m!

.
0 ~\ITll\1 • I

Mixer Sodium Dodecyl Sulfate Alkyl Benzene Sulfonate

(SDS) (AOS)

---- --

Phenol Sodium Hydroxide Toluene

32
 Dissertation

Chapter4

RESULTS & DISCUSSIONS

During the separation tests, there are six demulsifiers tested and they are labeled as
Demulsifier A, Demulsifier B, Demulsifier C, Demulsifier D, Demulsifier E and
Demulsifer F. The addition of these demulsifiers will break the interfacial film or in
other words it will speed up the interfacial film thinning. The table below presents the
details. of each demtdsifier,

Table 4.1: Details ofDemulsifiers

Volume Tested Concentration

T~ pe ofDemulsitler Description Tested
1~2111l.per$ml 100-SQO.ppm

1-2m! per Sml I 00-SOOp.pm

Demulsifier B Phenol emulsion

Demulsifier F

The demulsifiers have been tested according to certain .parameters such as volume,
concentration and also time-periodic of taking the data. The first four demulsifiers were
tested and some modifications have been made and thus combination of chemicals and
surfactants created Demulsifier E and F. The modification has been made due to few
purposes; accelerate speed of emulsion breaking, avoid contamination with the crude oil
and environmental issues.

Throughout this experiment, the results that will be obtained are amount of water
separated and also amount of oil separated. Most of the experiments done in the

33
 Dissertation

industries mainly focus on the water separation but not oil separation. Through
development of the demulsifier, some of the chemicals might be able to separate water
effectively from the emulsion but not crude oil. Therefore by taking into accounts both
rate of separation is the most practical way.

4.1 Volume ofDemulsifier

Water and Cf\lde oil separation mcrease with increasing volume of demulsifier
(surfactant loading) added to the emulsion. It means that too little demulsifier will leave
the emulsion unresolved and partially react with the emulsion. On the other hand, if too
high dosages of demulsifier are applied, it also may cause the emulsion become more
stable and thus the r-ate of separ-ation will be low. The graphs below r-epr-esent water and
crude oil separation by Sodium Dodecyl Sulfate (Demulsifier C) with 1OOOppm
concentration.

Water Separation by SDS lOOOppm

40.00%
35.00%

.."'
Cll
1111

c
Cll
...u
30.00%
25.00%
20.00%
/ 2m I
Cll 15.00% - - 4ml
CL.
10.00%
Sml
5.00% <>
0.00%
0.25h 0.5h 1h 2h 24h

Time Periodic

Figure 4.1 : Water Separation by SDS 1OOOppm

The graph (Figure 4.1 and 4.2) shows the rate of water and crude oil separation increased
when the volume of SDS solution change from 2ml to 5ml. However, there is slightly
similar effect or result on the water separ~tion by demulsifier loading of 4ml and 5ml.
This might be explained through plateau rate which the interfacial films of oil already
fully saturated with the demulsifier added.

34
 Dissertation

Crude Separation by SDS 1000ppm

30.()()'K.

2S.QO'K,

..
Gl
110
II$
c
20.()()'K.

..
Gl
\,1
Gl
A.
lS.QO'K,

lO.QO'K,
2m I

4ml

Sml
S.QO'K,

O.QO'K,

0.2Sh O.Sh lh 2h 24h

Time Periodic

Figure 4.2: Crude Oil Separation by SDS 1OOOppm

4.2 Concentrations of Surfactants

Oil film life time decreased with the increasing concentration of demulsifier. This shows
that the demulsifier molecules are adsorbed on the oil film, meanwhile film strength and
stability decreased and the rate of oil film thinning and the demulsifying efficiency
increased with increase of the demulsifier concentration. When the concentration is
increased even more, the demulsifiers are saturated at oil- water interface and the oil film
life time remains constant (plateau rate).

In this experiment, both surfactants Sodium Dodecyl Sulfate (SDS) and Alkyl Benzene
Sulfonate (AOS) have been tested according to five different concentrations which are
lOOOppm, 2000ppm, 3000ppm, 4000ppm and 5000ppm. From the graphs below, we can
see clearly by increasing the concentration of surfactant, the rate of separation has been
increased.

