Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Wettability alteration and retention of mixed polymer-grafted silica nanoparticles onto oil-wet porous medium

Wettability alteration and retention of mixed polymer-grafted silica nanoparticles onto oil-wet... Enhanced oil recovery (EOR) processes are applied to recover trapped or residual oil in the reservoir rocks after primary and secondary recovery methods. Changing the wettability of the rock from oil-wet to water-wet is named wettability alteration. It is an important factor for EOR. Due to their unique properties, nanoparticles have gained great attention for improving oil recovery. Despite the promising results, the main challenges of applying nanoparticles are related to the colloidal sta- bility of the nanofluids in the harsh conditions of the reservoirs. In recent years, polymer-grafted nanoparticles have been considered as novel promising materials for EOR. The obtained results showed that adding a hydrophobic agent trimethoxy (propyl) silane on the surface of modified silica nanoparticles with polyethylene glycol methyl ether has an effective role in improving retention and wettability alteration, especially in the oil-wet substrate due to hydrophobic interaction. The modified silica nanoparticle by mixed polyethylene glycol methyl ether (Mn ~ 5000) and trimethoxy (propyl) silane showed a proper performance at a concentration of 1000 ppm and a salinity range of 2000–40,000 ppm. The obtained findings can help for a better understanding of the silica nanofluid modification with both hydrophilic and hydrophobic agents for the EOR application of near-wellbore. Keywords Wettability alteration · Retention · Silica nanoparticle · Surface modification · Enhanced oil recovery 1 Introduction sources around the world. Hence, it is essential to develop novel methods for the recovery of the residual oil from Hydrocarbon resources are the main source of primary the rock pore space (Guo et al. 2016). There are several energy, contributing to the most used energy in the world methodologies used for increasing the amount of crude oil (Aftab et al. 2017; Agista et al. 2018; Patel et al. 2015). named enhanced oil recovery (EOR). EOR studies have been Injection of conventional water into oil reservoirs has been focused on the reduction of interfacial tension between water considered as the most commonly used secondary recovery and oil (Buijse et al. 2012), viscosity control (Jamaloei and method which can extract one-third of oil from the reser- Kharrat 2010), and wettability alteration of the reservoir voir rocks (Kazemzadeh et al. 2018). Hydrocarbon resources rocks which are effective parameters to enhance hydrocar - are the most demanded non-renewable and limited energy bon production (Zhao et al. 2010). Nanoparticles are one of the main nanomaterials that received the most attention for EOR purposes (Zhang et al. Edited by Xiu-Qiu Peng 2018). Due to their unique properties, they can penetrate the small pores of the reservoir rocks and alter the wettability * Hamid Daneshmand hamiddaneshmand1370@gmail.com of rock from oil-wet to water-wet state (Zargartalebi et al. 2015). As a result, trapped oil is extracted from the pore rock Department of Physics, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran along with a decrease in the capillary forces (Wang et al. Department of Chemistry, Faculty of Science, Yazd 2005). Most researches have been studied the capability of University, Yazd, Iran metal oxide nanoparticles (SiO , Al O , ZnO, T iO , NiO, 2 2 3 2 Department of Materials Engineering, Tarbiat Modares ZrO , and Fe O ) for EOR purposes (Giraldo et al. 2013; 2 3 4 University, Tehran, Iran Iglauer et al. 2015; Nwidee et al. 2017). Department of Material Science, Shahreza Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran Vol:.(1234567890) 1 3 Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 963 The main challenge for using the nanofluid in real condi- For example, Binks et al. (Binks and Rodrigues 2007; tions of the reservoir is related to the colloidal suspension Binks et al. 2007) showed that silica nanoparticles sta- stability and the agglomeration of nanoparticles (Ehtesabi bilize oil-in-water macro-emulsions when blended with et  al. 2014; Hendraningrat and Torsæter 2015; Ju et  al. an anionic or cationic surfactant. Johnston et al. (Bagaria 2002; Miranda et al. 2012). The stability of nanoparticles is et  al. 2013; Xue et al. 2014) studied various iron-oxide based on the electrostatic double-layer forces which can be nanoparticles grafted with amphiphilic and charged poly- affected at high-salinity. In this condition, the ionic strength mers. They reported a decrease in the interfacial tension of high salt concentration reduces electrostatic repulsive between oil and water. Also, they studied the effect of force between nanoparticles (Al-Anssari et  al. 2016; Ju iron-oxide clusters and silica nanoparticles coated with et al. 2006) (Fig. 1a). Furthermore, nanoparticles have a high poly  [oligo  (ethylene oxide) monomethyl ether meth- tendency to aggregate. This is because of the high surface- acrylate] and showed a significant reduction in inter- to-volume ratio and the existence of mutual van der Waals facial tension at very low nanoparticle concentrations forces between nanoparticles (Hendraningrat and Torsæter (1–10 ppm) (Foster et al. 2014; Kim and Krishnamoorti 2014; Ranka et al. 2015). Therefore, aggregation phenom- 2015). Lead et al. (Mirshahghassemi and Lead 2015; Pal- ena in nanoparticles can close pore throat and diminish choudhury and Lead 2014) reported polymer-coated nano- permeability that is essential for retention and subsequently particles that have the potential to separate oil–water mix- wettability alteration of rocks (Songolzadeh and Mogha- tures. Behzadi and coworkers (Behzadi and Mohammadi dasi 2017). The aggregation effect of nanoparticles can be 2016) studied the modified SiO with mixed polyethylene reduced by special methods. Recent studies have proposed glycol and propyl chains. They reported enhancing oil different approaches to modify the nanoparticle surface by recovery and wettability alteration of the glass substrate. mixing it with a polymer or surfactant that renders a bet- Choi et al. (Choi et al. 2017) studied that modified SiO ter performance than unmodified nanoparticles (Al-Anssari nanoparticles with a zwitterionic polymer. The results et  al. 2017a, b, c; Al-Anssari et al. 2018; Hendraningrat showed that these modified nanoparticles could improve et al. 2012). The grafting surface of the nanoparticle with a the oil recovery by 5% volume with 0.3 psi reduction in long-chain polymer is studied as a novel approach that not pressure. Moreover, the retention of polymer-grafted nano- only improves the stability of nanofluid but also increases particles onto the carbonate surface altered the wettability. flowability through the porous media at reservoir conditions. They found that the oil recovery was improved by 10.8% Fig. 1 Schematic of the EOR process for wettability alteration of reservoir rock with mixed polymer-grafted silica nanoparticles. a The aggre- gation of nanoparticles in the condition of the reservoir. b The addition of hydrophilic polymer on the surface of silica nanoparticle to prevent aggregation with steric stabilizer effect. c The addition of hydrophobic polymer on the surface of silica nanoparticle for increasing retention on the oil-wet substrate due to hydrophobic interaction. d Extracted oil from reservoir rock with retention of mixed polymer-grafted silica nanopar- ticles due to wettability alteration 1 3 964 Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 with 0.03 wt% of nanocomposite additives in compari- 2 Experimental details son with the seawater. El-Hoshoudy et al. (2016) studied the performance of polyacrylamide polymer-grafted SiO 2.1 Materials nanoparticles. Results showed that grafted nanoparticles indicated high anti-salinity, resistance against temperature, Non-porous silica nanoparticles ( AEROSIL 200) were and shear resistance properties with thickening behavior. used with a specific area of 200 ± 25 m /g. The average Besides, the wettability of the oil-wet rock surface can be primary particle size was 12 nm. Solid-glass bead (boro- altered to water-wet at high salinity of 40,000 ppm and a silicate, diam. 3 mm), polyethylene glycol methyl ether high temperature of 90 °C. The oil recovery of 2000 mg/L averages Mn ~ 2000 (PEG1), polyethylene glycol methyl of polymer-grafted SiO was reported 60% of residual oil ether averages Mn ~ 5000 (PEG2), 3-glycidoxypropyltri- saturation. However, despite valuable researches, further methoxysilane (GPTMS, 98%), and trimethoxy (propyl) studies are needed for polymer-modified nanoparticles silane (C3S, 97%) were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich. for designing more efficient polymer-coated nanoparti- Acetic acid (glacial, 100.0%), n-hexane (99.9%), sulfuric cles. Researchers mostly focused on the increase in the acid (98%), hydrogen peroxide (30%), and ethanol (99.9%) retention of nanofluid based on the colloidal stability using were provided from Merck. Acetonitrile (99.9%) and pal- polymer modification (Fig.  1b). In other words, adding the mitic acid (99%) were, respectively, acquired from Amere- steric effects to nanofluid for colloidal stability is the main tat Shimi (Iran) and CARLO EBRA (Italy). All reagents reason for using grafted polymers. It is important to note used in this work were of analytical grade and applied that reservoir rocks are often hydrophobic. As a result, without further purification. the addition of the hydrophobic agent to the nanoparti- cle surface leading the hydrophobic interaction between nanoparticles and reservoir rock. This observation can 2.2 Modification of silica nanoparticles increase the retention of nanoparticles. In this work, poly- mer and also hydrophobic agents were used to modify the The silanol groups, Si–OH, on the surface of silica nano- surface of silica nanoparticles to increase the retention of particles can interact with used polymers. To make a spe- nanoparticles and improve the wettability alteration. This cific interaction between silica nanoparticles and polymers, procedure leads to the addition of both steric effects and silanization strategies are also used for the modification of hydrophobic interaction between silica nanoparticles and polyethylene glycol methyl ether (PEG1 or PEG2) in which oil-wet substrate, respectively (Fig. 1c). their surface is silanized and functionalized with silane Here, we propose that properly designed, polymer-coated group. The details of this procedure are summarized as fol- nanoparticles can alter the wettability of substrate from an lows. A mixture of dried polyethylene glycol methyl ether oil-wet state to a water-wet one (Fig. 1d). We prepared a (30 g), GPTMS (4 g), and acetic acid (0.2 mL) as a catalyzer series of silica nanoparticles with a mixture of hydrophilic was placed in the flask containing 150 mL of acetonitrile and hydrophobic chains covalently grafted to the surface. solution. The obtained solution was refluxed at 90 °C with We found that nanoparticles coated with a mixture of hydro- continuous stirring for 6 h (Fig. 2a). C3S was added (5 mL) philic polymer chains and hydrophobic chains are more directly to silica distilled water solution (5 wt%) as the silane efficient in comparison with nanoparticles coated with group source and the obtained solution then stirring for 5 h only hydrophilic polymer chains in the oil-wet system due (Fig. 2b). To modify silica with polyethylene glycol methyl to hydrophobic interaction. In this study, the experimental ether, the functionalized polyethylene glycol methyl ether results and the characterization of silica nanoparticles modi- was added to silica distilled water solution (5 wt%) and fied with polymer or substrates are presented in detail. Thus, stirred for 10 h. This strategy is also used for the modifica- wettability alteration and retention of polymer-coated nan- tion of silica with the mixed polymer of polyethylene glycol oparticles are discussed based on the effective parameters methyl ether and propyl chains (Fig. 2c). The pH of the solu- such as the concentration of modified nanoparticles, time tion was adjusted at 9.5 using NaOH and the temperature of of surface modification, and salinity. All parameters were reflux was set at 80 °C. Finally, the obtained solution was studied at ambient conditions. It is notable to the fact that centrifuged and washed three times with ethanol (Behzadi high pressures and temperature can dominate at reservoir and Mohammadi 2016). conditions which consequently affect nanofluid retention. Three types of modified silica including the modified Therefore, the efficiency of polymer-coated nanoparticles silica nanoparticle by PEG1, the modified silica nanopar - can be different from the ambient condition in comparison ticle by mixed PEG1 and C3S, and the modified silica with the reservoir conditions. Also, the heterogeneity of nanoparticle by mixed PEG2 and C3S were prepared for rocks and the rate of nanoflow have a significant effect on the treatment of substrates. the retention and distribution of particles. 1 3 HO HO HO HO HO HO HO HO OH HO HO HO HO OH OH CH Si Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 965 (a) Si Si H3C O CH3 OH OH Polyethylene glycol GPTMS Functionalized polyethylene methyl ether glycol methyl ether OH (b) OH CH Si CH3 Si Si Si O O HO HO (c) OH CH Si Si Si O CH3 OH HO C3S grafted silica Functionalized polyethylene glycol methyl ether OH Mixed functionalized polyethylene glycol Si methyl ether/C3S grafted silica HO Fig. 2 Chemical reaction steps: a The functionalized polyethylene glycol methyl ether by 3-glycidoxypropyltrimethoxysilane (GPTMS), b The modified silica by trimethoxy (propyl) silane (C3S), and c The addition of functionalized polyethylene glycol methyl ether on the surface of the modified silica with C3S for 30 min. Then, it was dried under the ambient condi- 2.3 Modification of glass bead to oil‑wet glass bead tion in an oven. To obtain a strongly water-wet surface, the glass beads were refluxed in the piranha solution, a Due to the instability of reservoir rocks in the measure- 3:1 mixture of sulfuric acid (98%) and hydrogen perox- ment of the contact angle, borosilicate glass beads were ide (30%), at 250 °C for 24 h (Shi et al. 2010). Because used to replace sandstone (Jamaloei and Kharrat 2010). the piranha solution is a mixture of a strong oxidizing The reason for the application of this glass bead is that the agent, it will remove most residues of organic substrates, reservoir rock has a porous medium. Thus, these materi- as well as it will hydroxylate the used surfaces making als can be used for the simulation of the porosity condi- them highly hydrophilic. After that, the glass beads were tion. Sandstone is mainly composed of silica, which is washed with distilled water and ethanol and dried in an also a borosilicate glass bead. The oleophilicity of res- oven. The treated glass beads by the piranha solution were ervoir rock is due to the fact that fatty acids are adsorbed immersed in the palmitic acid solution (0.1 M) dissolved over time (Iglauer et al. 2015). Thus, palmitic acid was in n-hexane and refluxed at 90 °C for 24 h (Arslan et al. used to modify the glass beads. Before the treatment by 2006). Finally, the oil-wet glass beads were washed by nanofluids, the glass beads were washed with the aid of ethanol and distilled water to remove any trace residues of ultrasonic agitation in acetone, ethanol, and distilled water 1 3 CH OH Si HO HO HO HO 966 Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 fatty acid adsorbed on the surface of the glass beads. Then, 2.5 Water contact angle (θ) and retention they dried at the ambient conditions in an oven before the measurements treatment by the nanofluids. The sessile drop technique was used to study the wettability 2.4 T reatment of substrates (glass or oil‑wet glass alteration of the treated substrates using the modified nano- bead) with the modified silica nanoparticles particles. These experiments were carried out with 0.1–0.3 µL distilled water droplets at two different positions on at The modified silica nanoparticles were firstly dispersed least five glass beads. All the instruments were supported using magnetically stirred and then homogenized with the with the software image providing the ability to measure the aid of ultrasonic agitation for 30 min. The prepared sub- θ averages. It is considered as the θ of the studied condition. strates (glass beads or oil-wet glass beads) were immersed To investigate the retention of the modified nanoparticles on in the nanofluid at room conditions. One important challenge substrates, the calibration curve was obtained using ultravio- is the retention of the modified nanoparticles by gravity. To let–visible (UV–VIS) spectroscopy. The UV–VIS spectra overcome this problem, the nanofluid was stirred smoothly were measured by a Hash DR spectrophotometer at 400 nm. (60 rpm) during the treatment. In the experiment, irregular The retention was obtained using the following equation: compact packing of glass beads was prepared in a 25 mL −1 q(t)= (C − C )V × M (1) beaker. The porosity is exactly 26% due to the equal size i X of glass beads (Mader-Arndt et al. 2014). Eventually, the C and C are initial and final concentrations of the nanoflu- i x treated substrates (glass beads or oil-wet glass beads) with ids (mg/L). V is the volume of solution and M is the mass of the modified silica nanoparticles were washed by the dis- substrates. In our experiments, V and M were fixed at 20 mL tilled water and dried at ambient conditions in an oven. It and 20 g, respectively. Finally, q(t) is the amount of adsorbed modified nanoparticles on the substrates (mg/g ). glass Silica PEG C3S Functionalized PEG 2.6 Characterization methods C3S grafted silica PEG grafted silica GPTMS Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FT-IR) was applied to evaluate the chemical bonding between the surface of silica and polymer. FT-IR experiments were carried out by a spectrometer (VERTEX 70, Bruker Optics, Ettlingen, Ger- many) equipped with a deuterated triglycine sulfate (DTGS) detector. Thermogravimetric analysis (TGA) analysis was used to determine the content of polymers on the surface of the silica. The TGA patterns are obtained using the Thermo- gravimetric Analyzer of PerkinElmer with a heating rate of −1 20 °C min in a nitrogen atmosphere from 40 °C to 800 °C. Scanning electron microscope (SEM) was performed with Zeiss SEM and Oxford energy dispersive spectroscopy 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 (EDS) to study the morphology and composition of sub- -1 Wavenumber, cm strates before and after treatment by the modified nanoparti- cles. Zeta potential analyzer (HORIBA Scientific, SZ-100z) Fig. 3 FT-IR spectra of silica, trimethoxy (propyl) silane (C3S), and was used to measure zeta potentials of nanofluids. C3S-grafted silica. 