{"title":"Effect of Asphaltenes and Asphaltene Dispersants on Wax Precipitation and Treatment","authors":"O. M’barki, John Clements, Q. P. Nguyen","doi":"10.3390/colloids8030030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A detailed understanding of the interactions between wax and asphaltenes with other components of crude oils and the effect of treatments with paraffin inhibitors (PIs) and asphaltene dispersants (ADs), with a focus on identifying specific structure-activity relationships, is necessary to develop effective flow assurance strategies. The morphological and rheological consequences of treating wax and asphaltenes in oils of differing composition with a series of ADs having structural features in common with an alpha olefin-maleic anhydride (AO-MA) comb-like copolymer PI were assessed alone and in combination with said PI. Of the four ADs studied, two were identified as being effective dispersants of asphaltenes in heptane-induced instability tests and in a West Texas (WT) crude. The degree to which a low concentration of asphaltenes stabilizes wax in the absence of treatment additives is lessened in oils having greater aromatic fractions. This is because these stabilizing interactions are replaced by more energetically favorable aromatic–asphaltene interactions, increasing oil viscosity. Treatment with AD alone also reduces the extent of wax–asphaltene interactions, increasing oil viscosity. In concert with the PI, treatment with the AD having greater structural similarity with the PI appears to improve wax solubility in both the presence and absence of asphaltenes. However, the viscosity of the treated oils is greater than that of the oil treated with PI alone, while treatment with AD having lesser structural similarity with the PI does not adversely affect oil viscosity. These data suggest that rather than treating both wax and asphaltenes, AD may poison the function of the PI. These data illuminate the pitfalls of designing flow assurance additives to interact with both wax and asphaltenes and developing treatment plans.","PeriodicalId":10433,"journal":{"name":"Colloids and Interfaces","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Colloids and Interfaces","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/colloids8030030","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, PHYSICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
A detailed understanding of the interactions between wax and asphaltenes with other components of crude oils and the effect of treatments with paraffin inhibitors (PIs) and asphaltene dispersants (ADs), with a focus on identifying specific structure-activity relationships, is necessary to develop effective flow assurance strategies. The morphological and rheological consequences of treating wax and asphaltenes in oils of differing composition with a series of ADs having structural features in common with an alpha olefin-maleic anhydride (AO-MA) comb-like copolymer PI were assessed alone and in combination with said PI. Of the four ADs studied, two were identified as being effective dispersants of asphaltenes in heptane-induced instability tests and in a West Texas (WT) crude. The degree to which a low concentration of asphaltenes stabilizes wax in the absence of treatment additives is lessened in oils having greater aromatic fractions. This is because these stabilizing interactions are replaced by more energetically favorable aromatic–asphaltene interactions, increasing oil viscosity. Treatment with AD alone also reduces the extent of wax–asphaltene interactions, increasing oil viscosity. In concert with the PI, treatment with the AD having greater structural similarity with the PI appears to improve wax solubility in both the presence and absence of asphaltenes. However, the viscosity of the treated oils is greater than that of the oil treated with PI alone, while treatment with AD having lesser structural similarity with the PI does not adversely affect oil viscosity. These data suggest that rather than treating both wax and asphaltenes, AD may poison the function of the PI. These data illuminate the pitfalls of designing flow assurance additives to interact with both wax and asphaltenes and developing treatment plans.
要制定有效的流动保证策略,就必须详细了解蜡和沥青质与原油中其他成分之间的相互作用,以及使用石蜡抑制剂 (PI) 和沥青质分散剂 (AD) 处理的效果,重点是确定具体的结构-活性关系。我们单独评估了使用一系列与α-烯烃-马来酸酐(AO-MA)梳状共聚物 PI 具有相同结构特征的 ADs 处理不同成分油类中的蜡和沥青质所产生的形态和流变后果,以及与上述 PI 结合使用所产生的形态和流变后果。在所研究的四种 ADs 中,有两种在庚烷诱导的不稳定性测试和西得克萨斯(WT)原油中被确定为有效的沥青质分散剂。在没有处理添加剂的情况下,低浓度的沥青质对蜡的稳定程度在芳烃组分较多的油中会降低。这是因为这些稳定作用被能量上更有利的芳烃-沥青烯作用所取代,从而增加了油的粘度。单独使用 AD 处理也会降低蜡-沥青烯相互作用的程度,从而增加油的粘度。使用与 PI 结构相似度更高的 AD 处理蜡溶解度似乎与 PI 起到了协同作用,在有沥青质和没有沥青质的情况下都能提高蜡溶解度。不过,处理过的油的粘度要高于仅用 PI 处理过的油,而用与 PI 结构相似性较低的 AD 处理不会对油的粘度产生不利影响。这些数据表明,AD 可能会毒害 PI 的功能,而不是同时处理蜡和沥青质。这些数据揭示了在设计与蜡和沥青质相互作用的流动性保证添加剂以及制定处理计划时存在的隐患。