applied

sciences
Article
Effects of Nozzle Configuration on Rock Erosion
Under a Supercritical Carbon Dioxide Jet at Various
Pressures and Temperatures
Man Huang 1,2,3 , Yong Kang 1,2,3, *, Xiaochuan Wang 1,2,3 , Yi Hu 1,2,3 , Deng Li 1,2,3 , Can Cai 1,2,3
and Feng Chen 1,2,3
1 Key Laboratory of Hydraulic Machinery Transients, Ministry of Education, Wuhan University,
Wuhan 430072, China; mhuang@whu.edu.cn (M.H.); wangxiaochuanwhu@163.com (X.W.);
huyiwhu@163.com (Y.H.); lidengwhu@163.com (D.L.); caicanwhu@163.com (C.C.);
chenfengwhu@163.com (F.C.)
2 Hubei Key Laboratory of Waterjet Theory and New Technology, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, China
3 School of Power and Mechanical Engineering, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, China
* Correspondence: kangyong@whu.edu.cn; Tel.: +86-027-6877-4906

Academic Editor: Jose Augusto Paixao Coelho

Received: 18 May 2017; Accepted: 9 June 2017; Published: 12 June 2017

Abstract: The supercritical carbon dioxide (SC-CO2 ) jet offers many advantages over water jets in the
field of oil and gas exploration and development. To take better advantage of the SC-CO2 jet, effects
of nozzle configuration on rock erosion characteristics were experimentally investigated with respect
to the erosion volume. A convergent nozzle and two Laval nozzles, as well as artificial cores were
employed in the experiments. It was found that the Laval nozzle can enhance rock erosion ability,
which largely depends on the pressure and temperature conditions. The enhancement increases
with rising inlet pressure. Compared with the convergent nozzle, the Laval-1 nozzle maximally
enhances the erosion volume by 10%, 21.2% and 30.3% at inlet pressures of 30, 40 and 50 MPa,
respectively; while the Laval-2 nozzle maximally increases the erosion volume by 32.5%, 49.2% and
60%. Moreover, the enhancement decreases with increasing ambient pressure under constant inlet
pressure or constant pressure drop. The growth of fluid temperature above the critical value can
increase the enhancement. In addition, the jet from the Laval-2 nozzle with a smooth inner profile
always has a greater erosion ability than that from the Laval-1 nozzle.

Keywords: supercritical carbon dioxide (SC-CO2 ) jet; nozzle configuration; rock erosion; erosion
volume; pressure and temperature conditions

1. Introduction
The application of supercritical carbon dioxide (SC-CO2 ) has achieved obvious progress during
the last few decades, stimulated by the demand of a wide range of industries that have recognized
the incomparable advantages of SC-CO2 fluid [1]. SC-CO2 is an intermediate state between gas
and liquid for carbon dioxide when the pressure and temperature are both above the critical point
(Pc = 7.38 MPa and Tc = 304.13 K, respectively; the subscript “c” indicates the critical value.) [2]. It has
many unique properties, such as high density, high diffusivity, low viscosity, high absorptive capacity
by rock substances and so on, which make SC-CO2 very suitable for the exploitation of oil and gas
reservoirs as a working fluid [3–6]. In more specific terms, high density can provide enough power for
downhole drilling tools. Low viscosity can reduce the friction loss during the drilling fluid circulation.
High diffusivity can improve the rock erosion efficiency. Furthermore, high absorptive capability by
rock substances can lead to greater extraction of hydrocarbons and enhance recovery. In addition,

Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 606; doi:10.3390/app7060606 www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci

Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 606 2 of 21

using SC-CO2 as a working fluid in drilling and completion engineering will contribute to reducing
greenhouse gas emissions and pollution of water resources [7,8]. To make better use of SC-CO2 fluid
in the field of oil and gas development, different kinds of technologies using SC-CO2 fluid have been
invented, like SC-CO2 flooding, SC-CO2 fracturing, SC-CO2 coiled tubing drilling, SC-CO2 jets, and so
on. Among them, the SC-CO2 jet, which can be more efficient in eroding rocks than the water jet under
the same conditions, has been the subject of numerous studies [9–18]. The most attractive point of this
novel jet technology is that by taking full advantage of the high diffusivity of SC-CO2 , it can produce
an effective jet with a strong ability to erode rock without using any devices for increasing the inlet
pressure in the drilling systems. Simultaneously, the jet medium, SC-CO2 , can play a role in protecting
reservoirs and enhance recovery during the drilling process.
In the late 1990s, Kolle [19] first experimentally studied the rock erosion characteristics of the
SC-CO2 jet, for the purpose of overcoming the technical problems encountered in water jet assisted
coiled tubing drilling. He found that the SC-CO2 jet will cut hard shale, marble and granite at much
lower pressure than a water jet. In more specific terms, the SC-CO2 jet threshold pressure is 2/3
that of water jet in the granite and less than half that of water jet in the shale. Moreover, the rate
of penetration in the Mancos Shale with SC-CO2 was 3.3 times the rate using water and the drilling
specific energy is only about 20% that observed while drilling with water. Then, based on this study, to
make a better use of the SC-CO2 jet by maximally enhancing the erosion capability, many researchers
are focusing on the rock erosion characteristics, jet types, and flow field of the SC-CO2 jet as well as
the impacting characteristics, aiming at optimizing the operating conditions and revealing the rock
erosion mechanism. For instance, an experimental study was performed by Du et al. [9] to understand
the relationship of the rock erosion performance of the SC-CO2 jet with the various influencing factors
by the use of a well-designed experimental setup. They concluded that there exist optimal standoff
distance and nozzle diameter to achieve the strongest rock erosion capability for the SC-CO2 jet.
The increase in inlet pressure can significantly improve the rock erosion capacity of the SC-CO2 jet.
It should be noted that standoff distance, S, was defined as the distance from the exit of the nozzle
to the surface of the specimen. Also, to further reveal the rock erosion law using the SC-CO2 jet and
establish a theoretical basis for better application of the SC-CO2 jet in drilling engineering, a large
number of rock erosion experiments was conducted by Wang et al. [12]. They found that with the
increasing ambient pressure, the rock erosion efficiency of the SC-CO2 jet can reach the maximum
when the ambient pressure is around the critical pressure under constant pressure difference, and the
rotary speed of the core sample has no substantial influence on the erosion depth, but has an effect
on the average width of eroded grooves. Besides, for the sake of better applying the SC-CO2 jet in
shale gas drilling, the microscopic changes between the original shale samples and the samples eroded
by the SC-CO2 jet were studied by Huang et al. [20]. They found that the surface of the shale sample
impacted by the SC-CO2 jet exhibits a grid-like failure. The sample is broken into layers of large
volume overall as a whole. Also, the mechanical strength of the shale sample is reduced by the erosion
of shale mineral induced by SC-CO2 . Moreover, to clarify the rock failure mechanism and change of
pore structure, rock erosion experiments using the SC-CO2 jet and SEM observations were carried out
on different rocks by He et al. [21]. The results showed that rock erosion by SC-CO2 jet impingement
is mainly in the brittle tensile failure mechanism, accompanied with the shear failure in particular
locations such as the edge of the jet impinging area.
Then, a tangential injection type swirl jet nozzle was used by Du et al. [22] to investigate the
rock erosion characteristics of a SC-CO2 swirl jet. The results showed that the optimum number of
tangential injected entrances to achieve the best rock erosion effect for the jet is three and the optimum
standoff distance is twice the nozzle diameter. Similarly, to simultaneously utilize the characteristics
of both the swirling jet and conventional round jet, combined swirling and round jet nozzles were
designed, and rock erosion experiments using SC-CO2 combined with swirling and round jets using
the nozzles were conducted by Tian et al. [23]. Their experimental results illustrated that the rock
erosion efficiency of the SC-CO2 combined with swirling and round jets is 42.9% higher than that of
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 606 3 of 21

the conventional water jet, and the combined jet can lead to the occurrence of rock mass breakaway.
Simultaneously, to improve the erosion capacity of the SC-CO2 jet, the influence of nano-silica additive
on the rock erosion characteristics was experimentally investigated by Huang et al. [15]. They found
that an appropriated amount of nano-silica additive can greatly enhance the erosion ability of the jet,
and the effect on the erosion capability largely depends on the operating conditions.
On the other hand, for the purpose of figuring out the impact characteristics of the SC-CO2 jet and
the influence of parameters on the impact characteristics, Cheng et al. [24] performed a systematical
simulation to study the three-dimension flow field of SC-CO2 jet using a computational fluid dynamic
method. They concluded that a SC-CO2 jet can generate stronger impact pressure than water jet
under the same conditions. With the increase of standoff distance, the impact pressure of the SC-CO2
jet decreases, while the impact scope increases. Similarly, Wang et al. [17] theoretically explored
the flow characteristics of a SC-CO2 jet using the computational fluid dynamics method, and they
concluded that the SC-CO2 jet has a higher impact velocity than that of the water jet under the same
conditions and the maximum velocity of the SC-CO2 jet increases with growing fluid temperature.
Besides, a computational fluid dynamics model that includes the real gas effects of CO2 was used by
Long et al. [25] to study the impinging flow field of the SC-CO2 jet in the bottom hole. Their simulation
results showed that the Joule–Thompson throttling effects are much more prominent at higher inlet
fluid temperature and larger pressure drops. Additionally, the abrasive SC-CO2 jet, formed by adding
solid particles into the SC-CO2 jet, was numerically simulated by He et al. [16], and they found that the
two-phase axial velocities of the abrasive SC-CO2 jet is much higher than those of the abrasive water
jet. Moreover, by methods of laboratory experiment and numerical simulation, Wang et al. [18] studied
the bottom hole pressure and temperature distributions during the SC-CO2 jet drilling in detail. They
confirmed that with the increase of standoff distance, the bottom hole temperature decreases while the
bottom hole pressure increases first and then decreases. Besides, comprehensive methods of numerical
simulations and lab experiments were carried out by Tian et al. [11] to investigate the influences of the
ambient pressure and the standoff distance on the impinging pressure and perforation performance
of the SC-CO2 jet. They confirmed that when the pressure difference is kept constant, the effective
impinging pressure hardly changes with ambient pressure, but the eroded depth increases at first
and then decreases, bounded by the critical pressure of SC-CO2 . As the standoff distance extends,
the eroded diameter increases at first and then decreases.
Although a considerable amount of research has been carried out on the SC-CO2 jet, to the best
of our knowledge, there is so far little literature on how nozzle configuration influences the rock
erosion performance of the jet. However, when the nozzle configuration is changed, the flow of
SC-CO2 fluid inside the nozzle will change, which could result in different flow characteristics of the
jet ejected from the nozzle exit. Since flow characteristics of the SC-CO2 jet can have a great influence
on the impingement of the jet on rocks, nozzle configuration is expected to put a significant impact
on the rock erosion behaviors of the SC-CO2 jet. Furthermore, according to the basic theory of jet
dynamics [26–30], it is well known that a Laval nozzle can easily accelerate the jet fluid medium with
significant compressibility to a supersonic speed under certain conditions, which is difficult for a
commonly used convergent nozzle. Also, Wang et al. [31] experimentally concluded that different types
of nozzles can provide various flow velocities of the jet, and a supersonic jet without chocking can be
achieved using a Laval nozzle which is beneficial for improving coating density and adhesion in wire
spray. In addition, the compressibility of the fluid plays a key role in the process of fluid accelerated by
a Laval nozzle [27–29]. Meanwhile, it is reported that SC-CO2 has significant compressibility [32–34].
Therefore, it is reasonable to speculate that the Laval nozzle can alter the flow field of the SC-CO2 jet
and should have great effects on the rock erosion characteristics of the jet. Moreover, a Laval nozzle
was employed by Eslamian et al. [35] to accelerate a jet to supersonic levels, then the high speed jet was
used to erode cylindrical brittle gypsum deposits. The results showed that the gypsum deposits can be
effectively broken by the high-speed jet issuing from the Laval nozzle and the failure behaviors of the
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 606 4 of 21
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 606 4 of 21
depend on orientation. This is conducive to further optimizing the performance of sootblower
which is used to clean fireside deposits formed on tubes in boilers.
asymmetric deposits
The present depend
paper giveson anorientation.
experimentalThisinvestigation
is conduciveon to further optimizing
the effects of nozzletheconfiguration
performance
of sootblower which is used to clean fireside deposits formed on tubes in boilers.
including a convergent nozzle, and two Laval nozzles on the rock erosion characteristics of the
SC-CO The present
2 jet underpaper
various gives an experimental
pressures investigation
and temperatures, withonthethepurpose
effects of
ofnozzle configuration
enhancing the rock
including a convergent nozzle, and two Laval nozzles on the rock erosion characteristics
erosion capability of the jet. Moreover, artificial cores were applied for the experiments. It serves of the SC-CO as2
jet under various pressures and temperatures, with the purpose of enhancing the
a supplement to the previous related research so as to provide useful information for better rock erosion capability
of the jet. Moreover,
applications of SC-COartificial
2 jets. cores were applied for the experiments. It serves as a supplement to the
previous related research so as to provide useful information for better applications of SC-CO2 jets.
2. Theoretical Background
2. Theoretical Background
2.1. Acceleration Mechanisms of Compressible Flow Inside the Nozzle
2.1. Acceleration Mechanisms of Compressible Flow Inside the Nozzle
Figure 1 is a schematic diagram of the acceleration mechanism of a compressible flow inside
Figure 1 is a schematic diagram of the acceleration mechanism of a compressible flow inside the
the nozzles with different longitudinal sections. Generally, the typical longitudinal section has three
nozzles with different longitudinal sections. Generally, the typical longitudinal section has three main
main types, namely, the convergent section, the divergent section and the convergent-divergent
types, namely, the convergent section, the divergent section and the convergent-divergent section.
section. The corresponding nozzles are called the convergent nozzle, the divergent nozzle, and the
The corresponding nozzles are called the convergent nozzle, the divergent nozzle, and the Laval
Laval nozzle, as shown in the Figure 1.
nozzle, as shown in the Figure 1.