3-glycidoxypropyltrimethoxysilane (GPTMS), polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 2000 (PEG1), and functional- ized PEG1. 3-glycidoxypropyltrimethoxysilane (GPTMS) polyethyl- 3 Results and discussion ene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 5000 (PEG2), and functionalized PEG2. Silica, functionalized PEG1, and PEG1-grafted silica. Silica, func- tionalized PEG2, and PEG2-grafted silica 3.1 Characterizations of silica modified with polymer using FT‑IR and TGA techniques can be used for the contact angle measurement. The FT-IR spectra of silica, polymers, and polymer-coated −1 silica are shown in Fig.  3. The peak of 887 cm shows the Si–OH group of silica (black line). In the C3S spectra −1 −1 (red line), there are two peaks in 798 cm and 1230 cm 1 3 Intensity, a.u. Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 967 −1 −1 belonging to the Si–C group. Also, 887 cm and 1604 cm The TGA curves of silica and the modified silica by the peaks indicate the Si–OH and Si–OC groups. Peaks between used polymers including C3S, PEG1, mixed PEG1 and −1 2800 and 3000 cm are due to aliphatic groups of the car- C3S, and mixed PEG2 and C3S are shown in Fig. 4. It is bon chain (Behzadi and Mohammadi 2016). In the C3S- evident from Fig. 4a, the weight of silica is constant from modified silica spectra (blue line), apart from the main silica 100 to 800 °C. According to the previous description, the −1 peaks, there are two peaks in 2800–3000 cm , which are modification of silica nanoparticle is based on two-step related to C3S (Munshi et al. 2008; Richard et al. 2012). strategies. In the first step, the silica surface was modi - These peaks confirm the chemical reaction between C3S fied by C3S. In the second step, the surface of the silica and silica. The FT-IR spectra of PEG functionalized with nanoparticles changed using C3S was modified by PEG1 −1 silane group (blue line) shows two peaks at 890 cm and or PEG2. To determine the content of polymers on the −1 1250 cm from the GPTMS epoxy ring (purple line). Also, surface of the silica, TGA analysis was performed on the −1 new peaks have appeared around 1250-1500  cm and modified silica with C3S in the absence and presence of −1 1100  cm , which are related to PEG. The peak at about PEG1 and PEG2. In the TGA curve in Fig. 4b, the content −1 1100 cm belongs to the Si–O–C and C–O–C groups. As a of C3S was about 2%. The data in Figs. 4c and d demon- result, polyethylene glycol methyl ether (PEG1 or PEG2) is strate that the content of PEG1 and PEG2 for the modified functionalized with silane groups (Behzadi and Mohammadi silica by C3S was approximately 11% and 21%, respec- 2016). As shown in Fig. 3 (brown line), after modification of tively. Besides, the content of PEG1 coating on the silica the silica by PEG functionalized, a new peak appears around nanoparticles is estimated at 23% (Fig. 4e) which is more −1 2800-3000 cm , which is due to the binding of PEG to the than those of the other silica nanoparticles modified with silica surface. PEG1/C3S and PEG2/C3S. For modified silica by PEG1/ Due to the similarity of the peaks in C3S, PEG1, and C3S due to the presence of C3S on nanoparticle surface at PEG2, the FT-IR technique cannot be used to study the the first step of modification, there is a decrease in poly - mixed polymer grafted with silica. Therefore, TGA analy- mers content in comparison with modified silica by PEG1. sis was used to study the structure of silica modified with The presence of C3S on the silica surface causes increas- the mixed polymer. The ability to obtain key information ing steric effects which decreases the content of PEG1 on the surface of the silica. In the case of the modified silica with PGE2/C3S, the content of the polymer is more than modified silica with C3S/PGE1 but is nearly similar to the modified silica by PEG1. This fact is due to the (a) Silica more molecular weight of PEG2 in comparison with PEG1 (b) C3S grafted modified silica making the content of PEG2 on the surface of modified silica with C3S was close to the modified silica by PEG1. As a result, for the modified silica by all the mentioned (c) Mixed PEG1/C3S grafted silica materials, the content of polymers was less than ~ 25%. The relatively low content of polymers on the surface of (d) Mixed PEG1/C3S grafted silica 85 silica is due to the grafted to method that applied for their synthesis. As it can be observed, this method causes lower absolute grafting ratios of polymers in comparison with grafted from the method. This fact is due to the mechanism of the steric effect of polymer chains (Iglauer et al. 2009). (e) PEG1 grafted silica 100200 300400 500 600 700 800 3.2 Characterizations of substrates by SEM, EDS, Temperature, °C and contact angle measurement Fig. 4 TGA curves of a silica, b trimethoxy (propyl) silane (C3S)- grafted silica, c mixed polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 2000 Figure 5a–c represents SEM, EDS, and θ of the glass bead, (PEG1)/C3S-grafted silica, d mixed polyethylene glycol methyl ether the treated glass bead by piranha solution, and the oil-wet Mn ~ 5000 (PEG2)/C3S-grafted silica, and e PEG1-grafted silica glass bead (modified by palmitic acid), respectively. Pira- nha treatment decreased the θ of the glass bead from 62° to about the content of polymers coupled to the surface of 7° (Fig. 5a1 and b1). After modification with a fatty acid, nanoparticles makes TGA a suitable candidate for this the θ of glass bead increased to 114° (Fig. 5c ). research (Afsharian-Moghaddam and Haddadi-Asl 2013). Figure 5 shows the results obtained from EDS measure- ments of the glass bead. The treated glass bead by piranha 1 3 Weight loss, % 968 Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 (a) (a) Glass bead Glass bead Si Si Spectrum Spectrum 1 1 (a1) (a1) (a2 (a2)) O O Na Na Br Br 00 00.5 .5 1. 1.02 02 1. 1.5 5 2. 2.03 03 .5 .5 3. 3.04 04 .5 .5 4. 4.0 0 .5 .5 2 μm 2 μm EHT EHT = = 20.00 kV 20.00 kV Signal Signal A A = = SE SE1 1 Date: 3 Sep 2018 Date: 3 Sep 2018 WD WD = = 7.5 mm 7.5 mm Mag Mag = = 20.00 K 20.00 K X X Ti Time: 10:49:31 me: 10:49:31 Full scale 241 cts cursor: 0.00 Full scale 241 cts cursor: 0.000 0 keV keV (b) (b) Tr Treated glass bead by piranha solution eated glass bead by piranha solution Si Si Spectrum Spectrum 1 1 (b1) (b1) (b2 (b2)) Elemen ElementW tWeight, eight, % % Atomic, Atomic, % % O K O K 45.10 45.10 59.05 59.05 Si K Si K 54.90 54.90 40.95 40.95 O O 00 00.5 .5 1. 1.02 02 1. 1.5 5 2. 2.03 03 .5 .5 3. 3.04 04 .5 .5 4. 4.0 0 .5 .5 2 μm 2 μm EHT EHT = = 20.00 kV 20.00 kV Signal Signal A A = = SE SE1 1 Date: 3 Sep 2018 Date: 3 Sep 2018 WD WD = = 8.0 mm 8.0 mm Mag Mag = = 5.00 K 5.00 K X X Ti Time: 10:42:13 me: 10:42:13 Full scale 241 cts cursor: 0.00 Full scale 241 cts cursor: 0.000 0 keV keV (c) (c) Oil-wet glass bead (modified glass bead by palmitic acid) Oil-wet glass bead (modified glass bead by palmitic acid) Si Si Spectrum Spectrum 1 1 (c1) (c1) (c2 (c2)) Elemen Elementt We Weight, ight, % % Atomic, Atomic, % % C C K K 52.36 52.36 66.47 66.47 O O K K 18.66 18.66 17.79 17.79 Si Si K K 28.98 28.98 15.74 15.74 C C O O 00 00.5 .5 1. 1.02 02 1. 1.5 5 2. 2.03 03 .5 .5 3. 3.04 04 .5 .5 4. 4.0 0 .5 .5 3 μm 3 μm EHT EHT = = 20.00 kV 20.00 kV Signal Signal A A = = SE1 SE1 Date: 3 Sep 2018 Date: 3 Sep 2018 WD WD = = 8.0 mm 8.0 mm Mag Mag = = 10.00 K 10.00 K X X Ti Time: 10:12:12 me: 10:12:12 Full scale 321 cts cursor: 0.00 Full scale 321 cts cursor: 0.000 0 keV keV Fig. 5 SEM, EDS, and water contact angle (θ) of a surface of the glass, b treated glass bead by piranha solution, and c oil-wet glass bead solution and oil-wet glass bead (modified by palmitic acid) (oil-wet glass bead) is 52.36% indicating palmitic acid is are respectively shown in Fig. 5a2, b2, and c2. Based on vastly adsorbed on the surface of the glass bead. To inves- the obtained EDS results, the amount of available carbon tigate the retention of polymer and mixed polymer grafted on the surface of the modified glass bead by palmitic acid 1 3 Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 969 2.4 (a1) (a2) Glass-PEG1 Glass-PEG1 Glass-PEG2/C3S Glass-PEG1/C3S Glass-PEG2/C3S Glass-PEG1/C3S 2.0 1.6 1.2 0.8 0.4 10 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 Nanofluids concentration, ppm Nanofluids concentration, ppm 120 4.0 (b1) (b2) Oil-wet glass-PEG1 Oil-wet glass-PEG1 Oil-wet glass-PEG1/C3S 3.6 Oil-wet glass-PEG2/C3S Oil-wet glass-PEG2/C3S Oil-wet glass-PEG1/C3S 3.2 2.8 2.4 2.0 1.6 1.2 0.8 0.4 30 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 Nanofluids concentration, ppm Nanofluids concentration, ppm Fig. 6 Effect of modified nanofluids concentrations in 2 h exposure time on a1 water contact angle (θ) and a2 retention for the glass bead sub- strate. Effect of modified nanofluids concentrations in 2 h exposure time on b1 θ and b2 retention for the oil-wet glass bead substrate (polyethyl- ene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 2000 (PEG1), mixed PEG1/trimethoxy (propyl) silane (C3S)-grafted silica, and mixed polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 5000 (PEG2)/C3S grafted silica) with silica nanoparticles, the glass bead, and the oil-wet economic costs must be minimized for using nanofluid (Al- glass bead was used as substrates. Anssari et al. 2016). Please note to this point that PEG1, PEG1/C3S, and 3.3 Eec ff t of nanofluids concentrations PEG2/C3S are referred to as the modified silica nanoparti- cle by PEG1, the modified silica nanoparticle by PEG1 and To obtain appropriate performance, different interrelated C3S, and the modified silica nanoparticle by PEG2 and C3S. parameters were taken into account on the wetting and reten- Figure 6 shows the effect of the nanofluids concentrations tion of substrates. Since the nanoparticles influence wetting in 2 h treatment on the wettability and retention of the glass and retention of substrates, the choice of suitable concen- bead and the oil-wet glass bead, respectively. In Fig. 6 a1, the tration is very significant in the EOR procedure. Choose a initial θ of glass bead is 62°. As can be seen in Table 1, the proper concentration is restricted by various features which results revealed that the lowest concentration of the modified are essential for the proper effect of nanoparticles. The high nanoparticle with the most increase in the decrease of θ for concentration of nanoparticles (> 20,000 ppm) may reduce the glass bead is 3000 ppm belonging to PEG1 and PEG1/ the reservoir permeability (Ju et  al. 2006; Roustaei and C3S. Therefore, 3000 ppm can be considered as optimum Bagherzadeh 2015) because the stability of nanoparticle sus- concentration for PEG1 and PEG1/C3S. In this concentra- pension reduces dramatically by increasing their concentra- tion, the θ of the glass bead is decreased to 25° and 22° for tion (Al-Anssari et al. 2017a; Rubio et al. 2017). Moreover, PEG1 and PEG1/C3S, respectively. In contrast to PEG1 1 3 Water contact angle, degree Water contact angle, degree Adsorbed nanoparticles, mg/g Adsorbed nanoparticles, mg/g glass glass 970 Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 and PEG1/C3S, the θ of substrates for PEG2/C3S has linear behavior by increasing the concentration of nanofluid. The lowest concentration of this nanofluid with the highest effi- ciency on the θ reduction (from 62° to 24°) is at 1000 ppm. As it is shown in Fig. 6 a2, the retention of the PEG2 onto the glass bead was more than PEG1 and PEG1/C3S. This fact is due to the higher molecular weight of this nanofluid. The major energy for retention is based on the entropy gain associated with the desorption of serval water molecules for each adsorbed polymer molecule and this energy can be enhanced by increasing the molecular weight of the poly- ethylene glycol (Parfitt and Greenland 1970). In Fig. 6b1, PEG1 changed the oil-wet state of the glass bead (initial θ = 114°) to an intermediate-wet state (θ = 72°) at 3000 ppm. PEG2/C3S and PEG1/C3S had a better performance which changed the oil-wet glass bead to a strongly water-wet state (θ = 55° for PEG2/C3S and θ = 54° for PEG1/C3S) at 1000 and 3000 ppm, respectively. By changing substrates from water-wet state to oil-wet state, the amount of retention remained almost constant for PEG1 while increased for PEG1/C3S and PEG2/C3S (Fig. 6b2). For instance, in oil- wet substrates, the retention of PEG1/C3S (3000 ppm) and PEG2/C3S (1000 ppm) were increased by 67% and 80%, respectively. It is a possibility because of the hydrophobic interaction between C3S of the modified silica with the fatty acid of the glass bead which caused more efficiency of PEG1/C3S and PEG2/C3S (Fig. 7). This trend is similar to protein retention (Rabe et al. 2011). The results demonstrate that increase in the nanofluid concentrations had a significant effect on the θ reduction. It is consistent with previous studies about the silica nanopar- ticle concentrations on the calcite and the glass bead sub- strates (Al-Anssari et al. 2016; Nikolov et al. 2010; Rostami et al. 2011) and retention of the modified silica by polyeth- ylene glycol onto the clay minerals (Omurlu et al. 2016). Furthermore, it can be concluded that when the hydropho- bicity of the substrates is increased, the retention of the mixed polymer coating on the silica nanoparticles is also enhanced. Most reservoir rocks are strongly oil-wet, and this wettability state not only reduces the retention of the mixed polymer coating on the silica nanoparticles but also it can increase the retention of these nanofluids due to the increase in hydrophobic interaction. 3.4 Eec ff t of exposure time The exposure time of the substrates into the nanofluids is one of the key factors in the retention of material into the substrates (Al-Anssari et al. 2017a). Hence, the selection of a suitable time is necessary because an increase in the time makes substrates reach their maximum retention capacity (Roustaei and Bagherzadeh 2015). It was found that the most efficient nanofluid concentrations for the θ reduction of the 1 3 Table 1 Effect of modified nanofluid concentrations in 2 h exposure time on water contact angle (θ) and retention for the glass bead and the oil-wet glass bead substrates (polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 2000 (PEG1), mixed PEG1/trimethoxy (propyl) silane (C3S)-grafted silica, and mixed polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 5000 (PEG2)/C3S-grafted silica) Substrate Nanofluid 1000 ppm 2000 ppm 3000 ppm 4000 ppm 5000 ppm θ, degree q(t), mg/g θ, degree q(t), mg/g θ, degree q(t), mg/g θ, degree q(t), mg/g θ, degree q(t), mg/g glass glass glass glass glass Oil-wet glass bead PEG1 80.2 ± 3.6 0.1 74.3 ± 4.4 0.5 72.5 ± 2.3 0.7 70.3 ± 3.3 0.7 69.3 ± 3.3 0.8 PEG1/C3S 70.3 ± 3.3 1.2 60.5 ± 5.4 1.3 53.7 ± 1.7 1.5 50.8 ± 5.2 1.6 47.9 ± 4.1 1.8 PEG2/C2S 55.2 ± 5.1 2 50.8 ± 3.6 2.2 45.8 ± 2.4 2.7 39.7 ± 4.1 3 34.5 ± 2.2 3.4 Glass bead PEG1 36.8 ± 3.4 0.09 31 ± 3.1 0.5 25 ± 2.2 0.6 23.5 ± 2.4 0.7 22.9 ± 2.4 0.7 PEG1/C3S 30.3 ± 4.2 0.02 27.5 ± 4.3 0.1 22.1 ± 1.1 0.3 20.5 ± 2.3 0.5 19.9 ± 1.5 0.7 PEG2/C2S 25.2 ± 4.1 0.5 23.6 ± 5.1 0.9 20.4 ± 1.7 1.4 17.5 ± 2.7 1.6 14.5 ± 3.1 2 Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 971 (a) (b) Hydrophilic agent Hydrophilic agent Palmitic acid Hydrophobic agent Palmitic acid Hydrophobic interaction Oil-wet glass bead Oil-wet glass bead Fig. 7 Schematic of retention for a The polymer-coated silica nanoparticles and b The mixed polymer-coated silica nanoparticles Fig. 8 Zeta potential of modified nanoparticles for the treatment of glass bead and oil-wet glass bead substrates. a polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 5000 (PEG2)/trimethoxy (propyl) silane (C3S)-1000  ppm, b PEG1-3000  ppm, and c polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 2000 (PEG1)/C3S-3000 ppm substrates is 3000 ppm for PEG1 and PEG1/C3S and also colloidal stability of the nanofluid and the low zeta potential 1000 ppm for PEG2/C3S. Therefore, these concentrations shows that the nanofluid is unstable (Qi et al. 2018; Zhu were selected to study the effect of time on the retention of et al. 2016). Recent studies indicated that the zeta potential the substrates. higher than the absolute value of 25 mV can stabilize nano- Figure 8 shows the zeta potential of nanofluids. The zeta fluid (Mondragon et al. 2012). potentials for PEG1 (3000 ppm), PEG1/C3S (3000 ppm), To explore what way exposure time of the modified nano- and PEG2/C3S (1000 ppm) were obtained to be − 26, − 20, particles may affect the wettability alteration and retention and – 37 mV, respectively. Zeta potential is related to the of the glass bead and oil-wet glass bead substrates, θ and 1 3 972 Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 0.8 (a1) (a2) Glass-3000 ppm PEG1 Glass-3000 ppm PEG1/C3S Glass-1000 ppm PEG2/C3S 0.6 40 0.4 0.2 Glass-3000 ppm PEG1 20 Glass-3000 ppm PEG1/C3S Glass-1000 ppm PEG2/C3S 01234 0 123 4 Exposure time, hours Exposure time, hours 120 2.2 (b1) (b2) Oil-wet glass-3000 ppm PEG1 2.0 Oil-wet glass-3000 ppm PEG1/C3S Oil-wet glass-1000 ppm PEG2/C3S 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 Oil-wet glass-3000 ppm PEG1 Oil-wet glass-1000 ppm PEG2/C3S 0.2 Oil-wet glass-3000 ppm PEG1/C3S 40 0 01234 0123 4 Exposure time, hours Exposure time, hours Fig. 9 Effect of modified nanofluids exposure time on a1 water contact angle (θ) and a2 retention of the glass bead substrate. Effect of modified nanofluids exposure time on b1 θ and b2 retention of the oil-wet glass bead substrate (3000  ppm polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 2000 (PEG1), 3000  ppm mixed PEG1/trimethoxy (propyl) silane (C3S)-grafted silica, and 1000  ppm mixed polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 5000 (PEG2)/C3S-grafted silica) retention are recorded vs. exposure time (Fig. 9). The results the nanofluid treatments. By comparing the zeta potential in Fig. 9a1 and a2 are for the glass bead substrates. As it of the nanofluids, it can be concluded that the lowest zeta is observed from Fig. 9 a1, θ of all