polymers

Article
Rheological Model and Transition Velocity Equation
of a Polymer Solution in a Partial Pressure Tool
Bin Huang 1, *, Xinyu Hu 1 , Cheng Fu 1,2, *, Chongjiang Liu 3 , Ying Wang 4 and Xu An 5
1 Key Laboratory of Enhanced Oil Recovery (Northeast Petroleum University), Ministry of Education, College
of Petroleum Engineering, Northeast Petroleum University, Daqing 163318, China; 15204593438@163.com
2 Post-Doctoral Scientific Research Station, Daqing Oilfield Company, Daqing 163413, China
3 Research Institute of Production Engineering, Daqing Oilfield, Daqing 163453, China;
liuchongjiang@petrochina.com.cn
4 Aramco Asia, Beijing 100102, China; ying.wang.1@aramcoasia.com
5 NO.2 Oil Production Company, Daqing Oilfield, Daqing 163453, China; anxu212@126.com
* Correspondence: huangbin111@163.com (B.H.); cheng_fu111@163.com (C.F.)




Received: 27 March 2019; Accepted: 8 May 2019; Published: 10 May 2019


Abstract: In order to solve the problem of the low production degree of oil layers caused by an
excessively large permeability difference between layers during polymer flooding, we propose partial
pressure injection technology using a partial pressure tool. The partial pressure tool controls the
injection pressure of a polymer solution through a throttling effect to improve the oil displacement
effect in high- and low-permeability reservoirs. In order to analyze the influence of the partial pressure
tool on the rheological property of the polymer solution, a physical model of the tool is established,
the rheological equation of the polymer solution in the partial pressure tool is established according
to force balance analysis, the transition velocity equation for the polymer solution is established based
on the concept of stability factor, and the influence of varying the structural parameters of the partial
pressure tool on the rheological property of the polymer solution is analyzed. The results show that
the pressure drop of the polymer solution increases with the decrease of the front groove angle of
the partial pressure tool (from 60◦ to 30◦ ), reaching a maximum of 1.77 MPa at a front groove angle
of 30◦ . Additionally, the pressure drop of the polymer solution increases with the decrease of the
outer cylinder radius (from 25 to 24 mm), reaching a maximum of 1.32 MPa at a radius of 24 mm.
However, the apparent viscosity of the polymer solution before and after flowing through the partial
pressure tool does not change for any of the studied parameters. These research results are of great
significance to research on partial pressure injection technology and enhanced oil recovery.

Keywords: partial pressure tool; rheological equation; transition velocity; pressure drop;
apparent viscosity

1. Introduction
With the development of oilfields, many alternatives have been taken to improve their production
efficiency. The process of polymer flooding in oilfields can improve the injection profile to a certain
extent. However, due to the influence of various factors, such as reservoir heterogeneity and well-pattern
perfection, interlayer contradiction has not been fundamentally solved. Under the general injection
mode, high-molecular-weight polymer enters more into high-permeability reservoirs and less into
thin and poor reservoirs, which greatly reduces the permeability and production degree of thin and
poor reservoirs [1–3]. However, the direct injection of low-molecular-weight polymer solution can
increase the degree of control of polymer flooding, although the overall flooding effect will be affected
to some extent as the flooding effect of the high-permeability layer decreases. In order to improve the