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 1. Schematic
Figure 1. Schematicdiagram
diagramof of different
different types
types of nozzles:
of nozzles: (a) Convergent
(a) Convergent nozzle;nozzle; (b) Divergent
(b) Divergent nozzle;
nozzle; (c) Laval nozzle
(c) Laval nozzle [26]. [26].

Along the flow direction, the cross-sectional area of the convergent nozzle and the divergent
Along the flow direction, the cross-sectional area of the convergent nozzle and the divergent
nozzle is getting smaller and larger, respectively; while that of the Laval nozzle reduces first and
nozzle is getting smaller and larger, respectively; while that of the Laval nozzle reduces first and then
then increases. Most importantly, the acceleration of compressible flow inside a nozzle is
increases. Most importantly, the acceleration of compressible flow inside a nozzle is determined by
determined by the flow speed and the type of longitudinal section of the nozzle [26–29]. To give a
the flow speed and the type of longitudinal section of the nozzle [26–29]. To give a more detailed
more detailed description, the characteristic equation derived from the conservation equations and
description, the characteristic equation derived from the conservation equations and the adiabatic
the adiabatic equation [26,27], is introduced to make a theoretical analysis of the flow characteristics
equation [26,27], is introduced to make a theoretical analysis of the flow characteristics inside the
inside the nozzles with different longitudinal sections, as shown in Equation (1).
nozzles with different longitudinal sections, as shown in Equation (1).
dA 2 dv
dA = ( M a2 − 1) dv (1)
A = ( M a − 1) v (1)
A v
where A
where A is
is cross-sectional
cross-sectional area area of
of the
the nozzle
nozzle flowflow path
path (m (m33);); M Ma isis Mach
Mach number;
number; and and vv isis flow
flow
a
velocity (m/s).
velocity (m/s).
It can be
It can be deduced
deducedfrom fromEquation
Equation(1) (1)that
thatthethevelocity
velocitychange
change ofof flow,
flow, dv,dv,
in in
thethe nozzle
nozzle depends
depends on
on the change in the cross-sectional area of the nozzle, dA, and the Mach
the change in the cross-sectional area of the nozzle, dA, and the Mach number, Ma . To be more specific, number, M a. To be more

specific,
when thewhen
velocity the of
velocity
flow is of flow is that
subsonic, subsonic,
is, Mathat
< 1, is,
theM a < 1, the fluid can be accelerated by the
fluid can be accelerated by the convergent
convergent nozzle, namely, dA < 0. This is because
nozzle, namely, dA < 0. This is because the dA < 0 and the (Ma − the dA < 02 and1) the (Ma2make
< 0 can − 1) <the
0 can
dv >make
0, whichthe
dv > 0, which means the flow is accelerated. It should be noted that the
means the flow is accelerated. It should be noted that the maximum speed that can be obtained by the maximum speed that can be
obtained by the subsonic flow inside the convergent nozzle is the speed
subsonic flow inside the convergent nozzle is the speed of sound, which is called the choking [26,29]. of sound, which is called
the choking
On the other[26,29]. On the
hand, when theother hand,
velocity whenisthe
of flow velocity of
supersonic, that flow
is, M is supersonic, that is, Ma > 1,
a > 1, to further increase the
to further increase the velocity of the fluid, namely, dv > 0, the
velocity of the fluid, namely, dv > 0, the change in cross-sectional area should meet the change in cross-sectional area should
condition
meet
dA > 0,thethatcondition
is, the flowdAcan> 0,be that is, the in
accelerated flow can be accelerated
the divergent nozzle. Most in importantly,
the divergent nozzle. Most
to accelerate the
importantly, to accelerate the fluid from subsonic to supersonic,
fluid from subsonic to supersonic, the fluid should first be accelerated from subsonic to thethe fluid should first be accelerated
speed of
from subsonic to the speed of sound by a convergent longitudinal section, and then the sonic flow
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 606 5 of 21

sound by a convergent longitudinal section, and then the sonic flow can be continuously accelerated
to supersonic by a divergent longitudinal section, as shown in Figure 1c. Therefore, the fluid whose
velocity is originally subsonic can be largely accelerated to a supersonic state by a Laval nozzle.

2.2. Jet-Flow Characteristics Outside the Nozzle

Since the fluid medium is generally accelerated from a low speed to a relatively high speed in
rock erosion application, only the convergent nozzle and the Laval nozzle are discussed here. The flow
characteristics of a jet emitted from the nozzle exit are related to the nozzle configuration and the
pressure ratio of the ambient pressure to the inlet pressure, Pa /Pi , which affects the acceleration process
of fluid inside the nozzle and determines the interaction of the jet fluid with the environment fluid
outside the nozzle [26–29].
When a jet is formed using a convergent nozzle, the jet will be in three different flow patterns
depending on the pressure ratio. For the convergent nozzle, there is a critical pressure ratio to
distinguish the flow states of the jet. The critical pressure ratio can be calculated by Equation (2) [27,29].
To be specific, when Pa /Pi > R1 , the flow velocity at the nozzle exit is subsonic and the jet is a subsonic
jet. Moreover, when Pa /Pi = R1 , the flow velocity at the nozzle exit is just the speed of sound and the
jet is a sonic jet. In addition, when Pa /Pi < R1 , the flow velocity at the nozzle exit does not continue to
increase and is still equal to the speed of sound, which is attributed to the chocking of the convergent
nozzle. Then, the sonic flow at the nozzle exit will inflate into a supersonic jet and shock waves will
occur in the jet beam. This is because the jet fluid is in an under-expanded state relative to the ambient
fluid under this pressure ratio [26,36].
  k
Pc1 2 k −1
R1 = = (2)
Pi k+1
where R1 is critical pressure ratio of convergent nozzle; Pc1 is critical ambient pressure of convergent
nozzle (MPa); Pi is inlet pressure (MPa); and k is adiabatic exponent.
For the case of the Laval nozzle, there are five different flow states for the jet formed by the
nozzle under different pressure ratios. Correspondingly, there are three critical pressure ratios, R2 , Ra1 ,
and Ra2 , which can be calculated by the Equations (3)–(5), respectively. The first case is that, when
Pa /Pi > Ra2 , the flow velocity at all locations inside the nozzle is subsonic and the jet is a subsonic jet.
The second case is, when Ra1 < Pa /Pi ≤ Ra2 , the fluid can reach supersonic velocity at the divergent
section near the throat of the nozzle and a normal shock wave is formed at the divergent section.
The supersonic flow passes through the normal shock wave and then decelerates to subsonic flow,
and finally forms a subsonic jet. The third case is, when R2 < Pa /Pi < Ra1 , the normal shock wave
moves outward and is located outside the nozzle. A supersonic jet can be achieved under this pressure
condition. It should be noted that the formation of normal shock wave is due to the over-inflated state
of the jet fluid relative to the ambient fluid. The fourth case is, when Pa /Pi = R2 , a supercritical jet can
be obtained through this nozzle and no shock wave will occur in the jet. In addition, the last case is,
when Pa /Pi < R2 , a supercritical flow can be achieved at the nozzle exit, and the supercritical jet will
be further accelerated through expansion outside nozzle exit and expansion waves will occur in the jet,
which is attributed to the under-expanded state of jet fluid relative to the ambient fluid [27,29,37].

Pc2
R2 = = π (λe ) (3)
Pi
k +1 2
λe − 1
R a1 = π (λe ) kk−+11 (4)
2
k −1 − λ e

R a2 = π (λ0e ) (5)
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 606 6 of 21

where R2 , Ra1 , and Ra2 are critical pressure ratios of Laval nozzle; Pc2 is critical ambient pressure of
0
Laval nozzle, MPa; λe and λe are supersonic and subsonic velocity coefficients, respectively; and π(λe )
is gas dynamics function.
From the above analysis, it is clear that nozzle configuration determines the acceleration process
and flow characteristics of the jet under different pressure conditions. As a consequence, the rock
erosion characteristics of the SC-CO2 jets are expected to be affected as long as the flow characteristics
have been influenced by nozzle configuration.

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Materials
As for the specimen, an artificial core, which has been used by many investigators for evaluating
the intensity of various jet erosion [9,12,22,23,38,39], was employed for the tests because of its relatively
perfect homogeneity and moderate hardness. The artificial core was made of cement, quartz sand and
water in a 1/2/0.5 mass ratio. To ensure high homogeneity of the specimen, the cement mortar was
fully stirred before pouring. After 28 days of curing, the physical and mechanical properties were
measured and averaged, as shown in Table 1. The diameter and height of all specimens were 100 mm.
The purity of CO2 used in the experiments was 99.8%.

Table 1. Physical and mechanical properties of the specimens.

Ratio, Rc Density, ρa Compressive Strength, σ a Modulus of Elasticity, Ea

Poisson0 s Ratio, υa
Cement/Sand/Water (g/cm3 ) (MPa) (GPa)
1/2/0.5 2.2 32.8 19.1 0.23

3.2. Facilities
Figure 2 is a schematic diagram of the experimental setup. The experiment was conducted with
the use of a multifunctional SC-CO2 jet test system developed by our research team independently,
and had been used in some related research [13,15]. The red arrows illustrate the flow direction of
CO2 , while the blue ones show that of hot water. The experimental system consists of a series of units,
including the CO2 cartridge, the cooling unit converting gaseous CO2 to liquid to facilitate pumping,
the storage tank for temporary storage of liquid CO2 , the high pressure plunger pump applied to
pressurize the liquid CO2 , the buffer tank employed to reduce the fluid fluctuation, the chamber
applied to establish the ambient pressure, the counterbalance valve used to regulate the ambient
pressure, and the cyclone de-sander utilized to purify the working SC-CO2 . Meanwhile, a water-bath
device was used to heat the buffer tank and chamber to control the temperature of CO2 . The inlet
pressure and fluid temperature can be regulated continuously through the control table from 0 to
75 MPa and 300 to 373 K, respectively. The ambient pressure in the chamber could be increased to
45 MPa. The SC-CO2 was provided through the process of pressurization and heating and then flowed
through the nozzle to form a SC-CO2 jet. The jet discharged into the rock erosion chamber and then
impinged on the specimen surface perpendicularly, as shown in Figure 2.
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 606 7 of 21
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 606 7 of 21

Supercritical CO2 line Hot water line Signal line

CO2 cartridge
Cooling part
Storage tank Plunger pump
Central nozzle Water bath heater
Pneumatic valve Buffer tank
Counterbalance valve S
Pi

Pa T

Temperature sensor
Pressure sensor
Cyclone Side nozzle

Data logger Laptop

Specimen Chamber Monitoring system

Figure
Figure 2.
2. Schematic
Schematic diagram
diagram of
of the
the rock
rock erosion test system.
erosion test system.