treatments with PEG1, potential of PEG1/C3S nanofluid (−20 mV) decreased the PEG1/C3S, and PEG2/C3S was rapidly decreased to 2 h and retention rate of PEG1/C3S on glass bead and oil-wet glass then reached a stable value. Also, Fig. 9a1 shows that reten- bead substrates. tion of all treatments with PEG1, PEG1/C3S, and PEG2/ The morphology, composition, and θ of the glass bead C3S was sharply increased with exposure time up to 1 h and and the oil-wet glass bead substrates treatment by the then remain constant for PEG1 and PEG2/C3S. However, nanofluids in 2 h of exposure time is shown in Figs.  10 there are very few changes θ in for PEG1/C3S. This is since and 11. Figure 10a–c shows treated glass beads by PEG1, the substrates reach their retention capacity and irrevers- PEG1/C3S, and PEG2/C3S, respectively. In the treated ible retention (Fig. 9a2). The results in Fig. 9b1 and b2 are glass bead by PEG1 and PEG1/C3S, adsorbed modified for the oil-wet glass bead substrates. Figure 9b1 shows that nanoparticles have heterogeneous distribution due to the θ was rapidly decreased to 1 h for PEG1 and PEG2/C3S agglomeration in the retention process (Fig. 10a1 and b1). treatments while decreased in 2 h for PEG1/C3S treatment. On the other hand, in the treated glass bead by PEG2/C3S, Figure  9b2 shows that the amount of retention increased the adsorbed modified nanoparticle has homogeneous dis- sharply to around 1 h and then remains constant for all of tribution due to the highest zeta potential (Fig. 10c1). In 1 3 Water contact angle, degree Water contact angle, degree Adsorbed nanoparticles, mg/g glass Adsorbed nanoparticles, mg/g glass Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 973 (a) Glass bead in 2h treatment with PEG1 Si Spectrum 1 (a1) (a2) Element Weight, %Atomic, % C K24.81 34.72 O K44.89 47.16 Si K30.29 18.13 00.5 1.02 1.5 2.03 .5 3.04 .5 4.0 .5 10 μm EHT = 20.00 kV Signal A = SE1 Date: 3 Sep 2018 WD = 8.0 mm Mag = 1.00 K X Time: 10:22:56 Full scale 321 cts cursor: 0.000 keV (b) Glass bead in 2h treatment with PEG1/C3S Si Spectrum 1 (b1) (b2) Element Weight, %Atomic, % CK 22.6832.66 O K42.38 45.82 Si K34.93 21.51 00.5 1.02 1.5 2.03 .5 3.04 .5 4.0 .5 20 μm EHT = 20.00 kV Signal A = SE1 Date: 3 Sep 2018 WD = 8.0 mm Mag = 1.00 K X Time: 10:56:15 Full scale 120 cts cursor: 0.000 keV (c) Glass bead in 2h treatment with PEG2/C3S Si Spectrum 1 (c1) (c2) Element Weight, %Atomic, % C K19.92 30.05 O K37.55 42.52 Si K42.52 27.43 00.5 1.02 1.5 2.03 .5 3.04 .5 4.0 .5 20 μm EHT = 20.00 kV Signal A = SE1 Date: 3 Sep 2018 WD = 8.0 mm Mag = 1.00 K X Time: 11:11:11 Full scale 120 cts cursor: 0.000 keV Fig. 10 SEM, EDS, and water contact angle (θ) of treated glass bead substrate in 2 h exposure time by a 3000 ppm polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 2000 (PEG1). b 3000 ppm mixed PEG1/trimethoxy (propyl) silane (C3S)-grafted silica, and c 1000 ppm mixed polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 5000 (PEG2)/C3S-grafted silica Fig. 10a2, b2, and c2, the amount of available carbon on PEG2/C3S, respectively, which indicates that modified the surface of glass bead substrates were obtained to be nanoparticles are adsorbed. 24.81%, 22.68%, and 19.92% for PEG1, PEG1/C3S, and 1 3 974 Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 (a) (a) Oil-wet glass in 2h treatment with PEG1 Oil-wet glass in 2h treatment with PEG1 Si Si Spectrum Spectrum 1 1 (a1) (a1) (a2) (a2) Element Element We Weight, ight, % % Atomic, Atomic, % % C C K K 58.86 58.86 69.83 69.83 O O K K 24.26 24.26 21.61 21.61 Si Si K K 16.88 16.88 8.56 8.56 C C O O 00 00.5 .5 1. 1.02 02 1. 1.5 5 2. 2.03 03 .5 .5 3. 3.04 04 .5 .5 4. 4.0 0 .5 .5 20 μm 20 μm EH EHT T = = 20.00 kV 20.00 kV Signal Signal A A = = SE1 SE1 Date: 3 Sep 2018 Date: 3 Sep 2018 WD WD = = 8.5 mm 8.5 mm Ma Mag g = = 1.00 K 1.00 K X X T Time: 1 ime: 11:28:33 1:28:33 Full scale 186 cts cursor: 0.00 Full scale 186 cts cursor: 0.000 0 keV keV (b) (b) Oil-wet glass in 2h treatment with PEG1/C3S Oil-wet glass in 2h treatment with PEG1/C3S Si Si Spectrum Spectrum 1 1 (b1) (b1) (b2) (b2) Element Element We Weight, ight, % % Atomic, Atomic, % % C C K K 48.85 48.85 60.55 60.55 O O K K 30.81 30.81 28.67 28.67 Si Si K K 20.34 20.34 10.78 10.78 C C O O 00 00.5 .5 1. 1.02 02 1. 1.5 5 2. 2.03 03 .5 .5 3. 3.04 04 .5 .5 4. 4.0 0 .5 .5 3 μm 3 μm EH EHT T = = 20.00 kV 20.00 kV Signal Signal A A = = SE1 SE1 Date: 3 Sep 2018 Date: 3 Sep 2018 WD WD = = 8.0 mm 8.0 mm Ma Mag g = = 5.00 K 5.00 K X X T Time: 1 ime: 11:41:33 1:41:33 Full scale 186 cts cursor: 0.00 Full scale 186 cts cursor: 0.000 0 keV keV (c) (c) Oil-wet glass bead in 2h treatment with PEG2/C3S Oil-wet glass bead in 2h treatment with PEG2/C3S Si Si Spectrum Spectrum 1 1 (c1) (c1) (c2) (c2) Element Element We Weight ight%A %Atomic% tomic% C K C K 29.35 29.35 41.99 41.99 O K O K 31.98 31.98 34.35 34.35 Si K Si K 38.67 38.67 23.66 23.66 O O C C 00 00.5 .5 1. 1.02 02 1. 1.5 5 2. 2.03 03 .5 .5 3. 3.04 04 .5 .5 4. 4.0 0 .5 .5 20 μm 20 μm EH EHT T = = 20.00 kV 20.00 kV Signal Signal A A = = SE1 SE1 Date: 3 Sep 2018 Date: 3 Sep 2018 WD WD = = 8.0 mm 8.0 mm Ma Mag g = = 1.00 K 1.00 K X X T Time: 1 ime: 11:51:26 1:51:26 Full scale 212 cts cursor: 0.00 Full scale 212 cts cursor: 0.000 0 keV keV Fig. 11 SEM, EDS, and water contact angle (θ) of treated oil-wet glass bead substrate in 2 h exposure time by a 3000 ppm polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 2000 (PEG1) b 3000 ppm mixed PEG1/trimethoxy (propyl) silane (C3S)-grafted silica, and c 1000 ppm mixed polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 5000 (PEG2)/C3S-grafted silica As a result, the more colloidal stability of the modified nanoparticles on the substrates. Homogeneous retention nanoparticles causes an increase in the retention rate. Also, distribution of the nanoparticles has a great impact on the it can affect the more uniform retention of the modified process of EOR. For better extraction of the oil from the 1 3 Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 975 1.2 (a1) (a2) Glass-3000 ppm PEG1 Glass-1000 ppm PEG2/C3S Glass-3000 ppm PEG1/C3S 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 Glass-3000 ppm PEG1 Glass-1000 ppm PEG2/C3S Glass-3000 ppm PEG1/C3S 10 0 010000 20000 30000 40000 0 10000 20000 30000 40000 NaCl concentration, ppm NaCl concentration, ppm 120 2.2 (b1) (b2) Oil-wet glass-3000 ppm PEG1 2.0 Oil-wet glass-1000 ppm PEG2/C3S Oil-wet glass-3000 ppm PEG1/C3S 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 Oil-wet glass-3000 ppm PEG1 Oil-wet glass-1000 ppm PEG2/C3S 0.2 Oil-wet glass-3000 ppm PEG1/C3S 40 0 010000 20000 30000 40000 50000 0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 NaCl concentration, ppm NaCl concentration, ppm Fig. 12 Effect of NaCl concentrations in 2 h exposure time on a1 water contact angle (θ) and a2 retention of the glass bead substrate. Effect of NaCl concentrations in 2 h exposure on b1 θ and b2 retention of the oil-wet glass bead substrate (3000 ppm polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 2000 (PEG1), 3000  ppm mixed PEG1/trimethoxy (propyl) silane (C3S)-grafted silica, and 1000  ppm mixed polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 5000 (PEG2)/C3S-grafted silica) reservoirs, nanoparticles need to be uniformly adsorbed on et al. 2012). However, interestingly, high salinity makes the rocks. The high colloidal stability of the silica nanoparti- the oil-wet rock to be more water-wet due to the increase cles modified with mixed polymer (PEG2/C3S) enables this in the physicochemical interactions (Hendraningrat 2015). nanofluid to be uniformly adsorbed on the substrate. According to Fig.  12, when the NaCl concentration is increased, θ is decreased for all of the substrates (glass beads 3.5 Eecfft of salinity or oil-wet glass beads). This may be related to the enhanced retention of the modified nanoparticles on the substrates. An It is well-known that the retention of modified nanoparti- increase in the NaCl concentration can improve the reten- cles is responsible for the wettability alteration of the glass tion and θ reduction of the substrates. This fact is due to the bead and the oil-wet glass bead substrates. The salinity decrease of the negative charges between the glass bead and of the oil reservoirs has a direct impact on the stability the modified nanoparticles (Al-Anssari et al. 2016). On the of injected nanofluids and the retention of the nanoparti- other hand, at a high concentration of NaCl, the repulsive cles on the reservoir rock. A major factor to stabilize the force between the modified nanoparticles as well as between nanoparticle in suspension is the repulsive forces between the modified nanoparticles and the substrates is attenuated. the nanoparticles. It is found in this research that some of It is strong evidence for increasing the agglomeration and the salts not only reduce repulsion forces but also cause precipitation of the modified nanoparticles which reduces agglomeration and precipitation of nanofluid (McElfresh the retention and θ reduction. As can be seen, from Table 2, 1 3 Water contact angle, degree Water contact angle, degree Adsorbed nanoparticles, mg/g glass Adsorbed nanoparticles, mg/g glass 976 Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 for the treatment of glass bead substrates by PEG1/C3S, θ is decreased from 22° to 20° along with an increase of NaCl concentration to 20,000 ppm. After this point, θ was increased to 24° at a concentration of 40,000 ppm. Furthermore, there is an optimal range for NaCl con- centration to reduce the θ of the substrates. Thus, the obtained results could be compared to the previous studies for the treatment of the calcite by the silica nanofluid (Al- Anssari et al. 2016) and surfactant with similar formula- tions, showing a good correlation with the same behavior (Iglauer et al. 2009; Salager et al. 2000). Figures 13 and 14 show the morphology and composi- tion of the treated glass bead as well as the oil-wet glass bead substrates by the modified nanoparticles in the NaCl concentration of 20,000 ppm. Figure 13a, b, and c shows treated glass beads by PEG1, PEG1/C3S, and PEG2/C3S, respectively. Salinity has a remarkable effect on the mor - phology of the glass bead surfaces in comparison with the other morphology of surfaces in the previous section (Fig. 10a–c). As shown in Fig. 13a and b, the surface indi- cates cubic like structure which available Cl was 22.61% and 49.73% for PEG1 and PEG1/C3S, respectively. It indicates sodium chloride is present on the glass bead surfaces. The retention of PEG1 and PEG1/C3S in the presence of salt has been increased to 40% and 63%, respectively. In the pres- ence of salinity on the glass bead substrate, the retention of PEG1 and PEG1/C3S have increased due to the enhanced physicochemical interaction (Hendraningrat 2015). On the other hand, more stability of PEG2/C3S has reduced the per- cent of Cl (0.65%) on the glass bead substrate. The result of the treated the oil-wet glass bead by PEG1, PEG1/C3S, and PEG2/C3S is shown in Fig. 14a, b, and c, respectively. It is evident from Fig. 14b that the shape is cubic which covered the surface of the oil-wet glass bead due to agglomeration and precipitation of the PEG1/C3S (Cl 22.39%). Remark- ably, unlike the glass bead substrate, it is the small amount of Cl (1.42%) on the surface of treated oil-wet glass bead substrates by PEG1. Consequently, this may be due to the different negative charge of the glass bead and oil-wet glass bead surfaces (Bodratti et  al. 2017; Watson et  al. 2001; Yanagishima et al. 2012). Palmitic acid on the glass bead surface in the oil-wet glass bead substrates reduces the nega- tive charge which consequently causes to decrease in the physicochemical interaction of the glass surface with Na and Cl. For treated oil-wet glass bead substrates in comparison with treated glass bead substrates, the percent of salt has been decreased for PEG1 94%, PEG1/C3S 45%, and PEG2/ C3S 48%. This suggests that surface charge is an important parameter for the retention of substrates in the presence of salt (Fig. 15). For PEG2/C3S, the amount of Cl on the oil-wet glass bead substrate (Cl 0.34%) was similar to the behavior of the glass bead substrate (Cl 0.65%). This result is very important 1 3 Table 2 Effect of NaCl concentrations in 2  h exposure time on water contact angle (θ) and retention of the glass bead and the oil-wet glass bead substrates ((3000  ppm polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 2000 (PEG1), 3000 ppm mixed PEG1/trimethoxy (propyl) silane (C3S)-grafted silica, and 1000 ppm mixed polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 5000 (PEG2)/C3S-grafted silica)) Sub- Nano- 5000 ppm 10,000 ppm 20,000 ppm 25,000 ppm 30,000 ppm 35,000 ppm 40,000 ppm 45,000 ppm strate fluid θ, degree q(t), θ, degree q(t), θ, degree q(t), θ, degree q(t), θ, degree q(t), θ, degree q(t), θ, degree q(t), θ, degree q(t), mg/ mg/ mg/ mg/ mg/ mg/ mg/ mg/ g glass g g g g g g g glass glass glass glass glass glass glass Oil-wet PEG1 71.9 ± 3.3 0.73 70.1 ± 4.1 0.78 69.6 ± 4.7 0.85 69.3 ± 6.2 0.87 68.7 ± 5.8 0.9 68 ± 6.1 0.92 69 ± 6.5 0.9 71 ± 7 0.8 glass PEG1/ 53.8 ± 3.4 1.6 53.5 ± 4.6 1.6 53 ± 4.1 1.82 55 ± 5.2 1.7 57.9 ± 4.9 1.6 59.5 ± 5.5 1.4 62.1 ± 4.9 1.3 62.9 ± 5.9 1.2 bead C3S PEG2/ 55.5 ± 3.1 2 55 ± 5.2 2.01 54 ± 4.2 2.05 54.3 ± 4.9 2,07 53.8 ± 4.1 2.08 54.2 ± 5.9 2,01 54.9 ± 5 1.98 56.8 ± 6.1 1.93 C2S Glass PEG1 23.9 ± 2.4 0.95 23.2 ± 3.1 0.98 22.2 ± 3.3 1.01 22.2 ± 3.1 1.05 22 ± 2.2 1.1 22.8 ± 3.1 1.06 23.9 ± 2 1 25.5 ± 4.2 0.98 bead PEG1/ 21.5 ± 1.7 0.83 21 ± 2.2 0.89 20 ± 3.1 0.91 22 ± 2.7 0.8 24 ± 3.1 0.77 24.8 ± 2.7 0.7 23.5 ± 1.1 0.68 25 ± 5.1 0.62 C3S PEG2/ 24.6 ± 3 0.5 24.3 ± 1.7 0.52 23.4 ± 2.7 0.54 23.1 ± 1.9 0.57 22.7 ± 3.1 0.6 22.4 ± 3.5 0.59 22.3 ± 3.6 0.61 24.4 ± 4.7 0.53 C2S Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 977 (a) Glass bead in 2h treatment with PEG1 (2000 ppm salinity) Spectrum 1 (a1) (a2) Si Element Weight, % Atomic, % O K 33.96 47.89 Na K 15.96 15.66 Si K 27.46 22.06 Cl K 22.61 14.39 Cl Na Cl Cl 00.5 1.02 1.5 2.03 .5 3.04 .5 4.0 .5 20 μm EHT = 20.00 kV Signal A = SE1 Date: 3 Sep 2018 WD = 8.0 mm Mag = 1.00 K X Time: 10:26:33 Full scale321 cts cursor: 0.000 keV (b) Glass bead in 2h treatment with PEG1/C3S (2000 ppm salinity) Na Si Cl Spectrum 1 (b1) (b2) Element Weight, % Atomic, % O K 9.00 15.66 Na K 20.09 24.32 Si K 21.18 20.99 Cl K 49.73 39.04 Cl Cl 00.5 1.02 1.5 2.03 .5 3.04 .5 4.0 .5 20 μm EHT = 20.00 kV Signal A = SE1 Date: 3 Sep 2018 WD = 8.0 mm Mag = 1.00 K X Time: 11:23:36 Full scale 104 cts cursor: 0.000 keV (c) Glass bead in 2h treatment with PEG2/C3S (2000 ppm salinity) Si Spectrum 1 (c1) (c2) Element Weight, % Atomic, % C K 44.71 57.15 O K 30.34 29.11 Na K 1.39 0.93 Si K 22.91 12.53 Cl K 0.65 0.28 Na Cl Cl Cl 00.5 1.02 1.5 2.03 .5 3.04 .5 4.0 .5 20 μm EHT = 20.00 kV Signal A = SE1 Date: 3 Sep 2018 WD = 8.0 mm Mag = 1.00 K X Time: 11:01:11 Full scale 120 cts cursor: 0.000 keV Fig. 13 SEM, EDS, and water contact angle (θ) of treated glass bead substrate in 2  h exposure time at 20,000  ppm NaCl concentration by a 3000 ppm polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 2000 (PEG1) b 3000 ppm mixed PEG1/trimethoxy (propyl) silane (C3S)-grafted silica, and c 1000 ppm mixed polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 5000 (PEG2)/C3S-grafted silica because there is high salinity in oil reservoirs which can modified with mixed polymer (PEG2/C3S), salinity shows affect the retention process. In the case of nanoparticles less effect on the mechanism and amount of retention. This 1 3 978 Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 (a) Oil-wet glass bead in 2h treatment with PEG1 (2000 ppm salinity) Si Spectrum 1 (a1) (a2) C Element Weight, % Atomic, % C K 68.54 78.11 O K 17.43 14.91 Na K 2.58 1.54 Si K 10.04 4.89 Cl K 1.42 0.55 Na Cl O Cl Cl 00.5 1.02 1.5 2.03 .5 3.04 .5 4.0 .5 20 μm EHT = 20.00 kV Signal A = SE1 Date: 3 Sep 2018 WD = 8.0 mm Mag = 1.00 K X Time: 11:33:50 Full scale 186 cts cursor: 0.000 keV (b) Oil-wet glass bead in 2h treatment with PEG1/C3S (2000 ppm salinity) Spectrum 1 (b1) (b2) Element Weight, % Atomic, % Cl C K 62.18 79.26 O K 2.73 2.62 Na K 12.69 8.45 Cl K 22.39 9.67 Na Cl Cl 00.5 1.02 1.5 2.03 .5 3.04 .5 4.0 .5 20 μm EHT = 20.00 kV Signal A = SE1 Date: 3 Sep 2018 WD = 8.0 mm Mag = 1.00 K X Time: 11:45:26 Full scale 455 cts cursor: 0.000 keV (c) Oil-wet glass bead in 2h treatment with PEG2/C3S (2000 ppm salinity) Si Spectrum 1 (c1) (c2) Element Weight, % Atomic, % C K 47.07 59.03 O K 30.68 28.88 Na K 1.63 1.07 Si K 20.28 10.88 Cl K 0.34 0.14 Na Cl Cl Cl 00.5 1.02 1.5 2.03 .5 3.04 .5 4.0 .5 20 μm EHT = 20.00 kV Signal A = SE1 Date: 3 Sep 2018 WD = 8.0 mm Mag = 1.00 K X Time: 12:01:25 Full scale 212 cts cursor: 0.000 keV Fig. 14 SEM, EDS, and water contact angle (θ) of treated oil-wet glass bead substrate in 2 h exposure time at 20,000 ppm NaCl concentration by a 3000 ppm polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 2000 (PEG1) b 3000 ppm mixed PEG1/trimethoxy (propyl) silane (C3S)-grafted silica, and c 1000 ppm mixed polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 5000 (PEG2)/C3S-grafted silica is due to the high colloidal stability of this nanofluid in com- chains make the hydrophobic interaction which increases the parison with other ones. Although high stability can decrease absorption of nanofluids. As a conclusion, the selection of retention (Al-Anssari et al. 2017a), the hydrophobic propyl polymers with proper molecular weight and suitable wetting 1 3 Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 979 (a) (b) Cl Cl Na Cl Cl Na Na Na Hydrophilic agent Na Cl Na Na Cl Cl Hydrophobic agent Cl Cl Na Cl Palmitic acid Na Cl Cl Na Na Cl Na Na Na Cl Na Glass bead Oil-wet glass bead Fig. 15 Effect of negative charge of glass bead substrate on salt retention a Retention of salt and mixed polymer-coated silica nanoparticles on glass bead and b Retention of salt and mixed polymer-coated silica nanoparticles on oil-wet glass bead properties can increase both colloidal stability and retention in the molecular weight of polyethylene glycol methyl for the nanoparticles modified with polymers. ether. It is important to demonstrate the roles of retention and (3) The amount of propyl chains available in the mixed precipitation on the θ reduction of the substrates. In our polymer is increased further retention of the nanoflu- experiment, retention of PEG2/C3S on the glass bead and ids on oil-wet substrates. Propyl chains make hydro- the oil-wet glass bead substrates is the main reason for the θ phobic interaction between the nanoparticles and the reduction. One has to pay attention to this fact that for PEG1 substrates. It can be proposed that the retention of sil- and especially PEG1/C3S, precipitation has a major role in ica modified with mixed polymer on the substrate will the θ reduction and retention of the glass bead and the oil- enhance with an increase in the hydrophobicity of the wet glass bead substrates. substrate. (4) The stability of nanofluids has a great impact on the morphology of the adsorbed layer on the substrates. 