35
 Dissertation

Water Separation by SDS

60.00%

50.00%

.."'
Cll
110

c:
Cll
40.00%

30.00%
1000ppm

2000ppm
...u
Cll 3000ppm
0.. 20.00%
- 4000ppm
10.00%
5000ppm
0.00%
0.25h O.Sh 1h 2h 24h

Time Periodic

Figure 4.3: Water Separation by SDS

With an increase of demulsifier concentration, the slope of each line has been increased
(Figure 4.3 and 4.4). The rate of separation for both water and crude oil are significantly
increased when tested from lower to higher concentration.

Crude Separation by SDS

35.00%

30.00%

25.00%

'...
1000ppm
"'Cll
1:
20.00%
2000ppm
u 15.00%
Cll 3000ppm
0..
10.00%
- - 4000ppm
5 .00%
SOOOppm
0.00%
0.25h O.Sh 1h 2h 24h

Time Periodic

Figure 4.4: Crude Oil Separation by SDS

36
 Dissertation

4.3 Comparison of Surfactants

Analysis of the results from Figure 4.5 and 4.6, both graphs show that the performance
of AOS is greater than SDS in terms of water separation and also crude oil separation.
Both surfactants are likely produce the same results for the first fifteen minutes and
along with time, the rate of separation for AOS had increased gradually and steeply than
SDS. From figure 4.5, it can be observed that at 24hours time periodic, both water and
crude oil separation for AOS are much greater than SDS; approximately 80% and 70%
respectively.

Water and Crude Oil Separation (3ml)

90.00%
80.00%
70.00% Water

..'"
c
60.00%
50.00%
Separation SDS
Water

..
Cll
u
Cll
A.
40.00%
30.00%
Separation AOS
Crude
Separation SDS
20.00% Crude
10.00% Separation AOS
0.00%
0.2Sh O.Sh 1h 2h 24h
nmePerlodic

Figure 4.5: Water and Crude oil Separation of3mJ Surfactant Loading

Water and Crude Oil Separation (Sml)

90.00%
80.00%
70.00% Water

.."
Cll
IIIII

c
60.00%
50.00%
Separation SDS
Water

..
Cll
u
Cll
A.
40.00%
30.00%
Separation AOS
Crude
20.00% Separation SDS
10.00% Crude
0.00% Separation AOS

0.2Sh O.Sh 1h 2h 24h

nme Periodic

Figure 4.6: Water and Crude oil Separation of 5ml Surfactant Loading

37
 Dissertation

From Figure 4.6, 5ml of surfactant loading shows quite similar pattern with 3m!
surfactant loading. At the beginning of test sample, both type of surfactants show same
reaction and these results vary towards the end where it can be observed AOS shows
better performance than SDS. At 24hours time periodic, both water and crude oil
separation for AOS are much greater than SDS; approximately 82% and 75%
respectively.

Based on the above results, it can be concluded that Alkyl Benzende Sulfonate (AOS)
produce better result compared to Sodium Dodecyl Sulfate (SDS). AOS promised a
faster reaction and higher separation at the end of samples testing.

4.4 Comparison ofDemulsifiers

Analysis of the results (Table 4.2, Figures 4.7 & 4.8) shows that Demulsifier B gives the
highest water separation of approximately 91% followed by Demulsifier F and D.
Meanwhile, for crude oil separation, Demulsifier A is the best with 90% separation
followed by Demulsifier F, E and B.

Table 4.2: Water and Crude Oil Separation by Demulsifiers

Crude Separation 0.25h O.Sh 1h 2h 24h

No Demulsifier 6.67% 6.67% 8.00% 8.67% 9.33%
Demulsifier A 66.67% 80.00% .83.33% 86.1)7%. 90.00%
Demulsifler B · · 60.00% ·. 66.67% 70.00% 73.33% 76.67%
!>~MM~~~t~L·•· · · · •· i •·. •j(),~?% . ·~~:~1\%. .J.~i~l% ~~i~~f )7.·~'!%
Demulsifier D 10.00% 12.67% 14.67% 20.67% 73.33%

38
 Dissertation

-- -- ,_- -- ,·-
, ~ -

Demulsifier E 40.00% 50.00% 53.33% 56.67% 76.67%

Demulsifier F 46.67% 56.67% 60.00% 63.33% 85.33%

Water Separation by Demulsifiers

100.00%
No Demulslfler
80.00% Demulsifier A
:.
!! 60.00% DemulsifierB
c
5t 40.00%
- Demulsifier C
Q,
Demulsifier 0