The detailed structural parameters of the nozzles used in the experiment are shown in Figure 3.
The detailed structural parameters of the nozzles used in the experiment are shown in Figure 3.
Nozzle A was a commonly used convergent nozzle consisting of a contraction section and a straight
Nozzle A was a commonly used convergent nozzle consisting of a contraction section and a straight
pipe section. The convergent nozzle had an outlet diameter of da = 2 mm, a convergent angle of
pipe section. The convergent nozzle had an outlet diameter of da = 2 mm, a convergent angle of
a1 = 13.5°,◦ and a straight pipe section length of la = 2da. Nozzle B was a Laval nozzle (Laval-1) which
a1 = 13.5 , and a straight pipe section length of la = 2da . Nozzle B was a Laval nozzle (Laval-1)
had three sections, namely, the convergent section, throat section and divergent section. The throat
which had three sections, namely, the convergent section, throat section and divergent section.
diameter of the Laval-1 nozzle was db2 = 2.0 mm and the outlet diameter was db1 = 2.66 mm.
The throat diameter of the Laval-1 nozzle was db2 = 2.0 mm and the outlet diameter was db1 = 2.66 mm.
The divergent angle of the divergent section was ab1 = 10°, the convergent angle of the convergent
The divergent angle of the divergent section was ab1 = 10◦ , the convergent angle of the convergent
section was ab2 = 13.5°,◦ and the length of the divergent section and the throat section are lb1 = 3.8 and
section was ab2 = 13.5 , and the length of the divergent section and the throat section are lb1 = 3.8 and
lb2 = 1.0 mm, respectively. Nozzle C was a typical Laval nozzle (Laval-2) with a smooth streamlined
lb2 = 1.0 mm, respectively. Nozzle C was a typical Laval nozzle (Laval-2) with a smooth streamlined
inner profile. The nozzle had a throat diameter of dc2 = 2.0 mm, an outlet diameter of dc1 = 2.66 mm,
inner profile. The nozzle had a throat diameter of d = 2.0 mm, an outlet diameter of dc1 = 2.66 mm,
and an inlet diameter of dc3 = 5mm. The lengthsc2 of the divergent section, the throat and the
and an inlet diameter of d = 5mm. The lengths of the divergent section, the throat and the convergent
convergent section were c3lc1 = 3.71, lc2 = 0.7 and lc3 = 1.8 mm, respectively. Moreover, the divergent
section were l = 3.71, l = 0.7 and l = 1.8 mm, respectively. Moreover, the divergent section lc1 was
section lc1 wasc1designedc2according toc3the characteristic line theory [40], and the convergent section lc3
designed according to the characteristic line theory [40], and the convergent section lc3 was designed
was designed using the commonly used empirical Witoszynski formula [41]. The two Laval nozzles
using the commonly used empirical Witoszynski formula [41]. The two Laval nozzles had the same
had the same designed Mach number of 2. In addition, the outside dimensions of the nozzle were
designed Mach number of 2. In addition, the outside dimensions of the nozzle were the same, which
the same, which were Da = Db = Dc = 12 mm and La = Lb = Lc = 19 mm.
were Da = Db = Dc = 12 mm and La = Lb = Lc = 19 mm.
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 606
Appl. 8 of 21

Da a1 da Db ab2 db2 ab1 db1 Dc dc3 dc2 dc1

lb2
lc3
A B C
la lb1 lc1
La lc2
Lb Lc
(a) (b) (c)

(d)

Figure 3.
3. Detailed structural parameters of the nozzles: (a) Convergent nozzle; (b) Laval-1 nozzle;
(c) Laval-2
(c) Laval-2 nozzle;
nozzle; (d)
(d) Pictures
Pictures of
of the
the nozzles.
nozzles.

Inlet pressure, Pi, was defined as the pressure of the flow entering into the nozzle. Ambient
Inlet pressure, Pi , was defined as the pressure of the flow entering into the nozzle. Ambient
pressure, Pa, was defined as the pressure of the carbon dioxide in the chamber. Fluid temperature, T,
pressure, Pa , was defined as the pressure of the carbon dioxide in the chamber. Fluid temperature,
was defined as the temperature of the fluid near the nozzle inlet. As is illustrated in Figure 2,
T, was defined as the temperature of the fluid near the nozzle inlet. As is illustrated in Figure 2,
pressure transducers (model: BD/SENSORS DMP334, BD SENSORS GmbH, Thierstein, Germany)
pressure transducers (model: BD/SENSORS DMP334, BD SENSORS GmbH, Thierstein, Germany)
which had been calibrated by the manufacturer with an accuracy of 0.175% FS (full scale) were
which had been calibrated by the manufacturer with an accuracy of 0.175% FS (full scale) were
positioned immediately close to the nozzle inlet and in the chamber. Simultaneously, the temperature
positioned immediately close to the nozzle inlet and in the chamber. Simultaneously, the temperature
near the nozzle inlet was measured using Omega T thermocouple whose total accuracy was ±1 K.
near the nozzle inlet was measured using Omega T thermocouple whose total accuracy was ±1 K.
The real-time data were obtained by a QuantumXMX840, (HBM, Darmstadt, Germany) data
The real-time data were obtained by a QuantumXMX840, (HBM, Darmstadt, Germany) data acquisition
acquisition and monitoring system. During each test, the impingement on the samples by the jet
and monitoring system. During each test, the impingement on the samples by the jet would not begin
would not begin until the pressures and temperatures obtained by the transducers had stabilized at
until the pressures and temperatures obtained by the transducers had stabilized at the desired values.
the desired values. In this way, the practical application conditions for the SC-CO2 jet in the bottom
In this way, the practical application conditions for the SC-CO2 jet in the bottom hole were simulated.
hole were simulated.
The aggressive intensity of the SC-CO2 jet rock erosion was evaluated by measuring the volume,
The aggressive intensity of the SC-CO2 jet rock erosion was evaluated by measuring the
V, of the erosion hole. The erosion volume V was obtained by three steps, as shown in Figure 4. First,
volume, V, of the erosion hole. The erosion volume V was obtained by three steps, as shown in
a certain amount of salt of density of ρs = 2.165 g/cm3 was weighted using an electronic balance with a
Figure 4. First, a certain amount of salt of density of ρs = 2.165 g/cm3 was weighted using an
resolution of 0.001 g, and the mass was m1 . Then, the erosion hole was filled up with the salt. Finally,
electronic balance with a resolution of 0.001 g, and the mass was m1. Then, the erosion hole was
the remaining salt was weighted by the balance to get the mass, m2 , and the erosion volume was
filled up with the salt. Finally, the remaining salt was weighted by the balance to get the mass, m2,
calculated using Equation (6). To reduce the influence of accidental factors and improve the reliability
and the erosion volume was calculated using Equation (6). To reduce the influence of accidental
of this research, each rock erosion experiment was repeated three times and then the measured erosion
factors and improve the reliability of this research, each rock erosion experiment was repeated three
volumes were averaged and used as final data to analyze the effects of nozzle configuration. In addition,
times and then the measured erosion volumes were averaged and used as final data to analyze the
the erosion depth was measured using a vernier caliper with an accuracy of 0.02 mm.
effects of nozzle configuration. In addition, the erosion depth was measured using a vernier caliper
with an accuracy of 0.02 mm. m − m2
V= 1 (6)
ρs
m1 − m2
where V is erosion volume (cm3 ); m1 is massVof=salt before filling (g); m2 is mass of salt after filling(6)
(g);
and ρs is density of the salt (g/cm3 ).
ρs
where V is erosion volume (cm3); m1 is mass of salt before filling (g); m2 is mass of salt after filling
(g); and ρs is density of the salt (g/cm3).
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 606 9 of 21
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 606 9 of 21

Step 1 Step 2 Step 3

Electronic balance
Salt, m2
Specimen

Salt, m1

(a)

Vernier caliper

Specimen

(b)

Figure 4.
4. Schematic
Schematic diagram
diagram of measurements
measurements of erosion volume and depth: (a)
(a) Erosion volume;
Erosion depth.
(b) Erosion depth.

3.3. Experimental
3.3. Experimental Procedures
Procedures
The SC-CO
The SC-CO22 jet jet rock
rock erosion tests using
erosion tests using different
different nozzles
nozzles were
were conducted
conducted in in the
the high-pressure
high-pressure
chamber, as is shown in Figure 2. In each test, after the nozzle was installed,
chamber, as is shown in Figure 2. In each test, after the nozzle was installed, the standoff distance the standoff distance
could
could
be be changing
set by set by changing
the holding theposition
holdingofposition of theThen
the specimen. specimen. Then the
the chamber was chamber
closed and was closed
tightened
and tightened
securely to ensure securely
that thetochamber
ensure could that maintain
the chambera highcould maintain
temperature anda pressure
high temperature
environment. and
pressure environment.
Subsequently, the pump and water bath heater were started, and then the CO2 was pressurized
Subsequently,
and heated. When the theinlet
pump and water
pressure andbathfluidheater were started,
temperature reached and
thethen the CO
desired 2 was
value, andpressurized
remained
stable, the pneumatic valve controlling the side nozzle was opened and then the fluid wasremained
and heated. When the inlet pressure and fluid temperature reached the desired value, and injected
stable,
into thethe pneumatic
chamber valve controlling
to establish a submerged theenvironment.
side nozzle was Thus,opened and then
the erosion theoffluid
effect was injected
impingement on
into the chamber to establish a submerged environment. Thus, the erosion
the specimen by a non-submerged jet could be avoided. Furthermore, the desirable ambient pressure effect of impingement on
the specimen by a non-submerged jet could be
in the chamber could be achieved by regulating the counterbalance valve. avoided. Furthermore, the desirable ambient
pressure
Afterinthe
thedesired
chamber could be achieved
submerged environment by regulating the counterbalance
was established, the erosion valve.
of the specimen by the
impact of the SC-CO2 jet ejected from the central nozzle began and lasted for 180 s.the
After the desired submerged environment was established, the erosion of specimen
Finally, by the
the ambient
impact of the SC-CO 2 jet ejected from the central nozzle began and lasted
pressure in the chamber was released and then the erosion volume could be measured from the for 180 s. Finally, the ambient
pressurespecimen.
eroded in the chamber was released and then the erosion volume could be measured from the
eroded specimen.
3.4. Experimental Uncertainty
3.4. Experimental Uncertainty
The main experimental uncertainties were the accuracy of the temperature transducer acquiring
The temperature,
the fluid main experimental the pressure uncertainties
transducers were the accuracy
achieving of the
the pressures temperature
at the nozzle inlettransducer
and in the
acquiring and
chamber, the fluid temperature,ofthe
the repeatability thepressure
electronic transducers achievingthe
balance measuring themass
pressures
of theatsalt,
the which
nozzlewere
inlet
and than
less in the±chamber,
1 K, 0.175% andFS,theandrepeatability
±0.001 g, of the electronic
respectively. balance another
Moreover, measuring the mass
source of the salt,
of experimental
which werewas
uncertainty lessattributed
than ±1 K, to 0.175%
the method FS, and ±0.001 g,the
of obtaining respectively. Moreover,
erosion volume. anotherof source
For purpose reducingof
experimental
this uncertainty, uncertainty
the averaged was erosion
attributed volumesto thewere
method
used of obtaining
in the followingtheexperimental
erosion volume. For
analysis,
purpose
as of reducing
mentioned in Section this
3.2.uncertainty, the averaged erosion volumes were used in the following
experimental analysis, as mentioned in Section 3.2.
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 606 10 of 21
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 606 10 of 21

4. Results
4. Results
Effects
Effectsofofnozzle
nozzleconfiguration
configuration onon the
the rock
rock erosion characteristicsofofthe
erosion characteristics theSC-CO
SC-CO 2 jet
2 jet were
were
investigated
investigated at various
at various standoff
standoff distance,
distance, inletinlet
and and ambient
ambient pressures,
pressures, and temperatures.
and fluid fluid temperatures.
A great
A greatofnumber
number of specimens
specimens were A
were tested. tested. A qualitative
qualitative analysis
analysis was carried
was carried out according
out according to the
to the most
most typical macroscopic appearances of the eroded specimens. Meanwhile,
typical macroscopic appearances of the eroded specimens. Meanwhile, the erosion volume the erosion volume waswas
plotted
plotted to to quantitativelyanalyze
quantitatively analyzethe
therock
rock erosion
erosion capability
capability of
of the
theSC-CO
SC-CO2 2jets
jetsformed
formedbybythethe
three
three
different
different nozzles.
nozzles.