4 Summary and conclusions PEG2/C3S has more stability compared to PEG1 and PEG1/C3S causing a uniform distribution of the Nanoparticles modified with mixed polymer are considered adsorbed nanoparticles on the substrates. as a novel approach to increase hydrocarbon production (5) The effect of salinity on the retention mechanism of from the reservoir rocks. This work presents a compre- nanofluids was investigated. According to the findings, hensive study of the modified nanoparticles by polymers the absorption mechanism of PEG2/C3S is slightly based on effective parameters, including the nanoparticles affected by salinity. Albeit, retention of PEG1 and espe- concentrations, surface modification time, and salinity. For cially PEG1/C3S is increased because of the enhanced these purposes, wettability alteration and retention of the physicochemical interactions. modified silica nanoparticle by polyethylene glycol methyl (6) Investigation of morphology and composition of the ether average Mn ~ 2000 (PEG1), the modified silica nano- treated substrates with PEG1 and PEG1/C3S revealed particle by mixed polyethylene glycol methyl ether average Na and Cl are available on the adsorbed layer. Due to Mn ~ 2000 and propyl chains (PEG1/C3S), and the modi- the physicochemical interaction, salinity caused more fied silica nanoparticle by mixed polyethylene glycol methyl retention for PEG1 and PEG1/C3S. Also, the perfor- ether average Mn ~ 5000 and propyl chains (PEG2/C3S) on mance of PEG2/C3S was better than that of PEG1, simulated porous media by glass beads and oil-wet glass PEG1/C3S. The optimal concentration of this nano- beads were studied. The following conclusions are as follow: fluid was 1000  ppm in a salinity range of 20,000– 40,000 ppm, for the θ reduction of the glass bead and (1) The retention is enhanced along with an increase in the oil-wet glass bead from 62° to 23° and 114° to 54°, concentration of nanofluids and further water contact respectively. angle (θ) is decreased. (7) It should be noted that pressure and temperature have (2) The molecular weight of the polymer affects the reten- a notable effect on nanofluid properties, especially tion of the substrate. In this research, the retention of at reservoir conditions. These observations were not nanofluid on substrates is enhanced with an increase considered in this study. Besides, reservoir rocks were replaced by glass beads. Thus, it can be experimen- 1 3 980 Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 Arslan G, Özmen M, Gündüz B, Zhang X, Ersöz M. Surface modifica- tally predicted that practical nanofluid efficiency can tion of glass beads with an aminosilane monolayer. Turk J Chem. be affected by rock heterogeneity, due to nanoparti- 2006;30(2):203–10. cle transport. Despite these assumptions, our study Bagaria HG, Neilson BM, Worthen AJ, Xue Z, Yoon KY, Cheng showed at salinity conditions, mixed polymer-grafted V, et al. Adsorption of iron oxide nanoclusters stabilized with sulfonated copolymers on silica in concentrated NaCl and nanoparticles have better performance in comparison CaCl2 brine. J Colloid Interf Sci. 2013;398:217–26. https ://doi. with polymer-grafted nanoparticles, especially in the org/10.1016/j.jcis.2013.01.056. oil-wet system. This observation is due to the hydro- Behzadi A, Mohammadi A. Environmentally responsive surface-mod- phobic interaction mechanism. As a total conclusion, ified silica nanoparticles for enhanced oil recovery. J Nanopart Res. 2016;18(9):266. https://doi.or g/10.1007/s11051-016-3580-1 . this nanofluid can be considered as a promising agent Binks BP, Rodrigues JA. Enhanced stabilization of emulsions due for EOR purposes. to surfactant-induced nanoparticle flocculation. Langmuir. 2007;23(14):7436–9. https ://doi.org/10.1021/la700 597k. Binks BP, Rodrigues JA, Frith WJ. Synergistic interaction in emulsions stabilized by a mixture of silica nanoparticles and cationic sur- factant. Langmuir. 2007;23(7):3626–36. https ://doi.org/10.1021/ la063 4600. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attri- Bodratti AM, Sarkar B, Alexandridis P. Adsorption of poly (ethylene bution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adapta- oxide)-containing amphiphilic polymers on solid-liquid inter- tion, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long faces: fundamentals and applications. Adv Colloid Interface. as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, 2017;244:132–63. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.cis.2016.09.003. provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes Buijse MA, Tandon K, Jain S, Handgraaf J-W, Fraaije J, editors. Sur- were made. The images or other third party material in this article are factant optimization for EOR using advanced chemical compu- included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated tational methods. In: SPE Improved oil recovery symposium; otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in 2012: Society of Petroleum Engineers Journal. https ://doi. the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not org/10.2118/15421 2-ms. permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will Choi SK, Son HA, Kim HT, Kim JW. Nanofluid enhanced oil recovery need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a using hydrophobically associative zwitterionic polymer-coated copy of this licence, visit http://creativ ecommons .or g/licenses/b y/4.0/. silica nanoparticles. Energy Fuel. 2017;31(8):7777–82. https :// doi.org/10.1021/acs.energ yfuel s.7b004 55. Ehtesabi H, Ahadian MM, Taghikhani V, Ghazanfari MH. Enhanced heavy oil recovery in sandstone cores using TiO nanofluids. Energy Fuel. 2014;28(1):423–30. https ://doi.org/10.1021/ef401 References 338c. El-Hoshoudy A, Desouky S, Betiha M, Alsabagh A. Use of 1-vinyl Afsharian-Moghaddam H, Haddadi-Asl V. Direct synthesis of polymer- imidazole based surfmers for preparation of polyacrylamide–SiO grafted inorganic hybrids via reversible chain transfer catalyzed nanocomposite through aza-Michael addition copolymerization polymerization. Iran Polym J. 2013;22(10):757–66. https ://doi. reaction for rock wettability alteration. Fuel. 2016;170:161–75. org/10.1007/s1372 6-013-0176-9. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2015.12.036. Aftab A, Ismail AR, Ibupoto Z, Akeiber H, Malghani M. Nanopar- Foster LM, Worthen AJ, Foster EL, Dong J, Roach CM, Metaxas AE, ticles based drilling muds a solution to drill elevated tempera- et  al. High interfacial activity of polymers “grafted through” ture wells: a review. Renew Sust Energy Rev. 2017;76:1301–13. functionalized iron oxide nanoparticle clusters. Langmuir. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.03.050. 2014;30(34):10188–96. https ://doi.org/10.1021/la501 445f. Agista MN, Guo K, Yu Z. A state-of-the-art review of nanoparticles Giraldo J, Benjumea P, Lopera S, Cortés FB, Ruiz MA. Wettability application in petroleum with a focus on enhanced oil recovery. alteration of sandstone cores by alumina-based nanofluids. Energy Appl Sci. 2018;8(6):871. https ://doi.org/10.3390/app80 60871 . Fuel. 2013;27(7):3659–65. https ://doi.org/10.1021/ef400 2956. Al-Anssari S, Arif M, Wang S, Barifcani A, Iglauer S. Stabilis- Guo K, Li H, Yu Z. In-situ heavy and extra-heavy oil recovery: a ing nanofluids in saline environments. J Colloid Interf Sci. review. Fuel. 2016;185:886–902. https ://doi.or g/10.1016/j. 2017a;508:222–9. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2017.08.043. fuel.2016.08.047. Al-Anssari S, Arif M, Wang S, Barifcani A, Lebedev M, Iglauer S. Hendraningrat L. Unlocking the Potential of Hydrophilic Nanoparti- Wettability of nano-treated calcite/CO /brine systems: implica- cles as Novel Enhanced Oil Recovery Method: An Experimental tion for enhanced CO storage potential. Int J Greenh Gas Con. Investigation. 2015. 2017b;66:97–105. https://doi.or g/10.1016/j.ijggc.2017.09.008 . Hendraningrat L, Shidong L, Torsaeter O, editors. A glass micromodel Al-Anssari S, Arif M, Wang S, Barifcani A, Lebedev M, Iglauer S. experimental study of hydrophilic nanoparticles retention for EOR Wettability of nanofluid-modified oil-wet calcite at reservoir project. SPE Russian Oil and Gas Exploration and Production conditions. Fuel. 2018;211:405–14. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j. Technical Conference and Exhibition; 2012: Society of Petroleum fuel.2017.08.111. Engineers Journal. https ://doi.org/10.2118/15916 1-ms. Al-Anssari S, Barifcani A, Wang S, Maxim L, Iglauer S. Wettabil- Hendraningrat L, Torsæter O. Effects of the initial rock wettability on ity alteration of oil-wet carbonate by silica nanofluid. J Col- silica-based nanofluid-enhanced oil recovery processes at reser - loid Interf Sci. 2016;461:435–42. https ://doi.or g/10.1016/j. voir temperatures. Energy Fuel. 2014;28(10):6228–41. https://doi. jcis.2015.09.051. org/10.1021/ef501 4049. Al-Anssari S, Wang S, Barifcani A, Lebedev M, Iglauer S. Effect of Hendraningrat L, Torsæter O. Metal oxide-based nanoparticles: temperature and SiO nanoparticle size on wettability alteration of revealing their potential to enhance oil recovery in different wet- oil-wet calcite. Fuel. 2017c;206:34–42. https://doi.or g/10.1016/j. tability systems. Appl Nanosci. 2015;5(2):181–99. https ://doi. fuel.2017.05.077. org/10.1007/s1320 4-014-0305-6. 1 3 Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 981 Iglauer S, Pentland C, Busch A. C O wettability of seal and reservoir Palchoudhury S, Lead JR. A facile and cost-effective method for sep- rocks and the implications for carbon geo-sequestration. Water aration of oil–water mixtures using polymer-coated iron oxide Resour Res. 2015;51(1):729–74. https ://doi.org/10.1002/2014W nanoparticles. Environ Sci Technol. 2014;48(24):14558–63. https R0155 53.://doi.org/10.1021/es503 7755. Iglauer S, Wu Y, Shuler P, Tang Y, Goddard WA III. Alkyl polyglyco- Parfitt R, Greenland D. The adsorption of poly (ethylene glycols) side surfactant–alcohol cosolvent formulations for improved oil on clay minerals. Clay Miner. 1970;8(3):305–15. https ://doi. recovery. Colloid Surface A. 2009;339(1–3):48–59. https ://doi.org/10.1180/claym in.1970.008.3.08. org/10.1016/j.colsu rfa.2009.01.015. Patel J, Borgohain S, Kumar M, Rangarajan V, Somasundaran P, Sen R. Jamaloei BY, Kharrat R. Analysis of microscopic displacement mech- Recent developments in microbial enhanced oil recovery. Renew anisms of dilute surfactant flooding in oil-wet and water-wet Sust Energy Rev. 2015;52:1539–58. ht t p s : / /d o i . org / 10 . 1 0 16 / j . porous media. Transport Porous Med. 2010;81(1):1. https ://doi. rser.2015.07.135. org/10.1007/s1124 2-009-9382-5. Qi C, Liu M, Wang G, Pan Y, Liang L. Experimental research on Ju B, Dai S, Luan Z, Zhu T, Su X, Qiu X, editors. A study of wettabil- stabilities, thermophysical properties and heat transfer enhance- ity and permeability change caused by adsorption of nanometer ment of nanofluids in heat exchanger systems. Chin J Chem structured polysilicon on the surface of porous media. SPE Asia Eng. 2018;26(12):2420–30. https ://doi.or g/10.1016/j.cjc he Pacific oil and gas conference and exhibition; 2002: Society of .2018.03.021. Petroleum Engineers Journal. https ://doi.org/10.2118/77938 -ms. Rabe M, Verdes D, Seeger S. Understanding protein adsorption phe- Ju B, Fan T, Ma M. Enhanced oil recovery by flooding with hydro- nomena at solid surfaces. Adv Colloid Interface. 2011;162(1– philic nanoparticles. China Particuol. 2006;4(1):41–6. https: //doi. 2):87–106. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.cis.2010.12.007. org/10.1016/S1672 -2515(07)60232 -2. Ranka M, Brown P, Hatton TA. Responsive stabilization of nano- Kazemzadeh Y, Shojaei S, Riazi M, Sharifi M. Review on application particles for extreme salinity and high-temperature reservoir of nanoparticles for EOR purposes; a critical of the opportuni- applications. ACS Appl Mater. 2015;7(35):19651–8. https ://doi. ties and challenges. CHINESE J CHEM ENG 2018;10. https ://org/10.1021/acsam i.5b042 00. doi.org/10.1016/j.cjche .2018.05.022. Richard E, Aruna S, Basu BJ. Superhydrophobic surfaces fabri- Kim D, Krishnamoorti R. Interfacial Activity of Poly [oligo (eth- cated by surface modification of alumina particles. Appl Surf ylene oxide)–monomethyl ether methacrylate]-Grafted Silica Sci. 2012;258(24):10199–204. https ://doi.or g/10.1016/j.apsus Nanoparticles. Ind Eng Chem Res. 2015;54(14):3648–56. https c.2012.07.009. ://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.5b001 05. Rostami M, Mohseni M, Ranjbar Z. Investigating the effect of pH on Mader-Arndt K, Kutelova Z, Fuchs R, Meyer J, Staedler T, Hintz W, the surface chemistry of an amino silane treated nano silica. Pigm et al. Single particle contact versus particle packing behavior: Resin Technol. 2011. https ://doi.org/10.1108/03699 42111 11805 model based analysis of chemically modified glass particles. 09. Granul Matter. 2014;16(3):359–75. https ://doi.or g/10.1007/ Roustaei A, Bagherzadeh H. Experimental investigation of SiO nano- s1003 5-013-0478-9. particles on enhanced oil recovery of carbonate reservoirs. J Pet McElfresh PM, Holcomb DL, Ector D, editors. Application of nano- Explor Prod Technol. 2015;5(1):27–33. https ://doi.org/10.1007/ fluid technology to improve recovery in oil and gas wells. SPE s1320 2-014-0120-3. international oilfield nanotechnology conference and exhibi- Rubio N, Au H, Leese HS, Hu S, Clancy AJ, Shaffer MS. Grafting tion; 2012: Society of Petroleum Engineers Journal. https:/ /doi. from versus grafting to approaches for the functionalization of org/10.2118/15482 7-ms. graphene nanoplatelets with poly (methyl methacrylate). Mac- Miranda CR, Lara LSd, Tonetto BC, editors. Stability and mobility romolecules. 2017;50(18):7070–9. https ://doi.org/10.1021/acs. of functionalized silica nanoparticles for enhanced oil recovery macro mol.7b010 47. applications. SPE international oilfield nanotechnology confer - Salager JL, Marquez N, Graciaa A, Lachaise J. Partitioning of eth- ence and exhibition; 2012: Society of Petroleum Engineers Jour- oxylated octylphenol surfactants in microemulsion − oil − water nal. https ://doi.org/10.2118/15703 3-ms. systems: influence of temperature and relation between parti- Mirshahghassemi S, Lead JR. Oil recovery from water under envi- tioning coefficient and physicochemical formulation. Langmuir. ronmentally relevant conditions using magnetic nanoparti- 2000;16(13):5534–9. https ://doi.org/10.1021/la990 5517. cles. Int J Environ Sci Te. 2015;49(19):11729–36. https ://doi. Shi X, Rosa R, Lazzeri A. On the coating of precipitated calcium org/10.1021/acs.est.5b026 87. carbonate with stearic acid in aqueous medium. Langmuir. Mondragon R, Julia JE, Barba A, Jarque JC. Characterization of 2010;26(11):8474–82. https ://doi.org/10.1021/la904 914h. silica–water nanofluids dispersed with an ultrasound probe: Songolzadeh R, Moghadasi J. Stabilizing silica nanoparticles in high a study of their physical properties and stability. Powder saline water by using ionic surfactants for wettability alteration Technol. 2012;224:138–46. https ://doi.or g/10.1016/j.po wte application. Colloid Polym Sci. 2017;295(1):145–55. https ://doi. c.2012.02.043.org/10.1007/s0039 6-016-3987-3. Munshi A, Singh V, Kumar M, Singh J. Effect of nanoparticle size on Wang D, Duan H, Möhwald H. The water/oil interface: the emerg- sessile droplet contact angle. J Appl Phys. 2008;103(8):084315. ing horizon for self-assembly of nanoparticles. Soft Matter. https ://doi.org/10.1063/1.29124 64. 2005;1(6):412–6. https ://doi.org/10.1039/B5119 11A. Nikolov A, Kondiparty K, Wasan D. Nanoparticle self-structuring Watson H, Norström A, Torrkulla Å, Rosenholm J. Aqueous amino in a nanofluid film spreading on a solid surface. Langmuir. silane modification of E-glass surfaces. J Colloid Interface Sci. 2010;26(11):7665–70. https ://doi.org/10.1021/la100 928t. 2001;238(1):136–46. https ://doi.org/10.1006/jcis.2001.7506. Nwidee LN, Al-Anssari S, Barifcani A, Sarmadivaleh M, Lebedev Xue Z, Foster E, Wang Y, Nayak S, Cheng V, Ngo VW, et al. Effect of M, Iglauer S. Nanoparticles influence on wetting behaviour of grafted copolymer composition on iron oxide nanoparticle stabil- fractured limestone formation. J Pet Sci Eng. 2017;149:782–8. ity and transport in porous media at high salinity. Energy Fuel. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.petro l.2016.11.017. 2014;28(6):3655–65. https ://doi.org/10.1021/ef500 340h. Omurlu C, Pham H, Nguyen Q. Interaction of surface-modified silica Yanagishima T, Di Michele L, Kotar J, Eiser E. Diffusive behaviour of nanoparticles with clay minerals. Appl Nanosci. 2016;6(8):1167– PLL–PEG coated colloids on λ-DNA brushes–tuning hydropho- 73. https ://doi.org/10.1007/s1320 4-016-0534-y. bicity. Soft Matter. 2012;8(25):6792–8. https ://doi.org/10.1039/ C2SM2 5296A . 1 3 982 Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 Zargartalebi M, Kharrat R, Barati N. Enhancement of surfactant Zhao X, Blunt MJ, Yao J. Pore-scale modeling: effects of wettability flooding performance by the use of silica nanoparticles. Fuel. on waterflood oil recovery. J Pet Sci Eng. 2010;71(3–4):169–78. 2015;143:21–7. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2014.11.040.https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.petro l.2010.01.011. Zhang H, Ramakrishnan T, Nikolov A, Wasan D. Enhanced oil dis- Zhu X, Zhang Q, Wang Y, Wei F. Review on the nanoparticle fluidiza- placement by nanofluid’s structural disjoining pressure in model tion science and technology. Chin J Chem Eng. 2016;24(1):9–22. fractured porous media. J Colloid Interf Sci. 2018;511:48–56. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjche .2015.06.005. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2017.09.067. 1 3 http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Petroleum Science Springer Journals

Wettability alteration and retention of mixed polymer-grafted silica nanoparticles onto oil-wet porous medium