-
20.00%
Demulsifier E
0.00% Demulsifier F
0.25h O.Sh 1h 2h 24h

Time Periodic

Figure 4. 7: Water Separation by Demulsifiers

Crude Separation by Demulsifiers

100.00%

• • • No Oemulsifier

~
80.00% Oemulsifier A

.."'
Cll
1111

c
60.00% Oemulsiflt!r B

.
Cll
u
Cll
Q,
40.00%
Oemulsifier C

Oemulsifier 0
20.00% Oemulslfler E

0.00% Demulsifler F

0.25h O.Sh lh 2h 24h

Time Periodic

Figure 4.8: Crude Oil Separation by Demulsifiers

Based on the graphs (Figure 4. 7 & 4.8), Demulsifier B, E and F are showing good
performance either in water or crude oil separation. In spite of high separation of water
and crude from the emulsion, these demulsifiers promised fast reaction compared to

39
 Dissertation

others demulsifiers. This characteristic is very crucial in order to shorten the shut in
period of the candidate wells and thus can reduce loss due to off-production.

The proposed demulsifier for this emulsion samples is Demulsifier F which are blended
of AOS and a small portion of toluene and phenol. This proposed demulsifier occupied
rate of separation for both water and crude oil; approximately 88% and 85%
respectively.

Demulsifier F
100.00%

80.00%
:0
I'CI 60.00%
cGl Crude oil
separation
:.~ 40.00%
Water
20.00% Separation

0.00%
0.25h O.Sh lh 2h 24h
Time Periodic

Figure 4.9: Demulsifier F Performance

40
 Dissertation

ChapterS

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION

5.1 Conclusions

Based on the experimental analysis in the results and discussions section, surfactants
can be one of the best demulsifier. The application of the surfactants can break or
destabilize the emulsion particles effectively with the aid of minor catalysts such as
phenol and toluene. The results show great value of water and crude oil separation by
using Sodium Dodecyl Sulfate (SDS) and Alkyl Benzene Sulfonate (AOS). Among
these two surfactants, AOS show more impressive performance by giving higher
separation and also reduce the residence time (fast reaction).

The recommended demulsifier is combination of AOS and very small volume of

toluene and phenol. These minor catalysts will help AOS in accelerating the separation
of water and oil while AOS will mainly working on reducing the interfacial tension
(film) of the oil and water droplets.

5.2 Recommendation

However a wellbore treatment still needs to be carried out to eliminate emulsion from
the source. This can be done by diverting the flow mechanism from radial to linear by
means of fracturing the formation by proppants. This would avoid the flow from
becoming turbulence thus promote emulsion formation.

41
 Dissertation

6 References

1. Johann Sjoblom : Emulsions and Emulsion Stability Second Edition, CRC Press
Taylor & Francis Group (2006)

2. Milton J. Rosen : Surfactants and Interfacial Phenomena, John Wiley & Sons
Inc. Publication, Hoboken, New Jersey (2004)

3. Sunil Kokal, SPE, Saudi Aramco : Crude Oil Emulsions, A State of the Art
Review, SPE 77497 (2002)

4. Christine Dalmazzone, Christine Noik I Institut Francais du Petrole IFP :

Development of New "green" Demulsijiers for Oil Productions, SPE 65041
(2001)

5. C. Dalmazzone, C. Noik and L.Komunjer. : Mechanisms of Crude-Oil/Water

Interface Destabilization by Silicone Demulsijiers , SPE International
Symposium, SPE 80241 (2004)

6. Abdullah Al-Ghamdi & Sunil Kokal :Investigation ofCauses of Tight Emulsions

in Gas Oil Separation Plants, SPE 81508 (2003)

7. N. Al-Bastaki, A.Abbas, and H.Zubari : Improving the Production of Heavy

Emulsion Crudes in the Bahrain Field : Experimental and Field Investifations,
SPE 81450 (2003)

8. Merek Pakulski :Accelerating Effect ofSurfactants on Gas Hydrates Formation,

SPE 106166 (2007)

9. Girma Biresaw & K.L. Mittal : Surfactants in Tribology CRC Press Taylor &
Francis Group (2008)

42
 Dissertation

10. K. Robert Lange : Suifactants A Practical Handbook, Hanser Gardner

Publications Inc. (1999)