4.1.4.1. Macroscopic
Macroscopic AppearancesofofEroded
Appearances ErodedSpecimens
Specimens
Figure
Figure 5 illustrates
5 illustrates thethe macroscopic
macroscopic appearances
appearances of specimens
of specimens eroded
eroded by by SC-CO
SC-CO 2 jet issuing
2 jet issuing from
from the three nozzles with different configurations around the optimum
the three nozzles with different configurations around the optimum standoff distance under the standoff distance undersame
the same operating conditions. The inlet pressure was set constant as 40
operating conditions. The inlet pressure was set constant as 40 MPa. The ambient pressure was setMPa. The ambient pressure
was set to 10 MPa, and the fluid temperature was set at 330 K. These photos were displayed and
to 10 MPa, and the fluid temperature was set at 330 K. These photos were displayed and analyzed
analyzed because around the optimum standoff distance, the aggressive rock erosion intensity
because around the optimum standoff distance, the aggressive rock erosion intensity affected by nozzle
affected by nozzle configuration shows the largest differences with respect to erosion volume.
configuration shows the largest differences with respect to erosion volume. As can be observed from
As can be observed from the photos in Figure 5, an erosion pit is formed in the central area of the
the photos in Figure 5, an erosion pit is formed in the central area of the specimen by the high-speed
specimen by the high-speed SC-CO2 jet impingement. This phenomenon suggests that the erosion
SC-CO 2 jet impingement.
of artificial core specimen This phenomenon
caused by the SC-COsuggests that the erosion of artificial core specimen caused
2 jet is a kind of “drilling-type” damage, which has
bybeen
the SC-CO
claimed jet is a kind of “drilling-type”
2 a feature of jet impact erosion for rocks damage, which
with has been claimed
comparatively higha feature
porosity, of jet
suchimpact
as
erosion for rocks with comparatively high porosity, such as limestone, sandstone
limestone, sandstone and so on [42,43]. This kind of damage is characterized by rather deep depth and so on [42,43].
This kind
with of damage
small diameter. is Additionally,
characterizeditby canrather
also bedeep depth that
observed withthesmall
sizediameter. Additionally,
of the erosion it can
pit increases
also be observed
first and then that the size
decreases of the
with theerosion pit increases
increasing standoff first and then
distance, and decreases
the maximum with the
sizeincreasing
can be
standoff
achieved distance,
at the and the maximum
standoff distance ofsize 3 andcan4be forachieved at the standoff
the convergent distance
nozzle and of 3 and
the other two 4Laval
for the
convergent nozzle and This
nozzles, respectively. the other two Laval
is because, with nozzles,
the increaserespectively.
of standoffThis is because,
distance, with the
the diameter increase
of the jet
of beam
standoff increases
distance,while thethe energy of
diameter of the
the jet
jet declines [9]. Moreover,
beam increases while the
the macroscopic
energy of the appearances
jet declinesof[9].
eroded specimens
Moreover, are in good
the macroscopic agreement
appearances with thespecimens
of eroded results of are
rockinerosion by jets in previous
good agreement with the related
results of
articles
rock erosion [15,39], indicating
by jets in previousthe reliability of this [15,39],
related articles experiment.indicating the reliability of this experiment.

(a)

(b)

Figure 5. Cont.
Figure 5. Cont.
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 606 11 of 21
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 606 11 of 21

(c)

Figure 5. Photos of rock specimens after erosion: (a) Specimens eroded by the convergent nozzle;
Figure 5. Photos of rock specimens after erosion: (a) Specimens eroded by the convergent nozzle;
(b) Specimens eroded by the Laval-1 nozzle; (c) Specimens eroded by the Laval-2 nozzle.
(b) Specimens eroded by the Laval-1 nozzle; (c) Specimens eroded by the Laval-2 nozzle.

It can also be observed in Figure 5 that, for the Laval nozzles, the size of the pits on the surface
of Itthe
can also be observed
specimens are largerinthan
Figure
that5ofthat,
the for
pitsthe Lavalbynozzles,
eroded the size of the
the jet discharging from pits
theon the surface
convergent
of the
nozzlespecimens
at the sameare standoff
larger than that of
distance, the pits eroded
indicating that the by the jet
erosion discharging
capability of thefrom
SC-CO the2 convergent
jet can be
nozzle
enhancedat theby same
the standoff distance,
Laval nozzles. Thisindicating
is mainlythatduetheto erosion
the factcapability of thenozzle
that the Laval SC-COwith 2 jet can
a
be convergent-divergent
enhanced by the Laval nozzles. section
longitudinal This iscanmainly
make theduejettohave
the fact that impact
a greater the Laval nozzle
speed, and with
then a
produce a stronger impingement
convergent-divergent on the specimens
longitudinal section can make the thanjetthe convergent
have a greaternozzle
impactunderspeed, theand
samethen
experimental
produce conditions
a stronger [26,29]. Inon
impingement addition, another interesting
the specimens phenomenon
than the convergent that can
nozzle be observed
under the same
in the figureconditions
experimental is that there exist In
[26,29]. small pieces another
addition, of rock breakage
interestingaround the erosion
phenomenon thatpits
canonbethe surface in
observed
of eroded specimens when using the Laval nozzles. On the other hand,
the figure is that there exist small pieces of rock breakage around the erosion pits on the surface of the macroscopic
appearances
eroded specimens of eroded specimens
when using are relatively
the Laval nozzles. flat
On and smooth
the other when
hand, theusing the convergent
macroscopic nozzle. of
appearances
Thesespecimens
eroded phenomena areillustrate
relativelythat,
flat the
andspecimens
smooth when are eroded
using thein aconvergent
more intense way These
nozzle. when phenomena
using the
Laval nozzles than that when employing the convergent nozzle. This difference
illustrate that, the specimens are eroded in a more intense way when using the Laval nozzles than that in macroscopic
appearances also suggests that the Laval nozzle with a convergent-divergent longitudinal section
when employing the convergent nozzle. This difference in macroscopic appearances also suggests that
can enhance the impingement of the SC-CO2 jet on the surface of the specimens.
the Laval nozzle with a convergent-divergent longitudinal section can enhance the impingement of
the4.2.
SC-CO jetNozzle
Effect2 of on theConfiguration
surface of the specimens.
Under Different Inlet Pressures
4.2. Effect of Nozzle
In this groupConfiguration
of experiments, Under Different Inletstandoff
the dimensionless Pressuresdistance, S, was normalized by the nozzle
diameter, and increased from 1 to 10. The ambient pressure was set constant as 10 MPa, and the fluid
In this group of experiments, the dimensionless standoff distance, S, was normalized by the
temperature was set at 330 K. The inlet pressures were set at 20, 30, 40 and 50 MPa, respectively.
nozzle diameter, and increased from 1 to 10. The ambient pressure was set constant as 10 MPa, and the
Figure 6 illustrates the effects of nozzle configuration at various standoff distances on the rock
fluid temperature
erosion ability of was
theset at 3302 jet
SC-CO K. The
underinlet pressures
four were setItatis20,
inlet pressures. 30, 40in
shown and 50 MPa,
Figure respectively.
6 that, nozzle
Figure 6 illustrates the effects of nozzle configuration at various standoff
configuration greatly affects the rock erosion ability of the SC-CO2 jet and the effects largely distances ondepend
the rock
erosion ability of the SC-CO
on standoff distance and inlet 2 pressure, which is claimed by evaluating the erosion volume ofnozzle
jet under four inlet pressures. It is shown in Figure 6 that, the
configuration
cavity on eachgreatly affectsOverall,
specimen. the rockwith
erosion ability inlet
increasing of thepressure,
SC-CO2 the jet and
rockthe effects
erosion largely
ability depend
of the threeon
standoff distance
test nozzle and inlet
increases. pressure,
This which
is because theishigher
claimed by pressure
inlet evaluating the erosion
allows volume of
more pressure the cavity
energy to beon
each specimen. Overall, with increasing inlet pressure, the rock erosion ability
converted into the kinetic energy of the jet, thereby enhancing the impingement of the jet. Moreover,of the three test nozzle
increases.
differentThis is because
nozzle the higher
configurations, theinlet pressurenozzle,
convergent allows more
or thepressure energy influence
Laval nozzles, to be converted into
the rock
theerosion
kinetic energy
performanceof the differently.
jet, thereby enhancing the impingement
In more specific of the jet.
terms, compared Moreover,
with different used
the commonly nozzle
convergent nozzle,
configurations, the Laval-1
the convergent nozzleorcan
nozzle, themaximally
Laval nozzles,enhance the erosion
influence volume
the rock erosionby about 10%,
performance
21.2% and
differently. In30.3%, respectively,
more specific terms,corresponding
compared with to inlet pressure ofused
the commonly 30, 40 and 50 MPa
convergent (Figure
nozzle, the6b–d);
Laval-1
whilecan
nozzle themaximally
Laval-2 nozzle has the
enhance thecapability of maximally
erosion volume enhancing
by about 10%, 21.2%the erosion volumerespectively,
and 30.3%, by about
32.5%, 49.2% to
corresponding and 60%
inlet at inlet of
pressure pressure of 30,5040MPa
30, 40 and and (Figure
50 MPa6b–d);
(Figurewhile
6b–d),therespectively.
Laval-2 nozzle However,
has the
at inlet pressure of 20 MPa, both the two Laval nozzles turn to play an opposite
capability of maximally enhancing the erosion volume by about 32.5%, 49.2% and 60% at inlet pressure role of reducing the
intensity of rock erosion with the maximum erosion volume being only 71%
of 30, 40 and 50 MPa (Figure 6b–d), respectively. However, at inlet pressure of 20 MPa, both the two and 88% of that of the
convergent nozzle (Figure 6a). In other words, at relatively higher inlet pressure, the Laval nozzles
Laval nozzles turn to play an opposite role of reducing the intensity of rock erosion with the maximum
can generally increase the rock erosion ability of the SC-CO2 jet; whilst at relatively lower inlet
erosion volume being only 71% and 88% of that of the convergent nozzle (Figure 6a). In other words,
pressures, they affect the erosion behavior in an opposite way of reduction. In addition, as the
at relatively higher inlet pressure, the Laval nozzles can generally increase the rock erosion ability of
inlet pressure increases, the Laval nozzles can increase the erosion capability of the SC-CO2 jet
the SC-CO2 jet; whilst at relatively lower inlet pressures, they affect the erosion behavior in an opposite
more significantly.
way of reduction. In addition, as the inlet pressure increases, the Laval nozzles can increase the erosion
capability of the SC-CO2 jet more significantly.
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 606 12 of 21
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 606 12 of 21

3.5 3.5
Convergent nozzle Convergent nozzle
3 3
Laval-1 nozzle Laval-1 nozzle
2.5 Laval-2 nozzle 2.5
V, (cm3)

Laval-2 nozzle

V, (cm3)
2
2
1.5
1.5
1
1
0.5
0.5
0
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
S
S

(a) Pi = 20 MPa (b) Pi = 30 MPa

3.5 3.5
Convergent nozzle
3 3
Laval-1 nozzle
2.5 Laval-2 nozzle 2.5
V, (cm3)

V, (cm3)
2 2
1.5 1.5
1 1 Convergent nozzle
Laval-1 nozzle
0.5 0.5
Laval-2 nozzle
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
S S
(c) Pi = 40 MPa (d) Pi = 50 MPa

Figure 6. Effect of nozzle configuration on rock erosion volume of the supercritical carbon dioxide
Figure 6. Effect of nozzle configuration on rock erosion volume of the supercritical carbon dioxide
(SC-CO2) jet under different inlet pressures.
(SC-CO2 ) jet under different inlet pressures.