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer-journals/wettability-alteration-and-retention-of-mixed-polymer-grafted-silica-7CCxuhoFHp
Publisher
Springer Journals
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 2021
ISSN
1672-5107
eISSN
1995-8226
DOI
10.1007/s12182-021-00552-3
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Enhanced oil recovery (EOR) processes are applied to recover trapped or residual oil in the reservoir rocks after primary and secondary recovery methods. Changing the wettability of the rock from oil-wet to water-wet is named wettability alteration. It is an important factor for EOR. Due to their unique properties, nanoparticles have gained great attention for improving oil recovery. Despite the promising results, the main challenges of applying nanoparticles are related to the colloidal sta- bility of the nanofluids in the harsh conditions of the reservoirs. In recent years, polymer-grafted nanoparticles have been considered as novel promising materials for EOR. The obtained results showed that adding a hydrophobic agent trimethoxy (propyl) silane on the surface of modified silica nanoparticles with polyethylene glycol methyl ether has an effective role in improving retention and wettability alteration, especially in the oil-wet substrate due to hydrophobic interaction. The modified silica nanoparticle by mixed polyethylene glycol methyl ether (Mn ~ 5000) and trimethoxy (propyl) silane showed a proper performance at a concentration of 1000 ppm and a salinity range of 2000–40,000 ppm. The obtained findings can help for a better understanding of the silica nanofluid modification with both hydrophilic and hydrophobic agents for the EOR application of near-wellbore. Keywords Wettability alteration · Retention · Silica nanoparticle · Surface modification · Enhanced oil recovery 1 Introduction sources around the world. Hence, it is essential to develop novel methods for the recovery of the residual oil from Hydrocarbon resources are the main source of primary the rock pore space (Guo et al. 2016). There are several energy, contributing to the most used energy in the world methodologies used for increasing the amount of crude oil (Aftab et al. 2017; Agista et al. 2018; Patel et al. 2015). named enhanced oil recovery (EOR). EOR studies have been Injection of conventional water into oil reservoirs has been focused on the reduction of interfacial tension between water considered as the most commonly used secondary recovery and oil (Buijse et al. 2012), viscosity control (Jamaloei and method which can extract one-third of oil from the reser- Kharrat 2010), and wettability alteration of the reservoir voir rocks (Kazemzadeh et al. 2018). Hydrocarbon resources rocks which are effective parameters to enhance hydrocar - are the most demanded non-renewable and limited energy bon production (Zhao et al. 2010). Nanoparticles are one of the main nanomaterials that received the most attention for EOR purposes (Zhang et al. Edited by Xiu-Qiu Peng 2018). Due to their unique properties, they can penetrate the small pores of the reservoir rocks and alter the wettability * Hamid Daneshmand hamiddaneshmand1370@gmail.com of rock from oil-wet to water-wet state (Zargartalebi et al. 2015). As a result, trapped oil is extracted from the pore rock Department of Physics, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran along with a decrease in the capillary forces (Wang et al. Department of Chemistry, Faculty of Science, Yazd 2005). Most researches have been studied the capability of University, Yazd, Iran metal oxide nanoparticles (SiO , Al O , ZnO, T iO , NiO, 2 2 3 2 Department of Materials Engineering, Tarbiat Modares ZrO , and Fe O ) for EOR purposes (Giraldo et al. 2013; 2 3 4 University, Tehran, Iran Iglauer et al. 2015; Nwidee et al. 2017). Department of Material Science, Shahreza Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran Vol:.(1234567890) 1 3 Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 963 The main challenge for using the nanofluid in real condi- For example, Binks et al. (Binks and Rodrigues 2007; tions of the reservoir is related to the colloidal suspension Binks et al. 2007) showed that silica nanoparticles sta- stability and the agglomeration of nanoparticles (Ehtesabi bilize oil-in-water macro-emulsions when blended with et  al. 2014; Hendraningrat and Torsæter 2015; Ju et  al. an anionic or cationic surfactant. Johnston et al. (Bagaria 2002; Miranda et al. 2012). The stability of nanoparticles is et  al. 2013; Xue et al. 2014) studied various iron-oxide based on the electrostatic double-layer forces which can be nanoparticles grafted with amphiphilic and charged poly- affected at high-salinity. In this condition, the ionic strength mers. They reported a decrease in the interfacial tension of high salt concentration reduces electrostatic repulsive between oil and water. Also, they studied the effect of force between nanoparticles (Al-Anssari et  al. 2016; Ju iron-oxide clusters and silica nanoparticles coated with et al. 2006) (Fig. 1a). Furthermore, nanoparticles have a high poly  [oligo  (ethylene oxide) monomethyl ether meth- tendency to aggregate. This is because of the high surface- acrylate] and showed a significant reduction in inter- to-volume ratio and the existence of mutual van der Waals facial tension at very low nanoparticle concentrations forces between nanoparticles (Hendraningrat and Torsæter (1–10 ppm) (Foster et al. 2014; Kim and Krishnamoorti 2014; Ranka et al. 2015). Therefore, aggregation phenom- 2015). Lead et al. (Mirshahghassemi and Lead 2015; Pal- ena in nanoparticles can close pore throat and diminish choudhury and Lead 2014) reported polymer-coated nano- permeability that is essential for retention and subsequently particles that have the potential to separate oil–water mix- wettability alteration of rocks (Songolzadeh and Mogha- tures. Behzadi and coworkers (Behzadi and Mohammadi dasi 2017). The aggregation effect of nanoparticles can be 2016) studied the modified SiO with mixed polyethylene reduced by special methods. Recent studies have proposed glycol and propyl chains. They reported enhancing oil different approaches to modify the nanoparticle surface by recovery and wettability alteration of the glass substrate. mixing it with a polymer or surfactant that renders a bet- Choi et al. (Choi et al. 2017) studied that modified SiO ter performance than unmodified nanoparticles (Al-Anssari nanoparticles with a zwitterionic polymer. The results et  al. 2017a, b, c; Al-Anssari et al. 2018; Hendraningrat showed that these modified nanoparticles could improve et al. 2012). The grafting surface of the nanoparticle with a the oil recovery by 5% volume with 0.3 psi reduction in long-chain polymer is studied as a novel approach that not pressure. Moreover, the retention of polymer-grafted nano- only improves the stability of nanofluid but also increases particles onto the carbonate surface altered the wettability. flowability through the porous media at reservoir conditions. They found that the oil recovery was improved by 10.8% Fig. 1 Schematic of the EOR process for wettability alteration of reservoir rock with mixed polymer-grafted silica nanoparticles. a The aggre- gation of nanoparticles in the condition of the reservoir. b The addition of hydrophilic polymer on the surface of silica nanoparticle to prevent aggregation with steric stabilizer effect. c The addition of hydrophobic polymer on the surface of silica nanoparticle for increasing retention on the oil-wet substrate due to hydrophobic interaction. d Extracted oil from reservoir rock with retention of mixed polymer-grafted silica nanopar- ticles due to wettability alteration 1 3 964 Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 with 0.03 wt% of nanocomposite additives in compari- 2 Experimental details son with the seawater. El-Hoshoudy et al. (2016) studied the performance of polyacrylamide polymer-grafted SiO 2.1 Materials nanoparticles. Results showed that grafted nanoparticles indicated high anti-salinity, resistance against temperature, Non-porous silica nanoparticles ( AEROSIL 200) were and shear resistance properties with thickening behavior. used with a specific area of 200 ± 25 m /g. The average Besides, the wettability of the oil-wet rock surface can be primary particle size was 12 nm. Solid-glass bead (boro- altered to water-wet at high salinity of 40,000 ppm and a silicate, diam. 3 mm), polyethylene glycol methyl ether high temperature of 90 °C. The oil recovery of 2000 mg/L averages Mn ~ 2000 (PEG1), polyethylene glycol methyl of polymer-grafted SiO was reported 60% of residual oil ether averages Mn ~ 5000 (PEG2), 3-glycidoxypropyltri- saturation. However, despite valuable researches, further methoxysilane (GPTMS, 98%), and trimethoxy (propyl) studies are needed for polymer-modified nanoparticles silane (C3S, 97%) were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich. for designing more efficient polymer-coated nanoparti- Acetic acid (glacial, 100.0%), n-hexane (99.9%), sulfuric cles. Researchers mostly focused on the increase in the acid (98%), hydrogen peroxide (30%), and ethanol (99.9%) retention of nanofluid based on the colloidal stability using were provided from Merck. Acetonitrile (99.9%) and pal- polymer modification (Fig.  1b). In other words, adding the mitic acid (99%) were, respectively, acquired from Amere- steric effects to nanofluid for colloidal stability is the main tat Shimi (Iran) and CARLO EBRA (Italy). All reagents reason for using grafted polymers. It is important to note used in this work were of analytical grade and applied that reservoir rocks are often hydrophobic. As a result, without further purification. the addition of the hydrophobic agent to the nanoparti- cle surface leading the hydrophobic interaction between nanoparticles and reservoir rock. This observation can 2.2 Modification of silica nanoparticles increase the retention of nanoparticles. In this work, poly- mer and also hydrophobic agents were used to modify the The silanol groups, Si–OH, on the surface of silica nano- surface of silica nanoparticles to increase the retention of particles can interact with used polymers. To make a spe- nanoparticles and improve the wettability alteration. This cific interaction between silica nanoparticles and polymers, procedure leads to the addition of both steric effects and silanization strategies are also used for the modification of hydrophobic interaction between silica nanoparticles and polyethylene glycol methyl ether (PEG1 or PEG2) in which oil-wet substrate, respectively (Fig. 1c). their surface is silanized and functionalized with silane Here, we propose that properly designed, polymer-coated group. The details of this procedure are summarized as fol- nanoparticles can alter the wettability of substrate from an lows. A mixture of dried polyethylene glycol methyl ether oil-wet state to a water-wet one (Fig. 1d). We prepared a (30 g), GPTMS (4 g), and acetic acid (0.2 mL) as a catalyzer series of silica nanoparticles with a mixture of hydrophilic was placed in the flask containing 150 mL of acetonitrile and hydrophobic chains covalently grafted to the surface. solution. The obtained solution was refluxed at 90 °C with We found that nanoparticles coated with a mixture of hydro- continuous stirring for 6 h (Fig. 2a). C3S was added (5 mL) philic polymer chains and hydrophobic chains are more directly to silica distilled water solution (5 wt%) as the silane efficient in comparison with nanoparticles coated with group source and the obtained solution then stirring for 5 h only hydrophilic polymer chains in the oil-wet system due (Fig. 2b). To modify silica with polyethylene glycol methyl to hydrophobic interaction. In this study, the experimental ether, the functionalized polyethylene glycol methyl ether results and the characterization of silica nanoparticles modi- was added to silica distilled water solution (5 wt%) and fied with polymer or substrates are presented in detail. Thus, stirred for 10 h. This strategy is also used for the modifica- wettability alteration and retention of polymer-coated nan- tion of silica with the mixed polymer of polyethylene glycol oparticles are discussed based on the effective parameters methyl ether and propyl chains (Fig. 2c). The pH of the solu- such as the concentration of modified nanoparticles, time tion was adjusted at 9.5 using NaOH and the temperature of of surface modification, and salinity. All parameters were reflux was set at 80 °C. Finally, the obtained solution was studied at ambient conditions. It is notable to the fact that centrifuged and washed three times with ethanol (Behzadi high pressures and temperature can dominate at reservoir and Mohammadi 2016). conditions which consequently affect nanofluid retention. Three types of modified silica including the modified Therefore, the efficiency of polymer-coated nanoparticles silica nanoparticle by PEG1, the modified silica nanopar - can be different from the ambient condition in comparison ticle by mixed PEG1 and C3S, and the modified silica with the reservoir conditions. Also, the heterogeneity of nanoparticle by mixed PEG2 and C3S were prepared for rocks and the rate of nanoflow have a significant effect on the treatment of substrates. the retention and distribution of particles. 1 3 HO HO HO HO HO HO HO HO OH HO HO HO HO OH OH CH Si Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 965 (a) Si Si H3C O CH3 OH OH Polyethylene glycol GPTMS Functionalized polyethylene methyl ether glycol methyl ether OH (b) OH CH Si CH3 Si Si Si O O HO HO (c) OH CH Si Si Si O CH3 OH HO C3S grafted silica Functionalized polyethylene glycol methyl ether OH Mixed functionalized polyethylene glycol Si methyl ether/C3S grafted silica HO Fig. 2 Chemical reaction steps: a The functionalized polyethylene glycol methyl ether by 3-glycidoxypropyltrimethoxysilane (GPTMS), b The modified silica by trimethoxy (propyl) silane (C3S), and c The addition of functionalized polyethylene glycol methyl ether on the surface of the modified silica with C3S for 30 min. Then, it was dried under the ambient condi- 2.3 Modification of glass bead to oil‑wet glass bead tion in an oven. To obtain a strongly water-wet surface, the glass beads were refluxed in the piranha solution, a Due to the instability of reservoir rocks in the measure- 3:1 mixture of sulfuric acid (98%) and hydrogen perox- ment of the contact angle, borosilicate glass beads were ide (30%), at 250 °C for 24 h (Shi et al. 2010). Because used to replace sandstone (Jamaloei and Kharrat 2010). the piranha solution is a mixture of a strong oxidizing The reason for the application of this glass bead is that the agent, it will remove most residues of organic substrates, reservoir rock has a porous medium. Thus, these materi- as well as it will hydroxylate the used surfaces making als can be used for the simulation of the porosity condi- them highly hydrophilic. After that, the glass beads were tion. Sandstone is mainly composed of silica, which is washed with distilled water and ethanol and dried in an also a borosilicate glass bead. The oleophilicity of res- oven. The treated glass beads by the piranha solution were ervoir rock is due to the fact that fatty acids are adsorbed immersed in the palmitic acid solution (0.1 M) dissolved over time (Iglauer et al. 2015). Thus, palmitic acid was in n-hexane and refluxed at 90 °C for 24 h (Arslan et al. used to modify the glass beads. Before the treatment by 2006). Finally, the oil-wet glass beads were washed by nanofluids, the glass beads were washed with the aid of ethanol and distilled water to remove any trace residues of ultrasonic agitation in acetone, ethanol, and distilled water 1 3 CH OH Si HO HO HO HO 966 Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 fatty acid adsorbed on the surface of the glass beads. Then, 2.5 Water contact angle (θ) and retention they dried at the ambient conditions in an oven before the measurements treatment by the nanofluids. The sessile drop technique was used to study the wettability 2.4 T reatment of substrates (glass or oil‑wet glass alteration of the treated substrates using the modified nano- bead) with the modified silica nanoparticles particles. These experiments were carried out with 0.1–0.3 µL distilled water droplets at two different positions on at The modified silica nanoparticles were firstly dispersed least five glass beads. All the instruments were supported using magnetically stirred and then homogenized with the with the software image providing the ability to measure the aid of ultrasonic agitation for 30 min. The prepared sub- θ averages. It is considered as the θ of the studied condition. strates (glass beads or oil-wet glass beads) were immersed To investigate the retention of the modified nanoparticles on in the nanofluid at room conditions. One important challenge substrates, the calibration curve was obtained using ultravio- is the retention of the modified nanoparticles by gravity. To let–visible (UV–VIS) spectroscopy. The UV–VIS spectra overcome this problem, the nanofluid was stirred smoothly were measured by a Hash DR spectrophotometer at 400 nm. (60 rpm) during the treatment. In the experiment, irregular The retention was obtained using the following equation: compact packing of glass beads was prepared in a 25 mL −1 q(t)= (C − C )V × M (1) beaker. The porosity is exactly 26% due to the equal size i X of glass beads (Mader-Arndt et al. 2014). Eventually, the C and C are initial and final concentrations of the nanoflu- i x treated substrates (glass beads or oil-wet glass beads) with ids (mg/L). V is the volume of solution and M is the mass of the modified silica nanoparticles were washed by the dis- substrates. In our experiments, V and M were fixed at 20 mL tilled water and dried at ambient conditions in an oven. It and 20 g, respectively. Finally, q(t) is the amount of adsorbed modified nanoparticles on the substrates (mg/g ). glass Silica PEG C3S Functionalized PEG 2.6 Characterization methods C3S grafted silica PEG grafted silica GPTMS Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FT-IR) was applied to evaluate the chemical bonding between the surface of silica and polymer. FT-IR experiments were carried out by a spectrometer (VERTEX 70, Bruker Optics, Ettlingen, Ger- many) equipped with a deuterated triglycine sulfate (DTGS) detector. Thermogravimetric analysis (TGA) analysis was used to determine the content of polymers on the surface of the silica. The TGA patterns are obtained using the Thermo- gravimetric Analyzer of PerkinElmer with a heating rate of −1 20 °C min in a nitrogen atmosphere from 40 °C to 800 °C. Scanning electron microscope (SEM) was performed with Zeiss SEM and Oxford energy dispersive spectroscopy 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 (EDS) to study the morphology and composition of sub- -1 Wavenumber, cm strates before and after treatment by the modified nanoparti- cles. Zeta potential analyzer (HORIBA Scientific, SZ-100z) Fig. 3 FT-IR spectra of silica, trimethoxy (propyl) silane (C3S), and was used to measure zeta potentials of nanofluids. C3S-grafted silica. 