Polymers 2019, 11, 855; doi:10.3390/polym11050855 www.mdpi.com/journal/polymers

Polymers 2019, 11, 855 2 of 19

overall development effect of polymer flooding and improve interlayer contradiction, Daqing Oilfield
has proposed a partial pressure polymer injection process. The main technical idea is to use a partial
pressure tool to reduce the injection pressure of polymer solution while ensuring the oil displacement
effect of high-molecular-weight polymer in the high-permeability layer, so as to control the injection
amount in the high-permeability layer, make the polymer solution enter the low-permeability layer to
produce oil displacement, and improve the overall development effect.
Meyers [4] carried out polymer flooding experiments in two newly developed wells by means
of chemically enhanced oil recovery in Kottrabathe oilfield. The results show that the oil recovery
efficiency of polymer flooding in the total affected area was 60.6% and the oil recovery efficiency of
water flooding in the total affected area was 39.9%. Clark [5] conducted polymer flooding research
in the West Kiehl oilfield, and conducted oil displacement tests by means of mobility control, profile
modification, and the injection of combined mobility control profile. The experiments showed that
polymer flooding successfully displaced residual oil that could not be displaced during water flooding,
and the oil recovery ratio increased from 11% to 40%. An oil displacement experiment was carried out
by injecting a high-concentration polymer solution into heterogeneous sediment cores, Denney [6]
concluded from experiments that when the pressure gradient and interfacial tension of oil layers
remain unchanged, polymer flooding can achieve a production efficiency that is 23.87% higher than
that of water flooding under the same conditions. Using simulation and core flooding for enhanced
oil recovery screening, Wassmuth et al. [7] proposed that in heavy oil reservoirs, polymer flooding
is the preferred enhanced oil recovery technology after primary oil recovery and water flooding.
Additionally, when the water cut reaches 95% after water injection, polymer flooding can improve the
oil recovery ratio by 20%.
Some scholars have concluded that polymer flooding can only expand the volume of the flood,
and cannot improve the efficiency of oil displacement, so that the oil recovery value is lower [8]. The
reason for this conclusion was that they considered the polymer solution as a Newtonian fluid [9,10].
However, in fact, polymer solutions are non-Newtonian fluids. Enhanced oil recovery is mainly
allowed by mechanisms which increase the viscosity of, and reduce the permeability of, the water
phase, which reduces the fluidity of the water phase and the fluidity ratio of water flooding, and
thus improves the sweep efficiency of the flooding and achieves the purpose of enhanced oil recovery.
Additionally, due to its rheological properties, the polymer exerts a stretching effect on the oil film or
oil droplets in the flow process, which increases the carrying force and improves the micro-oil washing
efficiency of the polymer solution. Therefore, it is of great significance to study the rheology of polymer
solutions for the polymer flooding injection process.
Yin et al. [11] simulated the flow characteristics of polymer solutions at both ends of the pores in
a reservoir by means of numerical simulation, drew contour lines of polymer solution velocity and
flow function, and quantitatively calculated the microscale scanning efficiency of the solutions. The
simulation results show that the sweep area and displacement efficiency increase with the increase
of the viscoelasticity of the polymer solution. Compared with Newtonian fluids, the viscoelasticity
of polymer solutions can improve the displacement efficiency of pores. By establishing rheological
equations, Lee [12] elaborated that the rheological property of a polymer solution for enhanced oil
recovery depends on the molecular properties, concentration, salinity, shear rate, and temperature
of the polymer. Rheological measurements were carried out using commonly used polymers, and
rheological model parameters related to these variables were determined. The results show that
with increasing temperature, salinity, and shear rate, the concentration and viscosity of the polymers
decreased. At the same time, the oscillatory rheological characteristics of the polymers were measured
in order to determine the flow behavior of the polymers in a reservoir rock. Silva [13] studied the
rheological behavior of different polymer solutions in porous media through laboratory tests of fluid
flow in porous media and analysis of fluid rheology and the hydrodynamic diameters of polymer
molecules. Due to the increasing hydrodynamic volume of the polymer during the shearing and
Polymers 2019, 11, 855 3 of 19