It can also be seen from Figure 6 that each jet has an optimum standoff distance at which
It
positioncan also
the be seen
erosion from Figure
volume reaches6 athat each jet has
maximum, whichan optimum
means thestandoff
existencedistance at which position
of an optimum standoff
the
distance could be a typical feature of the SC-CO2 jets for erosion. This is because standoff
erosion volume reaches a maximum, which means the existence of an optimum distance
the undeveloped
could
jet andbebackflow
a typicalresistance
feature ofat the SC-CO
small 2 jets for
standoff erosion.
distance lead This is because
to large energytheloss
undeveloped
and then the jet poor
and
backflow resistance A
erosion intensity. at small
standoffstandoff distance
distance leadthan
larger to large
the energy
optimalloss and then
value resultsthein poor erosion
significant
intensity. A standoff distance larger than the optimal value results in significant
entrainment of the jet flow and then large energy dissipation [12]. The curves suggest that entrainment of the
the
jet flow and then large energy dissipation [12]. The curves suggest that the optimal
optimal standoff distance is about 4 times the nozzle diameter for the SC-CO2 jet discharging from standoff distance
is about
the Laval4 times thewhile
nozzles, nozzle it diameter
reduces fromfor the
4 toSC-CO
2 with2 jet
thedischarging frompressure
increasing inlet the Laval fornozzles, while it
the convergent
reduces from 4 to 2 with the increasing inlet pressure for the convergent nozzle. It
nozzle. It is inferred that the jet issuing from the convergent nozzle has a smaller standoff distance is inferred that the
jet issuing
range from the convergent
to effectively nozzle has
erode the specimens at arelatively
smaller standoff
high inlet distance
pressure.range to effectively erode the
specimens at relatively high inlet pressure.
4.3. Effect of Nozzle Configuration Under Different Ambient Pressures and Constant Inlet Pressure
4.3. Effect of Nozzle Configuration Under Different Ambient Pressures and Constant Inlet Pressure
Figure 7 shows the influence of nozzle configuration on the rock erosion characteristics of the
Figure 7 shows the influence of nozzle configuration on the rock erosion characteristics of the
SC-CO2 jet under four ambient pressures and constant inlet pressure. In this group of experiments,
SC-CO2 jet under four ambient pressures and constant inlet pressure. In this group of experiments,
the inlet pressure was set constant as 40 MPa, and the fluid temperature was 330 K. The dimensionless
the inlet pressure was set constant as 40 MPa, and the fluid temperature was 330 K. The dimensionless
standoff distance was increased from 1 to 10. The ambient pressure was sequentially increased from
standoff distance was increased from 1 to 10. The ambient pressure was sequentially increased from 2
2 to 26 MPa with the increment of 8 MPa.
to 26 MPa with the increment of 8 MPa.
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 606 13 of 21
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 606 13 of 21

3.5 3.5
(a) Convergent nozzle (b) Convergent nozzle
3 3
Laval-1 nozzle Laval-1 nozzle
2.5 Laval-2 nozzle 2.5 Laval-2 nozzle
V, (cm3)

V, (cm3)
2 2
1.5 1.5
1 1
0.5 0.5
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
S S

(a) Pa = 2 MPa, Pi = 40 MPa (b) Pa = 10 MPa, Pi = 40 MPa

3.5 3.5
(c) Convergent nozzle (d) Convergent nozzle
3 3
Laval-1 nozzle Laval-1 nozzle
2.5 Laval-2 nozzle 2.5 Laval-2 nozzle
V, (cm3)
V, (cm3)

2 2
1.5 1.5
1 1
0.5 0.5
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
S S

(c) Pa = 18 MPa, Pi = 40 MPa (d) Pa = 26 MPa, Pi = 40 MPa

Figure 7. Effect of nozzle configuration on rock erosion volume of the SC-CO2 jet under different
Figure 7. Effect of nozzle configuration on rock erosion volume of the SC-CO2 jet under different
ambient pressures and constant inlet pressure: (a) 2 MPa; (b) 10 MPa; (c) 18 MPa; (d) 26 MPa.
ambient pressures and constant inlet pressure: (a) 2 MPa; (b) 10 MPa; (c) 18 MPa; (d) 26 MPa.

As is depicted in Figure 7, on the whole the increasing ambient pressure reduces the maximum
As is depicted in Figure 7, on the whole the increasing ambient pressure reduces the maximum
erosion volume of all the jets. This indicates a weakened intensity of rock erosion ability of the jets,
erosion volume of all the jets. This indicates a weakened intensity of rock erosion ability of the jets, which
which is attributed to the dramatic reduction of the pressure drop across the nozzles with the
is attributed to the dramatic reduction of the pressure drop across the nozzles with the increasing ambient
increasing ambient pressure, for less pressure energy could be transferred to the kinetic energy of
pressure, for less pressure energy could be transferred to the kinetic energy of the jets. Moreover, under
the jets. Moreover, under the constant inlet pressure, the nozzle configuration has varying effects on
the constant inlet pressure, the nozzle configuration has varying effects on the rock erosion ability of
the rock erosion ability of the SC-CO2 jet at different ambient pressures. More specifically,
the SC-CO2 jet at different ambient pressures. More specifically, compared with the convergent nozzle,
compared with the convergent nozzle, the maximum increments of rock erosion volume caused by
the maximum increments of rock erosion volume caused by the Laval-1 nozzle are about 23.8%, 21.8%,
the Laval-1 nozzle are about 23.8%, 21.8%, and 13.1%, corresponding to ambient pressures of 2, 10,
and 13.1%, corresponding to ambient pressures of 2, 10, and 18 MPa, respectively; while those caused by
and 18 MPa, respectively; while those caused by the Laval-2 nozzle are about 53.4%, 49.2%, and
the Laval-2 nozzle are about 53.4%, 49.2%, and 37.7%, respectively. For the ambient pressure of 26 MPa,
37.7%, respectively. For the ambient pressure of 26 MPa, curves of the Laval nozzles are always
curves of the Laval nozzles are always below that of the convergent nozzle, which indicates the weaker
below that of the convergent nozzle, which indicates the weaker erosion action of these two nozzles
erosion action of these two nozzles compared with that of the convergent nozzle. In addition, it is obvious
compared with that of the convergent nozzle. In addition, it is obvious from Figure 9 that the jets of
from Figure 9 that the jets of all the three nozzles have shorter optimal standoff distances at ambient
all the three nozzles have shorter optimal standoff distances at ambient pressure of 2 MPa than that
pressure of 2 MPa than that at relatively high ambient pressure.
at relatively high ambient pressure.
4.4. Effect of Nozzle Configuration Under Different Ambient Pressures and Constant Pressure Drop
4.4. Effect of Nozzle Configuration Under Different Ambient Pressures and Constant Pressure Drop
Figure 8 shows the influence of nozzle configuration on the rock erosion performance of the
Figure 8 shows the influence of nozzle configuration on the rock erosion performance of the
SC-CO2 jet under four ambient pressures and constant nozzle pressure drop, ∆P. In this group of
SC-CO2 jet under four ambient pressures and constant nozzle pressure drop, ΔP. In this group of
experiments, ∆P was set constant as 30 MPa, and the fluid temperature was set constant as 330 K.
experiments, ΔP was set constant as 30 MPa, and the fluid temperature was set constant as 330 K.
The standoff distances increased from 1 to 10. The ambient pressure was sequentially set at 2, 10, 18,
The standoff distances increased from 1 to 10. The ambient pressure was sequentially set at 2, 10, 18,
and 26 MPa.
and 26 MPa.
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 606 14 of 21
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 606 14 of 21

3.5 3.5
(a) Convergent nozzle (b) Convergent nozzle
3 3
Laval-1 nozzle Laval-1 nozzle
2.5 Laval-2 nozzle 2.5 Laval-2 nozzle

V, (cm3)
V, (cm3)

2 2
1.5 1.5
1 1
0.5 0.5
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
S S

(a) Pa = 2 MPa, ΔP = 30 MPa (b) Pa = 10 MPa, ΔP = 30 MPa

3.5 3.5
(c) Convergent nozzle (d) Convergent nozzle
3 3
Laval-1 nozzle Laval-1 nozzle
2.5 Laval-2 nozzle 2.5 Laval-2 nozzle

V, (cm3)
V, (cm3)

2 2
1.5 1.5
1 1
0.5 0.5
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
S S

(c) Pa = 18 MPa, ΔP = 30 MPa (d) Pa = 26 MPa, ΔP = 30 MPa

Figure 8. Effect of nozzle configuration on rock erosion volume of the SC-CO2 jet under different
Figure 8. Effect of nozzle configuration on rock erosion volume of the SC-CO2 jet under different
ambient pressures and constant ΔP: (a) 2 MPa; (b) 10 MPa; (c) 18 MPa; (d) 26 MPa.
ambient pressures and constant ∆P: (a) 2 MPa; (b) 10 MPa; (c) 18 MPa; (d) 26 MPa.
As is illustrated in Figure 8, the ambient pressure has a significant effect on the erosion ability
of Asall is illustrated
the in Figure
jets discharging from8, the ambient
different pressure
nozzles though hasthea significant
ΔP remainseffect on the
constant. erosion
The ability
maximum
of all the jets
erosion volumedischarging from
for the three different
nozzles nozzles
increases whenthough the ∆P
the ambient remains
pressure constant.
is increased from The
2 tomaximum
10 MPa.
erosion
Then volume
the further forincrease
the three nozzles pressure
of ambient increasesreduces
when thethe maximum
ambient pressure is increased
erosion volume. from 2 to
This suggests
that, when
10 MPa. Then thethe ambient pressureofisambient
further increase below the critical reduces
pressure pressurethe 7.38 MPa, the erosion
maximum increasing ambient
volume. This
pressure can enhance the rock erosion ability of the SC-CO jet, which is
suggests that, when the ambient pressure is below the critical pressure 7.38 MPa, the increasing
2 attributed to the increasing
densitypressure
ambient and diffusivity of SC-CO
can enhance 2 fluid
the rock with ability
erosion the increasing ambient
of the SC-CO pressure. The increase of
2 jet, which is attributed to the
ambientdensity
increasing pressure andabove the critical
diffusivity of SC-COpressure can weaken the erosion capability because of the
2 fluid with the increasing ambient pressure. The increase of
growing fluid resistance [11]. Moreover,
ambient pressure above the critical pressure can weaken when compared the to the convergent
erosion capabilitynozzle,
becausethe of maximum
the growing
erosion volumes of the Laval-1 nozzle show an increment
fluid resistance [11]. Moreover, when compared to the convergent nozzle, the maximum of 29.5%, 21.8%, 19.3%, and 16.4%,
erosion
corresponding to ambient pressures of 2, 10, 18, and 26 MPa, respectively; while those of the
volumes of the Laval-1 nozzle show an increment of 29.5%, 21.8%, 19.3%, and 16.4%, corresponding
Laval-2 nozzle show an increment of 54.6%, 49.2%, 45.6%, and 36.7%, respectively. These data
to ambient pressures of 2, 10, 18, and 26 MPa, respectively; while those of the Laval-2 nozzle show
suggest that, when ΔP is constant, the enhancement of rock erosion ability of the SC-CO2 jet caused
an increment of 54.6%, 49.2%, 45.6%, and 36.7%, respectively. These data suggest that, when ∆P
by the Laval nozzles decreases with the increase of ambient pressure. Besides, it can be observed in
is constant, the enhancement of rock erosion ability of the SC-CO2 jet caused by the Laval nozzles
the figure that the optimal standoff distances for the three nozzles at ambient pressure of 2 MPa are
decreases with the increase of ambient pressure. Besides, it can be observed in the figure that the
significantly shorter than that at ambient pressures of 10, 18, and 26 MPa.
optimal standoff distances for the three nozzles at ambient pressure of 2 MPa are significantly shorter
than
4.5.that at ambient
Effect pressures of 10,
of Nozzle Configuration 18, Different
Under and 26 MPa.
Fluid Temperatures
Figure
4.5. Effect 9 shows
of Nozzle the effects
Configuration of nozzle
Under configuration
Different on the erosion action of the jets under
Fluid Temperatures
various fluid temperatures. In this group of experiments, the inlet and ambient pressures were set
Figure at
constant 9 shows
40 andthe
10 effects of nozzle configuration
MPa, respectively. The standoff ondistance
the erosion actionfrom
increased of the1 jets under
to 10. The various
fluid
fluid temperatures. In this group of experiments, the
temperature was sequentially adjusted from 290 to 350 K. inlet and ambient pressures were set constant at
40 and 10 MPa, respectively. The standoff distance increased from 1 to 10. The fluid temperature was
sequentially adjusted from 290 to 350 K.
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 606 15 of 21
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 606 15 of 21