3-glycidoxypropyltrimethoxysilane (GPTMS), polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 2000 (PEG1), and functional- ized PEG1. 3-glycidoxypropyltrimethoxysilane (GPTMS) polyethyl- 3 Results and discussion ene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 5000 (PEG2), and functionalized PEG2. Silica, functionalized PEG1, and PEG1-grafted silica. Silica, func- tionalized PEG2, and PEG2-grafted silica 3.1 Characterizations of silica modified with polymer using FT‑IR and TGA techniques can be used for the contact angle measurement. The FT-IR spectra of silica, polymers, and polymer-coated −1 silica are shown in Fig.  3. The peak of 887 cm shows the Si–OH group of silica (black line). In the C3S spectra −1 −1 (red line), there are two peaks in 798 cm and 1230 cm 1 3 Intensity, a.u. Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 967 −1 −1 belonging to the Si–C group. Also, 887 cm and 1604 cm The TGA curves of silica and the modified silica by the peaks indicate the Si–OH and Si–OC groups. Peaks between used polymers including C3S, PEG1, mixed PEG1 and −1 2800 and 3000 cm are due to aliphatic groups of the car- C3S, and mixed PEG2 and C3S are shown in Fig. 4. It is bon chain (Behzadi and Mohammadi 2016). In the C3S- evident from Fig. 4a, the weight of silica is constant from modified silica spectra (blue line), apart from the main silica 100 to 800 °C. According to the previous description, the −1 peaks, there are two peaks in 2800–3000 cm , which are modification of silica nanoparticle is based on two-step related to C3S (Munshi et al. 2008; Richard et al. 2012). strategies. In the first step, the silica surface was modi - These peaks confirm the chemical reaction between C3S fied by C3S. In the second step, the surface of the silica and silica. The FT-IR spectra of PEG functionalized with nanoparticles changed using C3S was modified by PEG1 −1 silane group (blue line) shows two peaks at 890 cm and or PEG2. To determine the content of polymers on the −1 1250 cm from the GPTMS epoxy ring (purple line). Also, surface of the silica, TGA analysis was performed on the −1 new peaks have appeared around 1250-1500  cm and modified silica with C3S in the absence and presence of −1 1100  cm , which are related to PEG. The peak at about PEG1 and PEG2. In the TGA curve in Fig. 4b, the content −1 1100 cm belongs to the Si–O–C and C–O–C groups. As a of C3S was about 2%. The data in Figs. 4c and d demon- result, polyethylene glycol methyl ether (PEG1 or PEG2) is strate that the content of PEG1 and PEG2 for the modified functionalized with silane groups (Behzadi and Mohammadi silica by C3S was approximately 11% and 21%, respec- 2016). As shown in Fig. 3 (brown line), after modification of tively. Besides, the content of PEG1 coating on the silica the silica by PEG functionalized, a new peak appears around nanoparticles is estimated at 23% (Fig. 4e) which is more −1 2800-3000 cm , which is due to the binding of PEG to the than those of the other silica nanoparticles modified with silica surface. PEG1/C3S and PEG2/C3S. For modified silica by PEG1/ Due to the similarity of the peaks in C3S, PEG1, and C3S due to the presence of C3S on nanoparticle surface at PEG2, the FT-IR technique cannot be used to study the the first step of modification, there is a decrease in poly - mixed polymer grafted with silica. Therefore, TGA analy- mers content in comparison with modified silica by PEG1. sis was used to study the structure of silica modified with The presence of C3S on the silica surface causes increas- the mixed polymer. The ability to obtain key information ing steric effects which decreases the content of PEG1 on the surface of the silica. In the case of the modified silica with PGE2/C3S, the content of the polymer is more than modified silica with C3S/PGE1 but is nearly similar to the modified silica by PEG1. This fact is due to the (a) Silica more molecular weight of PEG2 in comparison with PEG1 (b) C3S grafted modified silica making the content of PEG2 on the surface of modified silica with C3S was close to the modified silica by PEG1. As a result, for the modified silica by all the mentioned (c) Mixed PEG1/C3S grafted silica materials, the content of polymers was less than ~ 25%. The relatively low content of polymers on the surface of (d) Mixed PEG1/C3S grafted silica 85 silica is due to the grafted to method that applied for their synthesis. As it can be observed, this method causes lower absolute grafting ratios of polymers in comparison with grafted from the method. This fact is due to the mechanism of the steric effect of polymer chains (Iglauer et al. 2009). (e) PEG1 grafted silica 100200 300400 500 600 700 800 3.2 Characterizations of substrates by SEM, EDS, Temperature, °C and contact angle measurement Fig. 4 TGA curves of a silica, b trimethoxy (propyl) silane (C3S)- grafted silica, c mixed polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 2000 Figure 5a–c represents SEM, EDS, and θ of the glass bead, (PEG1)/C3S-grafted silica, d mixed polyethylene glycol methyl ether the treated glass bead by piranha solution, and the oil-wet Mn ~ 5000 (PEG2)/C3S-grafted silica, and e PEG1-grafted silica glass bead (modified by palmitic acid), respectively. Pira- nha treatment decreased the θ of the glass bead from 62° to about the content of polymers coupled to the surface of 7° (Fig. 5a1 and b1). After modification with a fatty acid, nanoparticles makes TGA a suitable candidate for this the θ of glass bead increased to 114° (Fig. 5c ). research (Afsharian-Moghaddam and Haddadi-Asl 2013). Figure 5 shows the results obtained from EDS measure- ments of the glass bead. The treated glass bead by piranha 1 3 Weight loss, % 968 Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 (a) (a) Glass bead Glass bead Si Si Spectrum Spectrum 1 1 (a1) (a1) (a2 (a2)) O O Na Na Br Br 00 00.5 .5 1. 1.02 02 1. 1.5 5 2. 2.03 03 .5 .5 3. 3.04 04 .5 .5 4. 4.0 0 .5 .5 2 μm 2 μm EHT EHT = = 20.00 kV 20.00 kV Signal Signal A A = = SE SE1 1 Date: 3 Sep 2018 Date: 3 Sep 2018 WD WD = = 7.5 mm 7.5 mm Mag Mag = = 20.00 K 20.00 K X X Ti Time: 10:49:31 me: 10:49:31 Full scale 241 cts cursor: 0.00 Full scale 241 cts cursor: 0.000 0 keV keV (b) (b) Tr Treated glass bead by piranha solution eated glass bead by piranha solution Si Si Spectrum Spectrum 1 1 (b1) (b1) (b2 (b2)) Elemen ElementW tWeight, eight, % % Atomic, Atomic, % % O K O K 45.10 45.10 59.05 59.05 Si K Si K 54.90 54.90 40.95 40.95 O O 00 00.5 .5 1. 1.02 02 1. 1.5 5 2. 2.03 03 .5 .5 3. 3.04 04 .5 .5 4. 4.0 0 .5 .5 2 μm 2 μm EHT EHT = = 20.00 kV 20.00 kV Signal Signal A A = = SE SE1 1 Date: 3 Sep 2018 Date: 3 Sep 2018 WD WD = = 8.0 mm 8.0 mm Mag Mag = = 5.00 K 5.00 K X X Ti Time: 10:42:13 me: 10:42:13 Full scale 241 cts cursor: 0.00 Full scale 241 cts cursor: 0.000 0 keV keV (c) (c) Oil-wet glass bead (modified glass bead by palmitic acid) Oil-wet glass bead (modified glass bead by palmitic acid) Si Si Spectrum Spectrum 1 1 (c1) (c1) (c2 (c2)) Elemen Elementt We Weight, ight, % % Atomic, Atomic, % % C C K K 52.36 52.36 66.47 66.47 O O K K 18.66 18.66 17.79 17.79 Si Si K K 28.98 28.98 15.74 15.74 C C O O 00 00.5 .5 1. 1.02 02 1. 1.5 5 2. 2.03 03 .5 .5 3. 3.04 04 .5 .5 4. 4.0 0 .5 .5 3 μm 3 μm EHT EHT = = 20.00 kV 20.00 kV Signal Signal A A = = SE1 SE1 Date: 3 Sep 2018 Date: 3 Sep 2018 WD WD = = 8.0 mm 8.0 mm Mag Mag = = 10.00 K 10.00 K X X Ti Time: 10:12:12 me: 10:12:12 Full scale 321 cts cursor: 0.00 Full scale 321 cts cursor: 0.000 0 keV keV Fig. 5 SEM, EDS, and water contact angle (θ) of a surface of the glass, b treated glass bead by piranha solution, and c oil-wet glass bead solution and oil-wet glass bead (modified by palmitic acid) (oil-wet glass bead) is 52.36% indicating palmitic acid is are respectively shown in Fig. 5a2, b2, and c2. Based on vastly adsorbed on the surface of the glass bead. To inves- the obtained EDS results, the amount of available carbon tigate the retention of polymer and mixed polymer grafted on the surface of the modified glass bead by palmitic acid 1 3 Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 969 2.4 (a1) (a2) Glass-PEG1 Glass-PEG1 Glass-PEG2/C3S Glass-PEG1/C3S Glass-PEG2/C3S Glass-PEG1/C3S 2.0 1.6 1.2 0.8 0.4 10 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 Nanofluids concentration, ppm Nanofluids concentration, ppm 120 4.0 (b1) (b2) Oil-wet glass-PEG1 Oil-wet glass-PEG1 Oil-wet glass-PEG1/C3S 3.6 Oil-wet glass-PEG2/C3S Oil-wet glass-PEG2/C3S Oil-wet glass-PEG1/C3S 3.2 2.8 2.4 2.0 1.6 1.2 0.8 0.4 30 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 Nanofluids concentration, ppm Nanofluids concentration, ppm Fig. 6 Effect of modified nanofluids concentrations in 2 h exposure time on a1 water contact angle (θ) and a2 retention for the glass bead sub- strate. Effect of modified nanofluids concentrations in 2 h exposure time on b1 θ and b2 retention for the oil-wet glass bead substrate (polyethyl- ene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 2000 (PEG1), mixed PEG1/trimethoxy (propyl) silane (C3S)-grafted silica, and mixed polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 5000 (PEG2)/C3S grafted silica) with silica nanoparticles, the glass bead, and the oil-wet economic costs must be minimized for using nanofluid (Al- glass bead was used as substrates. Anssari et al. 2016). Please note to this point that PEG1, PEG1/C3S, and 3.3 Eec ff t of nanofluids concentrations PEG2/C3S are referred to as the modified silica nanoparti- cle by PEG1, the modified silica nanoparticle by PEG1 and To obtain appropriate performance, different interrelated C3S, and the modified silica nanoparticle by PEG2 and C3S. parameters were taken into account on the wetting and reten- Figure 6 shows the effect of the nanofluids concentrations tion of substrates. Since the nanoparticles influence wetting in 2 h treatment on the wettability and retention of the glass and retention of substrates, the choice of suitable concen- bead and the oil-wet glass bead, respectively. In Fig. 6 a1, the tration is very significant in the EOR procedure. Choose a initial θ of glass bead is 62°. As can be seen in Table 1, the proper concentration is restricted by various features which results revealed that the lowest concentration of the modified are essential for the proper effect of nanoparticles. The high nanoparticle with the most increase in the decrease of θ for concentration of nanoparticles (> 20,000 ppm) may reduce the glass bead is 3000 ppm belonging to PEG1 and PEG1/ the reservoir permeability (Ju et  al. 2006; Roustaei and C3S. Therefore, 3000 ppm can be considered as optimum Bagherzadeh 2015) because the stability of nanoparticle sus- concentration for PEG1 and PEG1/C3S. In this concentra- pension reduces dramatically by increasing their concentra- tion, the θ of the glass bead is decreased to 25° and 22° for tion (Al-Anssari et al. 2017a; Rubio et al. 2017). Moreover, PEG1 and PEG1/C3S, respectively. In contrast to PEG1 1 3 Water contact angle, degree Water contact angle, degree Adsorbed nanoparticles, mg/g Adsorbed nanoparticles, mg/g glass glass 970 Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 and PEG1/C3S, the θ of substrates for PEG2/C3S has linear behavior by increasing the concentration of nanofluid. The lowest concentration of this nanofluid with the highest effi- ciency on the θ reduction (from 62° to 24°) is at 1000 ppm. As it is shown in Fig. 6 a2, the retention of the PEG2 onto the glass bead was more than PEG1 and PEG1/C3S. This fact is due to the higher molecular weight of this nanofluid. The major energy for retention is based on the entropy gain associated with the desorption of serval water molecules for each adsorbed polymer molecule and this energy can be enhanced by increasing the molecular weight of the poly- ethylene glycol (Parfitt and Greenland 1970). In Fig. 6b1, PEG1 changed the oil-wet state of the glass bead (initial θ = 114°) to an intermediate-wet state (θ = 72°) at 3000 ppm. PEG2/C3S and PEG1/C3S had a better performance which changed the oil-wet glass bead to a strongly water-wet state (θ = 55° for PEG2/C3S and θ = 54° for PEG1/C3S) at 1000 and 3000 ppm, respectively. By changing substrates from water-wet state to oil-wet state, the amount of retention remained almost constant for PEG1 while increased for PEG1/C3S and PEG2/C3S (Fig. 6b2). For instance, in oil- wet substrates, the retention of PEG1/C3S (3000 ppm) and PEG2/C3S (1000 ppm) were increased by 67% and 80%, respectively. It is a possibility because of the hydrophobic interaction between C3S of the modified silica with the fatty acid of the glass bead which caused more efficiency of PEG1/C3S and PEG2/C3S (Fig. 7). This trend is similar to protein retention (Rabe et al. 2011). The results demonstrate that increase in the nanofluid concentrations had a significant effect on the θ reduction. It is consistent with previous studies about the silica nanopar- ticle concentrations on the calcite and the glass bead sub- strates (Al-Anssari et al. 2016; Nikolov et al. 2010; Rostami et al. 2011) and retention of the modified silica by polyeth- ylene glycol onto the clay minerals (Omurlu et al. 2016). Furthermore, it can be concluded that when the hydropho- bicity of the substrates is increased, the retention of the mixed polymer coating on the silica nanoparticles is also enhanced. Most reservoir rocks are strongly oil-wet, and this wettability state not only reduces the retention of the mixed polymer coating on the silica nanoparticles but also it can increase the retention of these nanofluids due to the increase in hydrophobic interaction. 3.4 Eec ff t of exposure time The exposure time of the substrates into the nanofluids is one of the key factors in the retention of material into the substrates (Al-Anssari et al. 2017a). Hence, the selection of a suitable time is necessary because an increase in the time makes substrates reach their maximum retention capacity (Roustaei and Bagherzadeh 2015). It was found that the most efficient nanofluid concentrations for the θ reduction of the 1 3 Table 1 Effect of modified nanofluid concentrations in 2 h exposure time on water contact angle (θ) and retention for the glass bead and the oil-wet glass bead substrates (polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 2000 (PEG1), mixed PEG1/trimethoxy (propyl) silane (C3S)-grafted silica, and mixed polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 5000 (PEG2)/C3S-grafted silica) Substrate Nanofluid 1000 ppm 2000 ppm 3000 ppm 4000 ppm 5000 ppm θ, degree q(t), mg/g θ, degree q(t), mg/g θ, degree q(t), mg/g θ, degree q(t), mg/g θ, degree q(t), mg/g glass glass glass glass glass Oil-wet glass bead PEG1 80.2 ± 3.6 0.1 74.3 ± 4.4 0.5 72.5 ± 2.3 0.7 70.3 ± 3.3 0.7 69.3 ± 3.3 0.8 PEG1/C3S 70.3 ± 3.3 1.2 60.5 ± 5.4 1.3 53.7 ± 1.7 1.5 50.8 ± 5.2 1.6 47.9 ± 4.1 1.8 PEG2/C2S 55.2 ± 5.1 2 50.8 ± 3.6 2.2 45.8 ± 2.4 2.7 39.7 ± 4.1 3 34.5 ± 2.2 3.4 Glass bead PEG1 36.8 ± 3.4 0.09 31 ± 3.1 0.5 25 ± 2.2 0.6 23.5 ± 2.4 0.7 22.9 ± 2.4 0.7 PEG1/C3S 30.3 ± 4.2 0.02 27.5 ± 4.3 0.1 22.1 ± 1.1 0.3 20.5 ± 2.3 0.5 19.9 ± 1.5 0.7 PEG2/C2S 25.2 ± 4.1 0.5 23.6 ± 5.1 0.9 20.4 ± 1.7 1.4 17.5 ± 2.7 1.6 14.5 ± 3.1 2 Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 971 (a) (b) Hydrophilic agent Hydrophilic agent Palmitic acid Hydrophobic agent Palmitic acid Hydrophobic interaction Oil-wet glass bead Oil-wet glass bead Fig. 7 Schematic of retention for a The polymer-coated silica nanoparticles and b The mixed polymer-coated silica nanoparticles Fig. 8 Zeta potential of modified nanoparticles for the treatment of glass bead and oil-wet glass bead substrates. a polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 5000 (PEG2)/trimethoxy (propyl) silane (C3S)-1000  ppm, b PEG1-3000  ppm, and c polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 2000 (PEG1)/C3S-3000 ppm substrates is 3000 ppm for PEG1 and PEG1/C3S and also colloidal stability of the nanofluid and the low zeta potential 1000 ppm for PEG2/C3S. Therefore, these concentrations shows that the nanofluid is unstable (Qi et al. 2018; Zhu were selected to study the effect of time on the retention of et al. 2016). Recent studies indicated that the zeta potential the substrates. higher than the absolute value of 25 mV can stabilize nano- Figure 8 shows the zeta potential of nanofluids. The zeta fluid (Mondragon et al. 2012). potentials for PEG1 (3000 ppm), PEG1/C3S (3000 ppm), To explore what way exposure time of the modified nano- and PEG2/C3S (1000 ppm) were obtained to be − 26, − 20, particles may affect the wettability alteration and retention and – 37 mV, respectively. Zeta potential is related to the of the glass bead and oil-wet glass bead substrates, θ and 1 3 972 Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 0.8 (a1) (a2) Glass-3000 ppm PEG1 Glass-3000 ppm PEG1/C3S Glass-1000 ppm PEG2/C3S 0.6 40 0.4 0.2 Glass-3000 ppm PEG1 20 Glass-3000 ppm PEG1/C3S Glass-1000 ppm PEG2/C3S 01234 0 123 4 Exposure time, hours Exposure time, hours 120 2.2 (b1) (b2) Oil-wet glass-3000 ppm PEG1 2.0 Oil-wet glass-3000 ppm PEG1/C3S Oil-wet glass-1000 ppm PEG2/C3S 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 Oil-wet glass-3000 ppm PEG1 Oil-wet glass-1000 ppm PEG2/C3S 0.2 Oil-wet glass-3000 ppm PEG1/C3S 40 0 01234 0123 4 Exposure time, hours Exposure time, hours Fig. 9 Effect of modified nanofluids exposure time on a1 water contact angle (θ) and a2 retention of the glass bead substrate. Effect of modified nanofluids exposure time on b1 θ and b2 retention of the oil-wet glass bead substrate (3000  ppm polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 2000 (PEG1), 3000  ppm mixed PEG1/trimethoxy (propyl) silane (C3S)-grafted silica, and 1000  ppm mixed polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 5000 (PEG2)/C3S-grafted silica) retention are recorded vs. exposure time (Fig. 9). The results the nanofluid treatments. By comparing the zeta potential in Fig. 9a1 and a2 are for the glass bead substrates. As it of the nanofluids, it can be