11. Y. Yang, K.I Dismuke, G.S. Penny and J. Paktinat: Lab and Field Study ofNew
Micremulsion-Bases Crude Oil Demulsifier for Well Completions, SPE 121762
(2009)

12. P.D. Berger, C. Hsu, J.P. Arendell : Designing and Selecting Demulsifiers for
Optimum Field Peiformance on the Basis of Production Fluid Characteristics,
SPE Production Engineering (1998)

13. M. Yang, A.C. Stewart and G.A.Davies : Interactions Between Chemical

Additives and Their Effects on Emulsion Separation, SPE 36617 (1996)

14. Bapan K. Dutta, SPE, BAPCO and Hani H. Ahmned: Production Improvement
by Downhole Demulsification - A Simple and Cost Effective Approach, SPE
81568 (2003)

15. J.H. Beetge and B.O. Home : Chemical Demulsifier Development Based on
Critical Electric Field Measurements, SPE 93325 (2005)

16. Montserrat Fortuny, Cesar B.Z. Oliveira, Rosana, Marcio Nele : Effect of
Salinity, Temperature, Water Content and pH in the Microwave Demulsifications
ofCrude Oil Emulsions, Energy and Fuels 2007

17. Wanli Kang, Guolin Jing, Hongyan Zhang bifluence of Demulsifier on

Inteifacial Film Between Oil and Water (2005)

18. Robert J. Fiocco, Kenneth W. Becker, Maljorie A. Walsh: Improved Laboratory

Demulsification Tests for Oil Spill Response

19. Dr Ragauskas : Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for Centrifuge and

Ultracentrifuge

43
 Dissertation

7 Appendices

Crude Separation AOS 3000ppm

80.00%
70.00%
60.00%
II!. 50.00%

.....
J!
c 40.00% -...3ml
1:! 30.00%
20.00% -1!1-Sml
10.00%
0.00%
0.2Sh O.Sh lh 2h 24h

Time Periodic

Appendix A

Water Separation AOS 3000ppm

···~c···3ml

-111-Sml

0.25h O.Sh lh 2h 24h

Time Periodic

AppendixB

44
 Dissertation

Vol of Emulsion (ml) 5

Estimated Vol of Water (ml) 3.5
Estimated Vol of Crude (ml) 1.5
Vol of Demulsifier tested (ml) 2

Water Seperation
Sodium Dodecyl Sulfate (SDS) 0.25h 0.5h 1h 2h 24h
1000ppm 5.71% 10.00% 11.43% 13.71% 31.43%
2000ppm 17.14% 18.57% 20.57% 21.43% 32.29%
3000ppm 14.29% 17.14% 20.00% 20.86% 33.71%
4000ppm 17.14% 20.00% 21.14% 22.86% 35.14%
5000ppm 22.86% 25.71% 27.14% 28.57% 36.57%
Append1xC

Vol of Emulsion (ml) 5

Estimated Vol of Water (ml) 3.5
Estimated Vol of Crude (ml) 1.5
Vol of Demulsifier tested (ml) 3

Water Seperation
Sodium Dodecyl Sulfate (SDS) 0.25h 0.5h 1h 2h 24h
1000ppm 20.00% 21.43% 25.71% 28.57% 32.86%
2000ppm 17.14% 22.86% 26.29% 28.57% 32.86%
3000ppm 20.00% 21.43% 24.29% 25.71% 31.43%
4000ppm 22.86% 25.71% 27.14% 28.57% 35.71%
5000ppm 27.14% 31.43% 32.86% 34.29% 40.00%
Append1xD

Vol of Emulsion (ml) 5

Estimated Vol of Water (ml) 3.5
Estimated Vol of Crude (ml) 1.5
Vol of Demulsifier tested (ml) 4

CrudeSeperation
Sodium Dodecyl Sulfate (SDS) 0.25h 0.5h 1h 2h 24h
1000ppm 8.00% 10.00% 10.00% 12.00% 20.00%
2000ppm 8.00% 10.00% 9.33% 12.67% 20.67%
3000ppm 9.33% 9.33% 10.00% 14.00% 22.00%
4000ppm 9.33% 11.33% 12.00% 13.33% 23.33%
5000ppm 10.67% 12.00% 12.67% 14.67% 24.00%
AppendixE

45