3.5 3.5
(a) Convergent nozzle (b) Convergent nozzle
3 3
Laval-1 nozzle Laval-1 nozzle
2.5 Laval-2 nozzle 2.5 Laval-2 nozzle
V, (cm3)

V, (cm3)
2 2
1.5 1.5
1 1
0.5 0.5
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
S S

(a) T = 290 K (b) T = 310 K

3.5 3.5
(c) Convergent nozzle (d)
3 3
Laval-1 nozzle
2.5 Laval-2 nozzle 2.5
V, (cm3)

2 V, (cm3) 2
1.5 1.5
1 1 Convergent nozzle
Laval-1 nozzle
0.5 0.5
Laval-2 nozzle
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
S S

(c) T = 330 K (d) T = 350 K

Figure 9. Effect of nozzle configuration on rock erosion volume of the SC-CO2 jet under different
Figure 9. Effect of nozzle configuration on rock erosion volume of the SC-CO2 jet under different
fluid temperatures.
fluid temperatures.
As can be seen from the curves in Figure 9, the fluid temperature not only affects the erosion
As can be
capability seenSC-CO
of the from 2the
jet, curves
but alsoinaffects
Figurethe 9, enhancement
the fluid temperature
of erosionnot only affects
performance the erosion
achieved by
capability
using theofLaval
the SC-CO 2 jet,
nozzles. but also affects
Specifically, the enhancement
the maximum of erosion
erosion volumes performance
for the three nozzles achieved
show anby
using the Laval
increasing trendnozzles.
with theSpecifically,
increasing thefluidmaximum
temperature. erosion
This volumes
indicates forthatthe
thethree
SC-CO nozzles
2 jet has show
a
stronger erosion capability at relatively higher temperatures. This is due to
an increasing trend with the increasing fluid temperature. This indicates that the SC-CO2 jet has a the fact that with the
growtherosion
stronger of fluid capability
temperature at the diffusivity
relatively of the
higher SC-CO2 fluid increases.
temperatures. This is due Whatto is more,
the fact the
thatincrease
with the
of diffusivity
growth is very significant
of fluid temperature when theoftemperature
the diffusivity the SC-CO2 increases from aWhat
fluid increases. liquidistemperature to a
more, the increase
of diffusivity is very significant when the temperature increases from a liquid temperaturethe
supercritical temperature, which results in the obvious enhancement of erosion ability of to a
SC-CO2 jettemperature,
supercritical when the temperature
which resultsincreases
in thefrom 290 toenhancement
obvious 310 K [9,11]. ofMoreover, compared
erosion ability of thewith the
SC-CO 2
jet commonly used convergent
when the temperature nozzle,
increases the290
from usetoof310
Laval-1 nozzle
K [9,11]. increasescompared
Moreover, the rock erosion
with thevolume
commonly by
12.5%, 21.8%, and 26.7%, respectively, corresponding to fluid temperature of 310, 330, and 350 K,
used convergent nozzle, the use of Laval-1 nozzle increases the rock erosion volume by 12.5%, 21.8%,
respectively; while the employ of Laval-2 nozzle increases the erosion volume by 37.2%, 49.2%, and
and 26.7%, respectively, corresponding to fluid temperature of 310, 330, and 350 K, respectively; while
53.7%, respectively. These data indicate that, with the increase of fluid temperature, the
the employ of Laval-2 nozzle increases the erosion volume by 37.2%, 49.2%, and 53.7%, respectively.
enhancement of rock erosion ability of the SC-CO2 jet by the Laval nozzles is more and more
These data indicate that, with the increase of fluid temperature, the enhancement of rock erosion
obvious though the inlet and ambient pressures remain constant. However, at temperature of 290 K,
ability of the SC-CO2 jet by the Laval nozzles is more and more obvious though the inlet and ambient
the convergent nozzle has better erosion performance than both the two Laval nozzles, which
pressures remain
means that the constant. However,
Laval nozzle cannotateffectively
temperature play ofits
290role
K, the convergent the
in accelerating nozzle hasCO
liquid better erosion
2 fluid at
performance than both
temperature of 290 K. the two Laval nozzles, which means that the Laval nozzle cannot effectively
play its role in accelerating the liquid CO2 fluid at temperature of 290 K.
5. Discussion
5. Discussion
From the experimental results, the nozzle configuration has significant effects on the rock
From characteristics
erosion the experimental results,
of the SC-CO the nozzle configuration has significant effects on the rock erosion
2 jet. How nozzle configuration influences rock erosion ability is
characteristics of the SC-CO2 jet. How nozzle configuration influences rock erosion ability is likely to
Appl. Sci. 2017,
2017, 7, 606 16 of 21

likely to depend on the nozzle configuration and the ratio of the inlet pressure and the ambient
depend onThis
pressure. the nozzle
is due configuration
to the fact that and thepressure
the ratio of the ratio inlet
canpressure
have large and effects
the ambient
on the pressure.
acceleration This
is due to the fact that the pressure ratio can have large effects
process of the SC-CO2 fluid inside the different nozzles which in turn directly affects the flow2 on the acceleration process of the SC-CO
fluid inside theas
characteristics different
well as nozzles which in turn
the impingement directly affects
characteristics of thethehigh-speed
flow characteristics
SC-CO2 jet. as well as the
To further
impingement characteristics of the
understand the mechanism of effects of nozzle configurationhigh-speed SC-CO 2 jet. To further understand the mechanism
on the rock erosion characteristics of of
effects of nozzle configuration on the
the SC-CO2 jet, a preliminary analysis was performed as follows.rock erosion characteristics of the SC-CO 2 jet, a preliminary
analysis was performed as follows.
According to the theory of erosion of materials by jet impact, when the fluid and the rock
According
specimens remain to the theory ofthe
unchanged, erosion
erosion of materials
intensity of by the
jet impact,
jet on the whenrockthe fluid andisthe
specimens rock
largely
specimens remain
dependent on theunchanged,
impact velocity the erosion
whichintensity
determines of the
the jetmagnitude
on the rock of specimens
the impact is largely
loading dependent
and the
on the impact velocity which determines the magnitude of
stress wave energy [44,45]. Moreover, the impact velocity is affected by the pressure ratio which the impact loading and the stress wave
energy [44,45]. Moreover, the impact velocity is affected
drives the fluid to flow in the nozzle, and the nozzle configuration which determines the by the pressure ratio which drives the
fluid to flowofinthe
acceleration thefluid
nozzle, inside and thethe nozzle
nozzle configuration
[26,27,29]. which determines
As described in Section 2.2, thewhen
acceleration
using nozzles of the
fluid inside the nozzle [26,27,29]. As described in Section 2.2,
with different configurations, the jet will have different impact velocities and structures under the when using nozzles with different
configurations,
same the jet willThe
pressure condition. have different
impact impact
velocity and velocities
structureand structures
of the jet can under
be judged the same pressure
and analyzed
condition.
by the critical The impact ratios.
pressure velocity and structure of the jet can be judged and analyzed by the critical
pressure ratios.
According to Equation (2), the calculated critical pressure ratio, R1, is 0.55 for the convergent
nozzle.According to Equation
Simultaneously, in (2),
lighttheofcalculated
Equations critical pressure
(3)–(5), ratio, R1 , is
the calculated 0.55 for
critical the convergent
pressure ratios, Rnozzle.
2, Ra1,
Simultaneously, in light of Equations (3)–(5), the calculated
and Ra2 are 0.13, 0.57, and 0.92, respectively. For the experiments on the effect of nozzle critical pressure ratios, R 2 , R a1 , and R a2 are
0.13, 0.57, and 0.92, respectively. For the experiments on the effect
configuration on the erosion ability of the SC-CO2 jet under various inlet pressures, the pressure of nozzle configuration on the erosion
ability were
ratios of theplotted
SC-COin 2 jet under10.
Figure various
As shown inlet in pressures,
the figure, theat pressure ratios were
inlet pressure of 20plotted
MPa, the in Figure
pressure 10.
As shown in the figure, at inlet pressure of 20 MPa, the pressure
ratio is very close to R1 and Ra1. For the convergent nozzle, the flow of the jet approaches ratio is very close to R 1 and R . For
a1 critical
the the
convergent
state and almost nozzle,no theshock
flow of the jet
wave is approaches
formed at this the critical
pressure state and almost
ratio; while for no shock
the Laval wavenozzles,
is formed at
this
this pressure ratio; while for the Laval nozzles, this will cause
will cause strong normal shock waves formed in the jet near the nozzle exit due to compression of strong normal shock waves formed in the
jet near
jet fluidtheby nozzle exit due
ambient fluid,to compression
resulting inof the jet fluid by ambient
largely reduced fluid, resulting
impact in the and
velocity largely thereduced
weak
impact velocity
impingement onandthethe weak impingement
specimens [26,27,29]. As onathe specimens
result, [26,27,29].nozzle
the convergent As a result, the convergent
has a greater erosion
nozzle hasthan
capability a greater erosion
the Laval capability
nozzles, than the
as shown in Laval
Figurenozzles,
6a. Besides,as shownwith in theFigure 6a. of
increase Besides, with the
inlet pressure,
increase of inlet pressure, for the convergent nozzle, the pressure
for the convergent nozzle, the pressure ratio is getting lower than the critical value, R1, resulting ratio is getting lower than the critical
in
value, R , resulting in more and more intense expansion of the jet
more and more intense expansion of the jet ejected from the nozzle exit [26,29]. This will make the
1 ejected from the nozzle exit [26,29]. This
will make the
jet cannot focusjet cannot
enough focus
energy enough energy to effectively
to effectively impact and impact
erode andtheerode the specimen,
specimen, which is which
likely is likely
to be
to bereason
the the reasonfor the forreduction
the reduction of the
of the optimal
optimal standoff
standoff distance,
distance, asas shownininFigure
shown Figure6b–d.
6b–d.For Forthe the Laval
Laval
nozzles, the
nozzles, the pressure
pressureratio ratioisisgettinggetting closer
closerto tothethe critical value,
critical R2 , with
value, R2, with increasing inletinlet
increasing pressure. This
pressure.
will reduce the intensity of the shock waves in the jet flow
This will reduce the intensity of the shock waves in the jet flow and enhance the accelerationand enhance the acceleration of SC-CO 2 fluid,
of
and thus
SC-CO enhance erosion capability of the jet [27,29] so that the maximum enhanced erosion volume
2 fluid, and thus enhance erosion capability of the jet [27,29] so that the maximum enhanced
increasesvolume
erosion when raising
increases the when
inlet pressure,
raising the as described
inlet pressure, in Section 4.2.
as described in Section 4.2.