concluded that the lowest zeta is observed from Fig. 9 a1, θ of all treatments with PEG1, potential of PEG1/C3S nanofluid (−20 mV) decreased the PEG1/C3S, and PEG2/C3S was rapidly decreased to 2 h and retention rate of PEG1/C3S on glass bead and oil-wet glass then reached a stable value. Also, Fig. 9a1 shows that reten- bead substrates. tion of all treatments with PEG1, PEG1/C3S, and PEG2/ The morphology, composition, and θ of the glass bead C3S was sharply increased with exposure time up to 1 h and and the oil-wet glass bead substrates treatment by the then remain constant for PEG1 and PEG2/C3S. However, nanofluids in 2 h of exposure time is shown in Figs.  10 there are very few changes θ in for PEG1/C3S. This is since and 11. Figure 10a–c shows treated glass beads by PEG1, the substrates reach their retention capacity and irrevers- PEG1/C3S, and PEG2/C3S, respectively. In the treated ible retention (Fig. 9a2). The results in Fig. 9b1 and b2 are glass bead by PEG1 and PEG1/C3S, adsorbed modified for the oil-wet glass bead substrates. Figure 9b1 shows that nanoparticles have heterogeneous distribution due to the θ was rapidly decreased to 1 h for PEG1 and PEG2/C3S agglomeration in the retention process (Fig. 10a1 and b1). treatments while decreased in 2 h for PEG1/C3S treatment. On the other hand, in the treated glass bead by PEG2/C3S, Figure  9b2 shows that the amount of retention increased the adsorbed modified nanoparticle has homogeneous dis- sharply to around 1 h and then remains constant for all of tribution due to the highest zeta potential (Fig. 10c1). In 1 3 Water contact angle, degree Water contact angle, degree Adsorbed nanoparticles, mg/g glass Adsorbed nanoparticles, mg/g glass Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 973 (a) Glass bead in 2h treatment with PEG1 Si Spectrum 1 (a1) (a2) Element Weight, %Atomic, % C K24.81 34.72 O K44.89 47.16 Si K30.29 18.13 00.5 1.02 1.5 2.03 .5 3.04 .5 4.0 .5 10 μm EHT = 20.00 kV Signal A = SE1 Date: 3 Sep 2018 WD = 8.0 mm Mag = 1.00 K X Time: 10:22:56 Full scale 321 cts cursor: 0.000 keV (b) Glass bead in 2h treatment with PEG1/C3S Si Spectrum 1 (b1) (b2) Element Weight, %Atomic, % CK 22.6832.66 O K42.38 45.82 Si K34.93 21.51 00.5 1.02 1.5 2.03 .5 3.04 .5 4.0 .5 20 μm EHT = 20.00 kV Signal A = SE1 Date: 3 Sep 2018 WD = 8.0 mm Mag = 1.00 K X Time: 10:56:15 Full scale 120 cts cursor: 0.000 keV (c) Glass bead in 2h treatment with PEG2/C3S Si Spectrum 1 (c1) (c2) Element Weight, %Atomic, % C K19.92 30.05 O K37.55 42.52 Si K42.52 27.43 00.5 1.02 1.5 2.03 .5 3.04 .5 4.0 .5 20 μm EHT = 20.00 kV Signal A = SE1 Date: 3 Sep 2018 WD = 8.0 mm Mag = 1.00 K X Time: 11:11:11 Full scale 120 cts cursor: 0.000 keV Fig. 10 SEM, EDS, and water contact angle (θ) of treated glass bead substrate in 2 h exposure time by a 3000 ppm polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 2000 (PEG1). b 3000 ppm mixed PEG1/trimethoxy (propyl) silane (C3S)-grafted silica, and c 1000 ppm mixed polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 5000 (PEG2)/C3S-grafted silica Fig. 10a2, b2, and c2, the amount of available carbon on PEG2/C3S, respectively, which indicates that modified the surface of glass bead substrates were obtained to be nanoparticles are adsorbed. 24.81%, 22.68%, and 19.92% for PEG1, PEG1/C3S, and 1 3 974 Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 (a) (a) Oil-wet glass in 2h treatment with PEG1 Oil-wet glass in 2h treatment with PEG1 Si Si Spectrum Spectrum 1 1 (a1) (a1) (a2) (a2) Element Element We Weight, ight, % % Atomic, Atomic, % % C C K K 58.86 58.86 69.83 69.83 O O K K 24.26 24.26 21.61 21.61 Si Si K K 16.88 16.88 8.56 8.56 C C O O 00 00.5 .5 1. 1.02 02 1. 1.5 5 2. 2.03 03 .5 .5 3. 3.04 04 .5 .5 4. 4.0 0 .5 .5 20 μm 20 μm EH EHT T = = 20.00 kV 20.00 kV Signal Signal A A = = SE1 SE1 Date: 3 Sep 2018 Date: 3 Sep 2018 WD WD = = 8.5 mm 8.5 mm Ma Mag g = = 1.00 K 1.00 K X X T Time: 1 ime: 11:28:33 1:28:33 Full scale 186 cts cursor: 0.00 Full scale 186 cts cursor: 0.000 0 keV keV (b) (b) Oil-wet glass in 2h treatment with PEG1/C3S Oil-wet glass in 2h treatment with PEG1/C3S Si Si Spectrum Spectrum 1 1 (b1) (b1) (b2) (b2) Element Element We Weight, ight, % % Atomic, Atomic, % % C C K K 48.85 48.85 60.55 60.55 O O K K 30.81 30.81 28.67 28.67 Si Si K K 20.34 20.34 10.78 10.78 C C O O 00 00.5 .5 1. 1.02 02 1. 1.5 5 2. 2.03 03 .5 .5 3. 3.04 04 .5 .5 4. 4.0 0 .5 .5 3 μm 3 μm EH EHT T = = 20.00 kV 20.00 kV Signal Signal A A = = SE1 SE1 Date: 3 Sep 2018 Date: 3 Sep 2018 WD WD = = 8.0 mm 8.0 mm Ma Mag g = = 5.00 K 5.00 K X X T Time: 1 ime: 11:41:33 1:41:33 Full scale 186 cts cursor: 0.00 Full scale 186 cts cursor: 0.000 0 keV keV (c) (c) Oil-wet glass bead in 2h treatment with PEG2/C3S Oil-wet glass bead in 2h treatment with PEG2/C3S Si Si Spectrum Spectrum 1 1 (c1) (c1) (c2) (c2) Element Element We Weight ight%A %Atomic% tomic% C K C K 29.35 29.35 41.99 41.99 O K O K 31.98 31.98 34.35 34.35 Si K Si K 38.67 38.67 23.66 23.66 O O C C 00 00.5 .5 1. 1.02 02 1. 1.5 5 2. 2.03 03 .5 .5 3. 3.04 04 .5 .5 4. 4.0 0 .5 .5 20 μm 20 μm EH EHT T = = 20.00 kV 20.00 kV Signal Signal A A = = SE1 SE1 Date: 3 Sep 2018 Date: 3 Sep 2018 WD WD = = 8.0 mm 8.0 mm Ma Mag g = = 1.00 K 1.00 K X X T Time: 1 ime: 11:51:26 1:51:26 Full scale 212 cts cursor: 0.00 Full scale 212 cts cursor: 0.000 0 keV keV Fig. 11 SEM, EDS, and water contact angle (θ) of treated oil-wet glass bead substrate in 2 h exposure time by a 3000 ppm polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 2000 (PEG1) b 3000 ppm mixed PEG1/trimethoxy (propyl) silane (C3S)-grafted silica, and c 1000 ppm mixed polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 5000 (PEG2)/C3S-grafted silica As a result, the more colloidal stability of the modified nanoparticles on the substrates. Homogeneous retention nanoparticles causes an increase in the retention rate. Also, distribution of the nanoparticles has a great impact on the it can affect the more uniform retention of the modified process of EOR. For better extraction of the oil from the 1 3 Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 975 1.2 (a1) (a2) Glass-3000 ppm PEG1 Glass-1000 ppm PEG2/C3S Glass-3000 ppm PEG1/C3S 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 Glass-3000 ppm PEG1 Glass-1000 ppm PEG2/C3S Glass-3000 ppm PEG1/C3S 10 0 010000 20000 30000 40000 0 10000 20000 30000 40000 NaCl concentration, ppm NaCl concentration, ppm 120 2.2 (b1) (b2) Oil-wet glass-3000 ppm PEG1 2.0 Oil-wet glass-1000 ppm PEG2/C3S Oil-wet glass-3000 ppm PEG1/C3S 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 Oil-wet glass-3000 ppm PEG1 Oil-wet glass-1000 ppm PEG2/C3S 0.2 Oil-wet glass-3000 ppm PEG1/C3S 40 0 010000 20000 30000 40000 50000 0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 NaCl concentration, ppm NaCl concentration, ppm Fig. 12 Effect of NaCl concentrations in 2 h exposure time on a1 water contact angle (θ) and a2 retention of the glass bead substrate. Effect of NaCl concentrations in 2 h exposure on b1 θ and b2 retention of the oil-wet glass bead substrate (3000 ppm polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 2000 (PEG1), 3000  ppm mixed PEG1/trimethoxy (propyl) silane (C3S)-grafted silica, and 1000  ppm mixed polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 5000 (PEG2)/C3S-grafted silica) reservoirs, nanoparticles need to be uniformly adsorbed on et al. 2012). However, interestingly, high salinity makes the rocks. The high colloidal stability of the silica nanoparti- the oil-wet rock to be more water-wet due to the increase cles modified with mixed polymer (PEG2/C3S) enables this in the physicochemical interactions (Hendraningrat 2015). nanofluid to be uniformly adsorbed on the substrate. According to Fig.  12, when the NaCl concentration is increased, θ is decreased for all of the substrates (glass beads 3.5 Eecfft of salinity or oil-wet glass beads). This may be related to the enhanced retention of the modified nanoparticles on the substrates. An It is well-known that the retention of modified nanoparti- increase in the NaCl concentration can improve the reten- cles is responsible for the wettability alteration of the glass tion and θ reduction of the substrates. This fact is due to the bead and the oil-wet glass bead substrates. The salinity decrease of the negative charges between the glass bead and of the oil reservoirs has a direct impact on the stability the modified nanoparticles (Al-Anssari et al. 2016). On the of injected nanofluids and the retention of the nanoparti- other hand, at a high concentration of NaCl, the repulsive cles on the reservoir rock. A major factor to stabilize the force between the modified nanoparticles as well as between nanoparticle in suspension is the repulsive forces between the modified nanoparticles and the substrates is attenuated. the nanoparticles. It is found in this research that some of It is strong evidence for increasing the agglomeration and the salts not only reduce repulsion forces but also cause precipitation of the modified nanoparticles which reduces agglomeration and precipitation of nanofluid (McElfresh the retention and θ reduction. As can be seen, from Table 2, 1 3 Water contact angle, degree Water contact angle, degree Adsorbed nanoparticles, mg/g glass Adsorbed nanoparticles, mg/g glass 976 Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 for the treatment of glass bead substrates by PEG1/C3S, θ is decreased from 22° to 20° along with an increase of NaCl concentration to 20,000 ppm. After this point, θ was increased to 24° at a concentration of 40,000 ppm. Furthermore, there is an optimal range for NaCl con- centration to reduce the θ of the substrates. Thus, the obtained results could be compared to the previous studies for the treatment of the calcite by the silica nanofluid (Al- Anssari et al. 2016) and surfactant with similar formula- tions, showing a good correlation with the same behavior (Iglauer et al. 2009; Salager et al. 2000). Figures 13 and 14 show the morphology and composi- tion of the treated glass bead as well as the oil-wet glass bead substrates by the modified nanoparticles in the NaCl concentration of 20,000 ppm. Figure 13a, b, and c shows treated glass beads by PEG1, PEG1/C3S, and PEG2/C3S, respectively. Salinity has a remarkable effect on the mor - phology of the glass bead surfaces in comparison with the other morphology of surfaces in the previous section (Fig. 10a–c). As shown in Fig. 13a and b, the surface indi- cates cubic like structure which available Cl was 22.61% and 49.73% for PEG1 and PEG1/C3S, respectively. It indicates sodium chloride is present on the glass bead surfaces. The retention of PEG1 and PEG1/C3S in the presence of salt has been increased to 40% and 63%, respectively. In the pres- ence of salinity on the glass bead substrate, the retention of PEG1 and PEG1/C3S have increased due to the enhanced physicochemical interaction (Hendraningrat 2015). On the other hand, more stability of PEG2/C3S has reduced the per- cent of Cl (0.65%) on the glass bead substrate. The result of the treated the oil-wet glass bead by PEG1, PEG1/C3S, and PEG2/C3S is shown in Fig. 14a, b, and c, respectively. It is evident from Fig. 14b that the shape is cubic which covered the surface of the oil-wet glass bead due to agglomeration and precipitation of the PEG1/C3S (Cl 22.39%). Remark- ably, unlike the glass bead substrate, it is the small amount of Cl (1.42%) on the surface of treated oil-wet glass bead substrates by PEG1. Consequently, this may be due to the different negative charge of the glass bead and oil-wet glass bead surfaces (Bodratti et  al. 2017; Watson et  al. 2001; Yanagishima et al. 2012). Palmitic acid on the glass bead surface in the oil-wet glass bead substrates reduces the nega- tive charge which consequently causes to decrease in the physicochemical interaction of the glass surface with Na and Cl. For treated oil-wet glass bead substrates in comparison with treated glass bead substrates, the percent of salt has been decreased for PEG1 94%, PEG1/C3S 45%, and PEG2/ C3S 48%. This suggests that surface charge is an important parameter for the retention of substrates in the presence of salt (Fig. 15). For PEG2/C3S, the amount of Cl on the oil-wet glass bead substrate (Cl 0.34%) was similar to the behavior of the glass bead substrate (Cl 0.65%). This result is very important 1 3 Table 2 Effect of NaCl concentrations in 2  h exposure time on water contact angle (θ) and retention of the glass bead and the oil-wet glass bead substrates ((3000  ppm polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 2000 (PEG1), 3000 ppm mixed PEG1/trimethoxy (propyl) silane (C3S)-grafted silica, and 1000 ppm mixed polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 5000 (PEG2)/C3S-grafted silica)) Sub- Nano- 5000 ppm 10,000 ppm 20,000 ppm 25,000 ppm 30,000 ppm 35,000 ppm 40,000 ppm 45,000 ppm strate fluid θ, degree q(t), θ, degree q(t), θ, degree q(t), θ, degree q(t), θ, degree q(t), θ, degree q(t), θ, degree q(t), θ, degree q(t), mg/ mg/ mg/ mg/ mg/ mg/ mg/ mg/ g glass g g g g g g g glass glass glass glass glass glass glass Oil-wet PEG1 71.9 ± 3.3 0.73 70.1 ± 4.1 0.78 69.6 ± 4.7 0.85 69.3 ± 6.2 0.87 68.7 ± 5.8 0.9 68 ± 6.1 0.92 69 ± 6.5 0.9 71 ± 7 0.8 glass PEG1/ 53.8 ± 3.4 1.6 53.5 ± 4.6 1.6 53 ± 4.1 1.82 55 ± 5.2 1.7 57.9 ± 4.9 1.6 59.5 ± 5.5 1.4 62.1 ± 4.9 1.3 62.9 ± 5.9 1.2 bead C3S PEG2/ 55.5 ± 3.1 2 55 ± 5.2 2.01 54 ± 4.2 2.05 54.3 ± 4.9 2,07 53.8 ± 4.1 2.08 54.2 ± 5.9 2,01 54.9 ± 5 1.98 56.8 ± 6.1 1.93 C2S Glass PEG1 23.9 ± 2.4 0.95 23.2 ± 3.1 0.98 22.2 ± 3.3 1.01 22.2 ± 3.1 1.05 22 ± 2.2 1.1 22.8 ± 3.1 1.06 23.9 ± 2 1 25.5 ± 4.2 0.98 bead PEG1/ 21.5 ± 1.7 0.83 21 ± 2.2 0.89 20 ± 3.1 0.91 22 ± 2.7 0.8 24 ± 3.1 0.77 24.8 ± 2.7 0.7 23.5 ± 1.1 0.68 25 ± 5.1 0.62 C3S PEG2/ 24.6 ± 3 0.5 24.3 ± 1.7 0.52 23.4 ± 2.7 0.54 23.1 ± 1.9 0.57 22.7 ± 3.1 0.6 22.4 ± 3.5 0.59 22.3 ± 3.6 0.61 24.4 ± 4.7 0.53 C2S Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 977 (a) Glass bead in 2h treatment with PEG1 (2000 ppm salinity) Spectrum 1 (a1) (a2) Si Element Weight, % Atomic, % O K 33.96 47.89 Na K 15.96 15.66 Si K 27.46 22.06 Cl K 22.61 14.39 Cl Na Cl Cl 00.5 1.02 1.5 2.03 .5 3.04 .5 4.0 .5 20 μm EHT = 20.00 kV Signal A = SE1 Date: 3 Sep 2018 WD = 8.0 mm Mag = 1.00 K X Time: 10:26:33 Full scale321 cts cursor: 0.000 keV (b) Glass bead in 2h treatment with PEG1/C3S (2000 ppm salinity) Na Si Cl Spectrum 1 (b1) (b2) Element Weight, % Atomic, % O K 9.00 15.66 Na K 20.09 24.32 Si K 21.18 20.99 Cl K 49.73 39.04 Cl Cl 00.5 1.02 1.5 2.03 .5 3.04 .5 4.0 .5 20 μm EHT = 20.00 kV Signal A = SE1 Date: 3 Sep 2018 WD = 8.0 mm Mag = 1.00 K X Time: 11:23:36 Full scale 104 cts cursor: 0.000 keV (c) Glass bead in 2h treatment with PEG2/C3S (2000 ppm salinity) Si Spectrum 1 (c1) (c2) Element Weight, % Atomic, % C K 44.71 57.15 O K 30.34 29.11 Na K 1.39 0.93 Si K 22.91 12.53 Cl K 0.65 0.28 Na Cl Cl Cl 00.5 1.02 1.5 2.03 .5 3.04 .5 4.0 .5 20 μm EHT = 20.00 kV Signal A = SE1 Date: 3 Sep 2018 WD = 8.0 mm Mag = 1.00 K X Time: 11:01:11 Full scale 120 cts cursor: 0.000 keV Fig. 13 SEM, EDS, and water contact angle (θ) of treated glass bead substrate in 2  h exposure time at 20,000  ppm NaCl concentration by a 3000 ppm polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 2000 (PEG1) b 3000 ppm mixed PEG1/trimethoxy (propyl) silane (C3S)-grafted silica, and c 1000 ppm mixed polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 5000 (PEG2)/C3S-grafted silica because there is high salinity in oil reservoirs which can modified with mixed polymer (PEG2/C3S), salinity shows affect the retention process. In the case of nanoparticles less effect on the mechanism and amount of retention. This 1 3 978 Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 (a) Oil-wet glass bead in 2h treatment with PEG1 (2000 ppm salinity) Si Spectrum 1 (a1) (a2) C Element Weight, % Atomic, % C K 68.54 78.11 O K 17.43 14.91 Na K 2.58 1.54 Si K 10.04 4.89 Cl K 1.42 0.55 Na Cl O Cl Cl 00.5 1.02 1.5 2.03 .5 3.04 .5 4.0 .5 20 μm EHT = 20.00 kV Signal A = SE1 Date: 3 Sep 2018 WD = 8.0 mm Mag = 1.00 K X Time: 11:33:50 Full scale 186 cts cursor: 0.000 keV (b) Oil-wet glass bead in 2h treatment with PEG1/C3S (2000 ppm salinity) Spectrum 1 (b1) (b2) Element Weight, % Atomic, % Cl C K 62.18 79.26 O K 2.73 2.62 Na K 12.69 8.45 Cl K 22.39 9.67 Na Cl Cl 00.5 1.02 1.5 2.03 .5 3.04 .5 4.0 .5 20 μm EHT = 20.00 kV Signal A = SE1 Date: 3 Sep 2018 WD = 8.0 mm Mag = 1.00 K X Time: 11:45:26 Full scale 455 cts cursor: 0.000 keV (c) Oil-wet glass bead in 2h treatment with PEG2/C3S (2000 ppm salinity) Si Spectrum 1 (c1) (c2) Element Weight, % Atomic, % C K 47.07 59.03 O K 30.68 28.88 Na K 1.63 1.07 Si K 20.28 10.88 Cl K 0.34 0.14 Na Cl Cl Cl 00.5 1.02 1.5 2.03 .5 3.04 .5 4.0 .5 20 μm EHT = 20.00 kV Signal A = SE1 Date: 3 Sep 2018 WD = 8.0 mm Mag = 1.00 K X Time: 12:01:25 Full scale 212 cts cursor: 0.000 keV Fig. 14 SEM, EDS, and water contact angle (θ) of treated oil-wet glass bead substrate in 2 h exposure time at 20,000 ppm NaCl concentration by a 3000 ppm polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 2000 (PEG1) b 3000 ppm mixed PEG1/trimethoxy (propyl) silane (C3S)-grafted silica, and c 1000 ppm mixed polyethylene glycol methyl ether Mn ~ 5000 (PEG2)/C3S-grafted silica is due to the high colloidal stability of this nanofluid in com- chains make the hydrophobic interaction which increases the parison with other ones. Although high stability can decrease absorption of nanofluids. As a conclusion, the selection of retention (Al-Anssari et al. 2017a), the hydrophobic propyl polymers with proper molecular weight and suitable wetting 1 3 Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 979 (a) (b) Cl Cl Na Cl Cl Na Na Na Hydrophilic agent Na Cl Na Na Cl Cl Hydrophobic agent Cl Cl Na Cl Palmitic acid Na Cl Cl Na Na Cl Na Na Na Cl Na Glass bead Oil-wet glass bead Fig. 15 Effect of negative charge of glass bead substrate on salt retention a Retention of salt and mixed polymer-coated silica nanoparticles on glass bead and b Retention of salt and mixed polymer-coated silica nanoparticles on oil-wet glass bead properties can increase both colloidal stability and retention in the molecular weight of polyethylene glycol methyl for the nanoparticles modified with polymers. ether. It is important to demonstrate the roles of retention and (3) The amount of propyl chains available in the mixed precipitation on the θ reduction of the substrates. In our polymer is increased further retention of the nanoflu- experiment, retention of PEG2/C3S on the glass bead and ids on oil-wet substrates. Propyl chains make hydro- the oil-wet glass bead substrates is the main reason for the θ phobic interaction between the nanoparticles and the reduction. One has to pay attention to this fact that for PEG1 substrates. It can be proposed that the retention of sil- and especially PEG1/C3S, precipitation has a major role in ica modified with mixed polymer on the substrate will the θ reduction and retention of the glass bead and the oil- enhance with an increase in the hydrophobicity of the wet glass bead substrates. substrate. (4) The stability of nanofluids has a great impact on the morphology of the adsorbed layer on the substrates. 