0.8
Pa/Pi
0.6 R1
R

0.4 R2

Ra1
0.2
Ra2
0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Pi (MPa)

Figure 10. Distribution of pressure ratio under different inlet pressures at constant ambient pressure
Figure 10. Distribution of pressure ratio under different inlet pressures at constant ambient pressure
of 10 MPa.
of 10 MPa.

Moreover, for the experiments under various

various ambient
ambient pressure
pressure and
and constant
constant inlet
inlet pressure,
pressure,
the pressure ratio grows up with increasing
increasing ambient
ambient pressure,
pressure, as
as shown
shown in
in Figure
Figure11.
11.
 Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 606 17 of 21
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 606 17 of 21
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 606 17 of 21
1
1
0.8
Pa/Pi
0.8
0.6 Pa/Pi
R1

R R
0.6 R1
R2
0.4
0.4 R2
Ra1
0.2
Ra1
Ra2
0.2
0 Ra2
0 0 10 20 30
0 10 Pa (MPa) 20 30
Pa (MPa)
Figure 11. 11.
Figure Distribution of pressure
Distribution ratio
of pressure under
ratio different
under ambient
different pressure
ambient at constant
pressure inlet
at constant pressure
inlet pressure
of 40
FigureMPa.
11. Distribution
of 40 MPa. of pressure ratio under different ambient pressure at constant inlet pressure
of 40 MPa.
For the Laval nozzle, the increasing pressure ratio above R2 will cause the stronger and
For the Laval nozzle, the increasing pressure ratio above R2 will cause the stronger and stronger
stronger
For normal
the shock
Laval wavesthe
nozzle, near the nozzle exit [26,29]. Then theR2normal shockthe waves attenuate
normal shock waves near theincreasing
nozzle exit pressure
[26,29].ratioThen above
the normal will shock
cause waves stronger
attenuate andthe
the acceleration
stronger normal of the waves
shock SC-CO2near fluid,the thus,
nozzleresulting
exit in theThen
[26,29]. gradually
the decreasing
normal shock enhancement
waves attenuate of
acceleration of the SC-CO2 fluid, thus, resulting in the gradually decreasing enhancement of rock
rock erosion
theerosion ability
acceleration of the SC-CO jet by the Laval nozzle, as described in Section 4.3. At an ambient
ability of theSC-CO
SC-CO2jetfluid, thus, resulting indescribed
the gradually decreasing enhancement of
2
of the 2 by the Laval nozzle, as in Section 4.3. At an ambient pressure
pressure
rock of 26ability
erosion MPa the of pressure
the SC-CO ratio
2 jet byis greater
the Lavalthan Ra1; the
nozzle, as normal shock
described in waves4.3.
Section willAtlocate
an inside
ambient
of 26 MPa the pressure ratio is greater than Ra1 ; the normal shock waves will locate inside the Laval
the Laval nozzle
pressure andtheobviously reduce the impact velocity of the jetshock
[26,29], which results in the
nozzle ofand26obviously
MPa pressure
reduce the ratio is greater
impact than
velocity Ra1;jet
of the the[26,29],
normal which resultswaves inwill
the locate
weakerinside
erosion
weaker erosion
theability
Lavalof nozzleability of the
and nozzles Laval
obviously nozzles
reduce than that of the convergent nozzle, as shown in Figure
in 7d.
the Laval than that ofthetheimpact velocity
convergent of the
nozzle, as jet [26,29],
shown which7d.
in Figure results the
Furthermore,
Furthermore,
weaker erosion atability
ambient of pressure
the Laval of 2 MPa,
nozzles thethat
than pressure
of theratio is less than
convergent nozzle, R2 and
as far below
shown in R1. This
Figure 7d.
at ambient pressure of 2 MPa, the pressure ratio is less than R2 and far below R1 . This leads to intense
leads to intense
Furthermore, expansion
at the
ambient of the
pressure jets
ofthe ejected
2 MPa, from
the [27,29] the
pressure nozzles
ratio [27,29] and the smaller optimal
expansion of jets ejected from nozzles and the is less than
smaller R2 and
optimal far below
standoff R1. This
distances than
standoff
leads to distances
intense than that atofambient
expansion the jets pressures
ejected of 10,the
from 18, nozzles
and 26 MPa.[27,29] and the smaller optimal
that at ambient pressures of 10, 18, and 26 MPa.
Besides,
standoff for the
distances experiments under various of ambient pressure and constant ΔP, the pressure
Besides, forthan that at ambient
the experiments underpressures 10, 18, and
various ambient 26 MPa.
pressure and constant ∆P, the pressure ratio
ratio Besides,
increasesforwith the growth
the growth
experiments of ambient pressure
underpressure
variousunder under
ambient constant
pressure ΔP,
and asconstant
illustrated ΔP,in the
Figure 12.
pressure
increases with the of ambient constant ∆P, as illustrated in Figure 12.
ratio increases with the growth 1 of ambient pressure under constant ΔP, as illustrated in Figure 12.
1
0.8
Pa/Pi
0.8
0.6 Pa/Pi
R1
R R

0.6 R1
R2
0.4
0.4 R2
Ra1
0.2
Ra1
Ra2
0.2
0 Ra2
0 0 10 20 30
0 10 Pa (MPa) 20 30
Pa (MPa)
Figure 12. Pressure ratio as a function of ambient pressure under constant pressure difference
of 30 MPa.
Figure 12.12.
Pressure
Figure Pressureratio
ratio as
as aafunction
functionof of ambient
ambient pressure
pressure under
under constant
constant pressure
pressure difference
difference of 30 MPa.
of 30 MPa.
Similarly, the higher the pressure ratio is, the stronger the normal shock wave near the nozzle
Similarly, the higher the pressure ratio is, the stronger the normal shock wave near the nozzle
exit will be [26,29].
Similarly, As a result,
the higher the enhancement
the pressure decreases
ratio is, the strongerwith increasing
the normal shockambient pressure
wave near under
the nozzle
exit will be [26,29]. As a result, the enhancement decreases with increasing ambient pressure under
constant ΔP, as described in Section 4.4. Likewise, the intense expansion of
exit will be [26,29]. As a result, the enhancement decreases with increasing ambient pressure underthe SC-CO 2 jet at very
constant ∆P, as described in Section 4.4. Likewise, the intense expansion of the SC-CO2 jet at very low
low pressure
constant ΔP, as ratio [27,29] results
described in the
in Section 4.4.smaller
Likewise,optimal standoff
the intense distances
expansion ofatthe
ambient
SC-CO2pressure
jet at veryof
pressure ratio [27,29] results in the smaller optimal standoff distances at ambient pressure of 2 MPa,
2low
MPa, as shown
pressure in [27,29]
ratio Figure 8a.
results in the smaller optimal standoff distances at ambient pressure of
as shown in Figure 8a.
In as
2 MPa, addition,
shown for the experiments
in Figure 8a. under various fluid temperatures, the pressure ratio remains
In addition, for the experiments under various fluid temperatures, the pressure ratio remains
constant, however,
In addition, forthe
theenhancement
experiments of erosion
under ability
various of temperatures,
fluid the SC-CO2 jetthe by pressure
the Lavalratio
nozzles still
remains
constant, however, the enhancement of erosion ability of the SC-CO2 jet by the Laval nozzles still shows
shows
constant,an however,
increasingthe trend when the of
enhancement fluid temperature
erosion ability ofrises from 310
the SC-CO 2 jetto
by350
the K, as described
Laval nozzles stillin
an increasing trend when the fluid temperature rises from 310 to 350 K, as described in Section 4.5.
Section 4.5. This is mostly due to the fact that the acceleration of fluid in
shows an increasing trend when the fluid temperature rises from 310 to 350 K, as described in the divergent section of the
This is mostly due to the fact that the acceleration of fluid in the divergent section of the Laval nozzle
Laval
Sectionnozzle is taking
4.5. This is mostlyadvantage
due to the of the
fact compressibility of theoffluid
that the acceleration fluid[26,28]. The compressibility
in the divergent section of the of
is taking advantage of the compressibility of the fluid [26,28]. The compressibility of the SC-CO2
the SC-CO
Laval 2 fluid
nozzle increases
is taking as the temperature
advantage rises. As a of
of the compressibility result, the enhancement
the fluid keeps an upward
[26,28]. The compressibility of
tendency
the SC-COwith increasing
2 fluid increasesfluid temperature.
as the temperatureFurthermore, at fluid
rises. As a result, thetemperature
enhancement ofkeeps
290 Kan below
upwardthe
tendency with increasing fluid temperature. Furthermore, at fluid temperature of 290 K below the
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 606 18 of 21

fluid increases as the temperature rises. As a result, the enhancement keeps an upward tendency
with increasing fluid temperature. Furthermore, at fluid temperature of 290 K below the critical
temperature (304.13 K), the Laval nozzles have weaker erosion capability than that of the convergent
nozzle, as shown in Figure 9a, which seems attributed to the low compressibility of the liquid CO2 .
Another interesting phenomenon that can be observed in Figures 6–9 is that, the SC-CO2 jet
issuing from the Laval-1 nozzle always has a weaker erosion ability than that discharging from the
Laval-2 nozzle. This is likely due to the fact that the inner profile of the Laval-2 nozzle is much
smoother than that of the Laval-1 nozzle, as shown in Figure 3. For Laval-1 nozzle, the unsmooth
inner profile makes the flow inside the nozzle more turbulent and shock waves form at the corner [29],
which results in more energy loss of the flow. As a result, the erosion ability is reduced.

6. Conclusions
To improve erosion ability of the SC-CO2 jet for better practical applications, effects of nozzle
configuration on rock erosion were experimentally investigated with respect to the macroscopic
appearances and erosion volumes of eroded specimens. The main results are described as follows:

1. The macroscopic appearances of specimens eroded by SC-CO2 jets discharging from different
nozzles display similar typical “drilling type” damage. Small pieces of rock breakage can be
observed around the erosion pits caused by the Laval nozzles, while the pits eroded by the
convergent nozzle are relatively flat and smooth.
2. Compared with the convergent nozzle, the Laval nozzles can enhance the erosion ability of the
SC-CO2 jet more and more significantly with increasing inlet pressure; whilst at relatively lower
inlet pressure of 20 MPa, they reduce the erosion capacity.
3. Under constant inlet pressure, the maximum increments of erosion capability caused by the Laval
nozzles are reduced by the increasing ambient pressure. Besides, at ambient pressure of 26 MPa,
the Laval nozzles turn to weaken the erosion ability. When ∆P is constant, the enhancements
caused by the Laval nozzles decrease with growing ambient pressure.
4. As the fluid temperature rises, the enhancements of erosion capacity produced by the Laval
nozzles increase. Moreover, the Laval nozzles weaken the erosion intensity at a temperature of
290 K, which puts CO2 in liquid state.
5. The SC-CO2 jet issuing from the Laval-2 nozzle with a smooth inner profile always has a greater
erosion ability than that discharging from the Laval-1 nozzle.

Acknowledgments: This research is financially supported by the National Key Basic Research Program of China
(No. 2014CB239203), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 51474158) and the Hubei Provincial
Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 2016CFA088).
Author Contributions: Man Huang, Yong Kang, and Yi Hu conceived and designed the facilities and the
experiments; Man Huang, Yi Hu, Can Cai, and Feng Chen performed the experiments; Man Huang, Xiaochuan
Wang and Deng Li analyzed the data and made the analysis; Man Huang wrote the paper.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Nomenclatures
Pc critical pressure of CO2 , MPa
Tc critical temperature of CO2 , K
A cross-sectional area of the nozzle flow path, m3
Ma Mach number
v flow velocity, m/s
Pi inlet pressure, MPa
Pa ambient pressure, MPa
R1 , R2 , Ra1 , Ra2 critical pressure ratios
k adiabatic exponent
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 606 19 of 21

Pc1 critical ambient pressure of convergent nozzle, MPa

Pc2 critical ambient pressure of Laval nozzle, MPa
π(λe ) gas dynamics function
λe supersonic velocity coefficient
0
λe subsonic velocity coefficient
Rc ratio of the cement mortar
ρa density of the artificial core, kg/m3
σa compressive strength of the artificial core, MPa
Ea elastic modulus of the artificial core, GPa
υa Poisson’s ratio of the artificial core
a1 , da , la , Da , La size parameters of the convergent nozzle
ab1 , ab2 , db1 , db2 , lb2 , lb1 , Db , Lb size parameters of the Laval-1 nozzle
dc1 , dc2 , dc3 , lc1 , lc2 , lc3 , Dc , Lc size parameters of the Laval-2 nozzle
S dimensionless standoff distance
V erosion volume, mm3
ρs density of the salt, g/cm3
m1 , m2 mass of salt, kg
R ratio of the ambient pressure to the inlet pressure

References
1. Knez, Ž.; Markočič, E.; Leitgeb, M.; Primožič, M.; Hrnčič, M.K.; Škerget, M. Industrial applications of
supercritical fluids: A review. Energy 2014, 77, 235–243. [CrossRef]
2. Bellan, J. Supercritical (and subcritical) fluid behavior and modeling: Drops, streams, shear and mixing
layers, jets and sprays. Prog. Energ. Combust. 2000, 26, 329–366. [CrossRef]
3. Shen, Z.; Wang, H.; Li, G. Feasibility analysis of coiled tubing drilling with supercritical carbon dioxide.
Petrol. Explor. Dev. 2010, 37, 743–747. [CrossRef]
4. Gupta, A.P.; Gupta, A.; Langlinais, J. Feasibility of supercritical carbon dioxide as a drilling fluid for deep
underbalanced drilling operation. In Proceedings of SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,
Dallas, TX, USA, 9–12 October 2005. [CrossRef]
5. ALAdwani, F.A. Mechanistic Modeling of an Underbalanced Drilling Operation Utilizing Supercritical
Carbon Dioxide. Ph. D. Thesis, Louisiana State University, LA, USA, August 2007.
6. Middleton, R.S.; Carey, J.W.; Currier, R.P.; Hyman, J.D.; Kang, Q.; Karra, S.; Jiménez-Martínez, J.;
Porter, M.L.; Viswanathan, H.S. Shale gas and non-aqueous fracturing fluids: Opportunities and challenges
for supercritical CO2 . Appl. Energy 2015, 147, 500–509. [CrossRef]
7. Wang, H.; Li, G.; Shen, Z. A feasibility analysis on shale gas exploitation with supercritical carbon dioxide.
Energ. Source A 2012, 34, 1426–1435. [CrossRef]
8. Fang, C.; Chen, W.; Amro, M. Simulation study of hydraulic fracturing using super critical CO2 in shale.
In Proceedings of Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition and Conference, Abu Dhabi, UAE, 10–13
November 2014. [CrossRef]
9. Du, Y.K.; Wang, R.H.; Ni, H.J.; Li, M.K.; Song, W.Q.; Song, H.F. Determination of rock-breaking performance
of high-pressure supercritical carbon dioxide jet. J. Hydrodyn. 2012, 24, 554–560. [CrossRef]
10. Lv, Q.; Long, X.P.; Kang, Y.; Xiao, L.Z.; Wu, W. Numerical investigation on the expansion of supercritical
carbon dioxide jet. IOP Conf. Ser. Matesr. Sci. Eng. 2013, 52, 072011. [CrossRef]
11. Tian, S.C.; He, Z.G.; Li, G.S.; Wang, H.Z.; Shen, Z.H.; Liu, Q.L. Influences of ambient pressure and
nozzle-to-target distance on SC-CO2 jet impingement and perforation. J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 2016, 29,
232–242. [CrossRef]
12. Wang, H.Z.; Li, G.S.; Shen, Z.H.; Tian, S.C.; Sun, B.J.; He, Z.G.; Lu, P.Q. Experiment on rock breaking with
supercritical carbon dioxide jet. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 2015, 127, 305–310. [CrossRef]
13. Hu, Y.; Kang, Y.; Wang, X.; Li, X.; Huang, M.; Zhang, M. Experimental and theoretical analysis of a
supercritical carbon dioxide jet on wellbore temperature and pressure. J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 2016, 36 Pt A,
108–116. [CrossRef]
14. Zhou, Z.; Lu, Y.; Tang, J.; Zhang, X.; Li, Q. Numerical simulation of supercritical carbon dioxide jet at well
bottom. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2017, 121, 210–217. [CrossRef]
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 606 20 of 21

15. Huang, M.; Kang, Y.; Long, X.; Wang, X.; Hu, Y.; Li, D.; Zhang, M. Effects of a nano-silica additive on the rock
erosion characteristics of a SC-CO2 jet under various operating conditions. Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 153. [CrossRef]
16. He, Z.G.; Li, G.S.; Wang, H.Z.; Shen, Z.H.; Tian, S.C.; Lu, P.Q.; Guo, B. Numerical simulation of the abrasive
supercritical carbon dioxide jet: The flow field and the influencing factors. J. Hydrodyn. 2016, 28, 238–246.
[CrossRef]
17. Wang, H.Z.; Li, G.S.; Tian, S.C.; Cheng, Y.X.; He, Z.G.; Yu, S.J. Flow field simulation of supercritical carbon
dioxide jet: Comparison and sensitivity analysis. J. Hydrodyn. 2015, 27, 210–215. [CrossRef]
18. Wang, R.H.; Huo, H.J.; Huang, Z.Y.; Song, H.F.; Ni, H.J. Experimental and numerical simulations of bottom
hole temperature and pressure distributions of supercritical CO2 jet for well-drilling. J. Hydrodyn. 2014, 26,
226–233. [CrossRef]
19. Kolle, J.J. Coiled-tubing drilling with supercritical carbon dioxide. In Preceeding of the SPE/CIM
International Conference on Horizontal Well Technology, Calgary, AB, Canada, 6–8 November 2000.
[CrossRef]
20. Huang, F.; Lu, Y.; Tang, J.; Ao, X.; Jia, Y. Reasearch on erosion of shale impacted by supercritical carbon
dioxide jet. Chin. J. Rock Mech. Eng. 2015, 34, 787–794. [CrossRef]
21. He, Z.; Li, G.; Tian, S.; Wang, H.; Shen, Z.; Li, J. SEM analysis on rock failure mechanism by supercritical CO2
jet impingement. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 2016, 146, 111–120. [CrossRef]
22. Du, Y.; Wang, R.; Ni, H. Rock-breaking experimental study on the supercritical carbon dioxide swirl jet.
J. Basic Sci. Eng. 2013, 21, 1078–1083. [CrossRef]
23. Tian, S.; Zhang, Q.; Li, G.; He, Z.; Liu, H.; Liu, X. Experimental study on rock-erosion features with conbieng
swirling and round jet of supercritical caibon dioxde. Explos. Shock 2016, 36, 189–197. [CrossRef]
24. Cheng, Y.; Li, G.; Shen, Z.; Wang, H.; Li, J. Impact pressure and parametric sensivity analysis of supercritical
CO2 jet. Acta Pet. Sin. 2014, 35, 765–770. [CrossRef]
25. Long, X.; Liu, Q.; Ruan, X.; Kang, Y.; Lyu, Q. Numerical investigation of the flow of supercritical carbon
dioxide injected into the bottom hole during drilling with special emphasis on the real gas effects. J. Nat. Gas
Sci. Eng. 2016, 34, 1044–1053. [CrossRef]
26. Zhao, C.; Jiang, Y. Gas Jet Dynamics; Beijing Institute of Technology Press: Beijing, China, 1998; pp. 37–60,
107–144.
27. Chapman, A.J.; Walker, W.F. Introductory Gas Dynamics; Holt, Rinehart and Winston: New York, NY, USA,
1971.
28. Shapiro, A.H. The Dynamics and Thermodynamics of Compressible Fluid Flow; John Wiley & Sons: New York,
NY, USA, 1953.
29. Courant, R.; Friedrichs, K.O. Supersonic Flow and Shock Waves; Springer Science & Business Media: Dordrecht,
The Netherlands, 1999; Volume 21.
30. Zaman, K. Asymptotic spreading rate of initially compressible jets - experiment and analysis. Phys. Fluids
1998, 10, 2652–2660. [CrossRef]
31. Wang, X.; Heberlein, J.; Pfender, E.; Gerberich, W. Effect of nozzle configuration, gas pressure, and gas type
on coating properties in wire arc spray. J. Therm. Spray Technol. 1999, 8, 565–575. [CrossRef]
32. Kainz, S.; Brinkmann, A.; Leitner, W.; Pfaltz, A. Iridium-catalyzed enantioselective hydrogenation of imines
in supercritical carbon dioxide. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1999, 121, 6421–6429. [CrossRef]
33. Koch, D.; Leitner, W. Rhodium-catalyzed hydroformylation in supercritical carbon dioxide. J. Am. Chem. Soc.
1998, 120, 13398–13404. [CrossRef]
34. Wood, C.D.; Cooper, A.I. Synthesis of macroporous polymer beads by suspension polymerization using
supercritical carbon dioxide as a pressure-adjustable porogen. Macromolecules 2001, 34, 5–8. [CrossRef]
35. Eslamian, M.; Pophali, A.; Bussmann, M.; Tran, H. Breakup of brittle deposits by supersonic air jet: The
effects of varying jet and deposit characteristics. Int. J. Impact Eng. 2009, 36, 199–209. [CrossRef]
36. Man, H.C.; Duan, J.; Yue, T.M. Dynamic characteristics of gas jets from subsonic and supersonic nozzles for
high pressure gas laser cutting. Opt. Laser Technol. 1998, 30, 497–509. [CrossRef]
37. Yi, S.H.; Zhao, Y.X.; He, L.; Zhang, M.L. Supersonic and Hypersonic Nozzle Design; National Defense Industry
Press: Beijing, China, 2013; pp. 11–24.
38. Hocheng, H.; Weng, C. Hydraulic erosion of concrete by a submerged jet. J. Mater. Eng. Perform. 2002, 11,
256–261. [CrossRef]
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 606 21 of 21

39. Hu, D.; Li, X.; Tang, C.; Kang, Y. Analytical and experimental investigations of the pulsed air–water jet.
J. Fluid. Struct. 2015, 54, 88–102. [CrossRef]
40. Wei, S. Gas Dynamics (Part 2); National Defense Industry Press: Beijing, China, 1984; pp. 55–122.
41. Wu, R.L.; Wang, Z.Y. Design of Wind Tunnel; Beihang University Press: Beijing, China, 1985; pp. 138–171.
42. Gnirk, P.F.; Grams, W.H. Rock drilling with pulsed high-velocity water jets. In Proceedings of the 14th US
Symposium on Rock Mechanics (USRMS), University Park, PA, USA, 11–14 June 1972.
43. Daniel, I.M. Experimental studies of water jet impact on rock and rocklike materials. In Proceedings of the
3rd International Symposium on Jet Cutting Technology, Chicago, IL, USA, 11–13 May 1976; pp. 27–46.
44. Lu, Y.; Huang, F.; Liu, X.; Ao, X. On the failure pattern of sandstone impacted by high-velocity water jet.
Int. J. Impact Eng. 2015, 76, 67–74. [CrossRef]
45. Momber, A.W. Deformation and fracture of rocks due to high-speed liquid impingement. Int. J. Fract. 2004,
130, 683–704. [CrossRef]

© 2017 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).