4 Summary and conclusions PEG2/C3S has more stability compared to PEG1 and PEG1/C3S causing a uniform distribution of the Nanoparticles modified with mixed polymer are considered adsorbed nanoparticles on the substrates. as a novel approach to increase hydrocarbon production (5) The effect of salinity on the retention mechanism of from the reservoir rocks. This work presents a compre- nanofluids was investigated. According to the findings, hensive study of the modified nanoparticles by polymers the absorption mechanism of PEG2/C3S is slightly based on effective parameters, including the nanoparticles affected by salinity. Albeit, retention of PEG1 and espe- concentrations, surface modification time, and salinity. For cially PEG1/C3S is increased because of the enhanced these purposes, wettability alteration and retention of the physicochemical interactions. modified silica nanoparticle by polyethylene glycol methyl (6) Investigation of morphology and composition of the ether average Mn ~ 2000 (PEG1), the modified silica nano- treated substrates with PEG1 and PEG1/C3S revealed particle by mixed polyethylene glycol methyl ether average Na and Cl are available on the adsorbed layer. Due to Mn ~ 2000 and propyl chains (PEG1/C3S), and the modi- the physicochemical interaction, salinity caused more fied silica nanoparticle by mixed polyethylene glycol methyl retention for PEG1 and PEG1/C3S. Also, the perfor- ether average Mn ~ 5000 and propyl chains (PEG2/C3S) on mance of PEG2/C3S was better than that of PEG1, simulated porous media by glass beads and oil-wet glass PEG1/C3S. The optimal concentration of this nano- beads were studied. The following conclusions are as follow: fluid was 1000  ppm in a salinity range of 20,000– 40,000 ppm, for the θ reduction of the glass bead and (1) The retention is enhanced along with an increase in the oil-wet glass bead from 62° to 23° and 114° to 54°, concentration of nanofluids and further water contact respectively. angle (θ) is decreased. (7) It should be noted that pressure and temperature have (2) The molecular weight of the polymer affects the reten- a notable effect on nanofluid properties, especially tion of the substrate. In this research, the retention of at reservoir conditions. These observations were not nanofluid on substrates is enhanced with an increase considered in this study. Besides, reservoir rocks were replaced by glass beads. Thus, it can be experimen- 1 3 980 Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 Arslan G, Özmen M, Gündüz B, Zhang X, Ersöz M. Surface modifica- tally predicted that practical nanofluid efficiency can tion of glass beads with an aminosilane monolayer. Turk J Chem. be affected by rock heterogeneity, due to nanoparti- 2006;30(2):203–10. cle transport. Despite these assumptions, our study Bagaria HG, Neilson BM, Worthen AJ, Xue Z, Yoon KY, Cheng showed at salinity conditions, mixed polymer-grafted V, et al. Adsorption of iron oxide nanoclusters stabilized with sulfonated copolymers on silica in concentrated NaCl and nanoparticles have better performance in comparison CaCl2 brine. J Colloid Interf Sci. 2013;398:217–26. https ://doi. with polymer-grafted nanoparticles, especially in the org/10.1016/j.jcis.2013.01.056. oil-wet system. This observation is due to the hydro- Behzadi A, Mohammadi A. Environmentally responsive surface-mod- phobic interaction mechanism. As a total conclusion, ified silica nanoparticles for enhanced oil recovery. J Nanopart Res. 2016;18(9):266. https://doi.or g/10.1007/s11051-016-3580-1 . this nanofluid can be considered as a promising agent Binks BP, Rodrigues JA. Enhanced stabilization of emulsions due for EOR purposes. to surfactant-induced nanoparticle flocculation. Langmuir. 2007;23(14):7436–9. https ://doi.org/10.1021/la700 597k. Binks BP, Rodrigues JA, Frith WJ. Synergistic interaction in emulsions stabilized by a mixture of silica nanoparticles and cationic sur- factant. Langmuir. 2007;23(7):3626–36. https ://doi.org/10.1021/ la063 4600. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attri- Bodratti AM, Sarkar B, Alexandridis P. Adsorption of poly (ethylene bution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adapta- oxide)-containing amphiphilic polymers on solid-liquid inter- tion, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long faces: fundamentals and applications. Adv Colloid Interface. as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, 2017;244:132–63. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.cis.2016.09.003. provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes Buijse MA, Tandon K, Jain S, Handgraaf J-W, Fraaije J, editors. Sur- were made. The images or other third party material in this article are factant optimization for EOR using advanced chemical compu- included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated tational methods. In: SPE Improved oil recovery symposium; otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in 2012: Society of Petroleum Engineers Journal. https ://doi. the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not org/10.2118/15421 2-ms. permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will Choi SK, Son HA, Kim HT, Kim JW. Nanofluid enhanced oil recovery need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a using hydrophobically associative zwitterionic polymer-coated copy of this licence, visit http://creativ ecommons .or g/licenses/b y/4.0/. silica nanoparticles. Energy Fuel. 2017;31(8):7777–82. https :// doi.org/10.1021/acs.energ yfuel s.7b004 55. Ehtesabi H, Ahadian MM, Taghikhani V, Ghazanfari MH. Enhanced heavy oil recovery in sandstone cores using TiO nanofluids. Energy Fuel. 2014;28(1):423–30. https ://doi.org/10.1021/ef401 References 338c. El-Hoshoudy A, Desouky S, Betiha M, Alsabagh A. Use of 1-vinyl Afsharian-Moghaddam H, Haddadi-Asl V. Direct synthesis of polymer- imidazole based surfmers for preparation of polyacrylamide–SiO grafted inorganic hybrids via reversible chain transfer catalyzed nanocomposite through aza-Michael addition copolymerization polymerization. Iran Polym J. 2013;22(10):757–66. https ://doi. reaction for rock wettability alteration. Fuel. 2016;170:161–75. org/10.1007/s1372 6-013-0176-9. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2015.12.036. Aftab A, Ismail AR, Ibupoto Z, Akeiber H, Malghani M. Nanopar- Foster LM, Worthen AJ, Foster EL, Dong J, Roach CM, Metaxas AE, ticles based drilling muds a solution to drill elevated tempera- et  al. High interfacial activity of polymers “grafted through” ture wells: a review. Renew Sust Energy Rev. 2017;76:1301–13. functionalized iron oxide nanoparticle clusters. Langmuir. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.03.050. 2014;30(34):10188–96. https ://doi.org/10.1021/la501 445f. Agista MN, Guo K, Yu Z. A state-of-the-art review of nanoparticles Giraldo J, Benjumea P, Lopera S, Cortés FB, Ruiz MA. Wettability application in petroleum with a focus on enhanced oil recovery. alteration of sandstone cores by alumina-based nanofluids. Energy Appl Sci. 2018;8(6):871. https ://doi.org/10.3390/app80 60871 . Fuel. 2013;27(7):3659–65. https ://doi.org/10.1021/ef400 2956. Al-Anssari S, Arif M, Wang S, Barifcani A, Iglauer S. Stabilis- Guo K, Li H, Yu Z. In-situ heavy and extra-heavy oil recovery: a ing nanofluids in saline environments. J Colloid Interf Sci. review. Fuel. 2016;185:886–902. https ://doi.or g/10.1016/j. 2017a;508:222–9. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2017.08.043. fuel.2016.08.047. Al-Anssari S, Arif M, Wang S, Barifcani A, Lebedev M, Iglauer S. Hendraningrat L. Unlocking the Potential of Hydrophilic Nanoparti- Wettability of nano-treated calcite/CO /brine systems: implica- cles as Novel Enhanced Oil Recovery Method: An Experimental tion for enhanced CO storage potential. Int J Greenh Gas Con. Investigation. 2015. 2017b;66:97–105. https://doi.or g/10.1016/j.ijggc.2017.09.008 . Hendraningrat L, Shidong L, Torsaeter O, editors. A glass micromodel Al-Anssari S, Arif M, Wang S, Barifcani A, Lebedev M, Iglauer S. experimental study of hydrophilic nanoparticles retention for EOR Wettability of nanofluid-modified oil-wet calcite at reservoir project. SPE Russian Oil and Gas Exploration and Production conditions. Fuel. 2018;211:405–14. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j. Technical Conference and Exhibition; 2012: Society of Petroleum fuel.2017.08.111. Engineers Journal. https ://doi.org/10.2118/15916 1-ms. Al-Anssari S, Barifcani A, Wang S, Maxim L, Iglauer S. Wettabil- Hendraningrat L, Torsæter O. Effects of the initial rock wettability on ity alteration of oil-wet carbonate by silica nanofluid. J Col- silica-based nanofluid-enhanced oil recovery processes at reser - loid Interf Sci. 2016;461:435–42. https ://doi.or g/10.1016/j. voir temperatures. Energy Fuel. 2014;28(10):6228–41. https://doi. jcis.2015.09.051. org/10.1021/ef501 4049. Al-Anssari S, Wang S, Barifcani A, Lebedev M, Iglauer S. Effect of Hendraningrat L, Torsæter O. Metal oxide-based nanoparticles: temperature and SiO nanoparticle size on wettability alteration of revealing their potential to enhance oil recovery in different wet- oil-wet calcite. Fuel. 2017c;206:34–42. https://doi.or g/10.1016/j. tability systems. Appl Nanosci. 2015;5(2):181–99. https ://doi. fuel.2017.05.077. org/10.1007/s1320 4-014-0305-6. 1 3 Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 981 Iglauer S, Pentland C, Busch A. C O wettability of seal and reservoir Palchoudhury S, Lead JR. A facile and cost-effective method for sep- rocks and the implications for carbon geo-sequestration. Water aration of oil–water mixtures using polymer-coated iron oxide Resour Res. 2015;51(1):729–74. https ://doi.org/10.1002/2014W nanoparticles. Environ Sci Technol. 2014;48(24):14558–63. https R0155 53.://doi.org/10.1021/es503 7755. Iglauer S, Wu Y, Shuler P, Tang Y, Goddard WA III. Alkyl polyglyco- Parfitt R, Greenland D. The adsorption of poly (ethylene glycols) side surfactant–alcohol cosolvent formulations for improved oil on clay minerals. Clay Miner. 1970;8(3):305–15. https ://doi. recovery. Colloid Surface A. 2009;339(1–3):48–59. https ://doi.org/10.1180/claym in.1970.008.3.08. org/10.1016/j.colsu rfa.2009.01.015. Patel J, Borgohain S, Kumar M, Rangarajan V, Somasundaran P, Sen R. Jamaloei BY, Kharrat R. Analysis of microscopic displacement mech- Recent developments in microbial enhanced oil recovery. Renew anisms of dilute surfactant flooding in oil-wet and water-wet Sust Energy Rev. 2015;52:1539–58. ht t p s : / /d o i . org / 10 . 1 0 16 / j . porous media. Transport Porous Med. 2010;81(1):1. https ://doi. rser.2015.07.135. org/10.1007/s1124 2-009-9382-5. Qi C, Liu M, Wang G, Pan Y, Liang L. Experimental research on Ju B, Dai S, Luan Z, Zhu T, Su X, Qiu X, editors. A study of wettabil- stabilities, thermophysical properties and heat transfer enhance- ity and permeability change caused by adsorption of nanometer ment of nanofluids in heat exchanger systems. Chin J Chem structured polysilicon on the surface of porous media. SPE Asia Eng. 2018;26(12):2420–30. https ://doi.or g/10.1016/j.cjc he Pacific oil and gas conference and exhibition; 2002: Society of .2018.03.021. Petroleum Engineers Journal. https ://doi.org/10.2118/77938 -ms. Rabe M, Verdes D, Seeger S. Understanding protein adsorption phe- Ju B, Fan T, Ma M. Enhanced oil recovery by flooding with hydro- nomena at solid surfaces. Adv Colloid Interface. 2011;162(1– philic nanoparticles. China Particuol. 2006;4(1):41–6. https: //doi. 2):87–106. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.cis.2010.12.007. org/10.1016/S1672 -2515(07)60232 -2. Ranka M, Brown P, Hatton TA. Responsive stabilization of nano- Kazemzadeh Y, Shojaei S, Riazi M, Sharifi M. Review on application particles for extreme salinity and high-temperature reservoir of nanoparticles for EOR purposes; a critical of the opportuni- applications. ACS Appl Mater. 2015;7(35):19651–8. https ://doi. ties and challenges. CHINESE J CHEM ENG 2018;10. https ://org/10.1021/acsam i.5b042 00. doi.org/10.1016/j.cjche .2018.05.022. Richard E, Aruna S, Basu BJ. Superhydrophobic surfaces fabri- Kim D, Krishnamoorti R. Interfacial Activity of Poly [oligo (eth- cated by surface modification of alumina particles. Appl Surf ylene oxide)–monomethyl ether methacrylate]-Grafted Silica Sci. 2012;258(24):10199–204. https ://doi.or g/10.1016/j.apsus Nanoparticles. Ind Eng Chem Res. 2015;54(14):3648–56. https c.2012.07.009. ://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.5b001 05. Rostami M, Mohseni M, Ranjbar Z. Investigating the effect of pH on Mader-Arndt K, Kutelova Z, Fuchs R, Meyer J, Staedler T, Hintz W, the surface chemistry of an amino silane treated nano silica. Pigm et al. Single particle contact versus particle packing behavior: Resin Technol. 2011. https ://doi.org/10.1108/03699 42111 11805 model based analysis of chemically modified glass particles. 09. Granul Matter. 2014;16(3):359–75. https ://doi.or g/10.1007/ Roustaei A, Bagherzadeh H. Experimental investigation of SiO nano- s1003 5-013-0478-9. particles on enhanced oil recovery of carbonate reservoirs. J Pet McElfresh PM, Holcomb DL, Ector D, editors. Application of nano- Explor Prod Technol. 2015;5(1):27–33. https ://doi.org/10.1007/ fluid technology to improve recovery in oil and gas wells. SPE s1320 2-014-0120-3. international oilfield nanotechnology conference and exhibi- Rubio N, Au H, Leese HS, Hu S, Clancy AJ, Shaffer MS. Grafting tion; 2012: Society of Petroleum Engineers Journal. https:/ /doi. from versus grafting to approaches for the functionalization of org/10.2118/15482 7-ms. graphene nanoplatelets with poly (methyl methacrylate). Mac- Miranda CR, Lara LSd, Tonetto BC, editors. Stability and mobility romolecules. 2017;50(18):7070–9. https ://doi.org/10.1021/acs. of functionalized silica nanoparticles for enhanced oil recovery macro mol.7b010 47. applications. SPE international oilfield nanotechnology confer - Salager JL, Marquez N, Graciaa A, Lachaise J. Partitioning of eth- ence and exhibition; 2012: Society of Petroleum Engineers Jour- oxylated octylphenol surfactants in microemulsion − oil − water nal. https ://doi.org/10.2118/15703 3-ms. systems: influence of temperature and relation between parti- Mirshahghassemi S, Lead JR. Oil recovery from water under envi- tioning coefficient and physicochemical formulation. Langmuir. ronmentally relevant conditions using magnetic nanoparti- 2000;16(13):5534–9. https ://doi.org/10.1021/la990 5517. cles. Int J Environ Sci Te. 2015;49(19):11729–36. https ://doi. Shi X, Rosa R, Lazzeri A. On the coating of precipitated calcium org/10.1021/acs.est.5b026 87. carbonate with stearic acid in aqueous medium. Langmuir. Mondragon R, Julia JE, Barba A, Jarque JC. Characterization of 2010;26(11):8474–82. https ://doi.org/10.1021/la904 914h. silica–water nanofluids dispersed with an ultrasound probe: Songolzadeh R, Moghadasi J. Stabilizing silica nanoparticles in high a study of their physical properties and stability. Powder saline water by using ionic surfactants for wettability alteration Technol. 2012;224:138–46. https ://doi.or g/10.1016/j.po wte application. Colloid Polym Sci. 2017;295(1):145–55. https ://doi. c.2012.02.043.org/10.1007/s0039 6-016-3987-3. Munshi A, Singh V, Kumar M, Singh J. Effect of nanoparticle size on Wang D, Duan H, Möhwald H. The water/oil interface: the emerg- sessile droplet contact angle. J Appl Phys. 2008;103(8):084315. ing horizon for self-assembly of nanoparticles. Soft Matter. https ://doi.org/10.1063/1.29124 64. 2005;1(6):412–6. https ://doi.org/10.1039/B5119 11A. Nikolov A, Kondiparty K, Wasan D. Nanoparticle self-structuring Watson H, Norström A, Torrkulla Å, Rosenholm J. Aqueous amino in a nanofluid film spreading on a solid surface. Langmuir. silane modification of E-glass surfaces. J Colloid Interface Sci. 2010;26(11):7665–70. https ://doi.org/10.1021/la100 928t. 2001;238(1):136–46. https ://doi.org/10.1006/jcis.2001.7506. Nwidee LN, Al-Anssari S, Barifcani A, Sarmadivaleh M, Lebedev Xue Z, Foster E, Wang Y, Nayak S, Cheng V, Ngo VW, et al. Effect of M, Iglauer S. Nanoparticles influence on wetting behaviour of grafted copolymer composition on iron oxide nanoparticle stabil- fractured limestone formation. J Pet Sci Eng. 2017;149:782–8. ity and transport in porous media at high salinity. Energy Fuel. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.petro l.2016.11.017. 2014;28(6):3655–65. https ://doi.org/10.1021/ef500 340h. Omurlu C, Pham H, Nguyen Q. Interaction of surface-modified silica Yanagishima T, Di Michele L, Kotar J, Eiser E. Diffusive behaviour of nanoparticles with clay minerals. Appl Nanosci. 2016;6(8):1167– PLL–PEG coated colloids on λ-DNA brushes–tuning hydropho- 73. https ://doi.org/10.1007/s1320 4-016-0534-y. bicity. Soft Matter. 2012;8(25):6792–8. https ://doi.org/10.1039/ C2SM2 5296A . 1 3 982 Petroleum Science (2021) 18:962–982 Zargartalebi M, Kharrat R, Barati N. Enhancement of surfactant Zhao X, Blunt MJ, Yao J. Pore-scale modeling: effects of wettability flooding performance by the use of silica nanoparticles. Fuel. on waterflood oil recovery. J Pet Sci Eng. 2010;71(3–4):169–78. 2015;143:21–7. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2014.11.040.https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.petro l.2010.01.011. Zhang H, Ramakrishnan T, Nikolov A, Wasan D. Enhanced oil dis- Zhu X, Zhang Q, Wang Y, Wei F. Review on the nanoparticle fluidiza- placement by nanofluid’s structural disjoining pressure in model tion science and technology. Chin J Chem Eng. 2016;24(1):9–22. fractured porous media. J Colloid Interf Sci. 2018;511:48–56. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjche .2015.06.005. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2017.09.067. 1 3

Journal

Petroleum ScienceSpringer Journals

Published: Feb 13, 2021

Keywords: Wettability alteration; Retention; Silica nanoparticle; Surface modification; Enhanced oil recovery

References