dilution of the polymer solution, the adsorption of the polymer solution was increased, indicating that
polymer flooding can improve oil recovery in oilfields.
The above mentioned experiments of polymer flooding and the rheology of polymer solutions
show that polymer flooding can improve the oil recovery ratio, and that the flooding effect is higher
than that of water flooding. However, the relationship between the permeability of different oil layers
is not considered in the process of polymer injection. High-molecular-weight polymer solutions have
better oil displacement effects in high-permeability oil layers; however, they have poor oil displacement
effects in low-permeability oil layers and limited degrees of enhanced oil recovery. Therefore, in order
to improve such interlayer contradictions, Li et al. [14] proposed separate polymer flooding injection
technology including concentric separate injection technology, eccentric separate injection technology,
and stratified separate injection technology according to the development needs of different stages and
different displacement objects in the Daqing Oilfield in order to adjust the polymer injection pressure
and control the polymer injection volume. The experimental results show that the recovery ratio in the
central well was increased by 5.08% on the basis of the original polymer flooding effect. Additionally,
based on a separate polymer injection technology, Geng et al. [15] put forward intermittent injection,
annular depressurization injection, and concentric injection of slender tubes. The pressure drop of the
polymer solution reached 2.4 MPa and the control range of the polymer solution injection volume was
greatly improved.
Although partial pressure injection technology and matching tools are proposed, which can
adjust the injection pressure of polymer solution and improve the injection relationship between oil
layers, these methods, while adjusting the pressure, cause a large reduction in viscosity when the
polymer solution is injected into a high-permeability oil layer, due to shearing action. When a high
pressure drop occurs, the viscosity reduction can be as high as 40% [15], which seriously affects the oil
displacement effect of the polymer in high- and low-permeability oil layers, preventing a maximum oil
recovery rate. Therefore, it is necessary to establish a partial pressure tool that can generate a large
drop in the pressure of the polymer solution while minimizing the viscosity reduction.
The analysis of the rheological characteristics of non-Newtonian fluids, such as polymer solutions,
in specific tools, and the method of establishing the equation, can be used to deduce the rheological
equation of a polymer solution in partial pressure tools, which is helpful for analyzing the influence
of partial pressure tools on pressure drops in, and the apparent viscosity of, a polymer solution.
Wu et al. [16] used the White–Metzner constitutive model to describe the rheological properties of a
polymer solution. A finite-element method was used to numerically solve the flow of the polymer
solution through a single transverse groove, the pore pressure under different Deborah numbers was
obtained, and the influence of fluid characteristic parameters and groove geometry on pore pressure
was analyzed. Huang et al. [17] established the rheological equation of a polymer solution in a mass
separation tool according to the tensor form of the rheological equation and the local perturbation
theory, and deduced the formula of the optimal injection speed of the polymer solution. Malkus [18]
numerically solved the flow of a polymer fluid through a transverse groove by an improved nonlinear
iterative method, and analyzed the relationship between the first normal stress difference and the pore
pressure. Wang [19] established the governing equation for the unsteady flow of a non-Newtonian
fluid in the eccentric annuli of an inner tube. The calculation formula for the pressure distribution on
the wall of the inner tube was given. Taking a polymer solution as an example, the governing equation
and the calculation formula above equations were numerically solved and calculated by the finite
difference method.
Hidema [20] studied the relationship between the tensile rheological properties of polymer
solutions and the turbulent deformation of the solutions, and determined that there are three kinds of
flow states in the two-dimensional turbulent flow of a polymer solution, and that the vortex shedding
in the two-dimensional flow is divided into three types, which are affected by the relaxation time of the
polymer solution. Furthermore, research by Wouter [21] showed that unsteady turbulence of polymer
solutions unsteady turbulence shows general characteristics before reaching a dynamic equilibrium
Polymers 2019, 11, 855 4 of 19

state. The nonequilibrium correction of the Kolmogorov spectrum can explain the observed universal
nonequilibrium scale, and can be used to establish a wide range of unsteady turbulence models.
As the above research shows, the technologies related to polymer flooding are very mature;
however, there are few researches related to improving interlayer contradiction, controlling the injection
amount of polymer solution in high- and low-permeability oil layers, and further improving the oil
displacement effect of polymer flooding. Only the Daqing Oilfield has proposed the concept of partial
pressure polymer solution injection technology to solve this problem. Existing theories and tools
can be used to adjust the pressure of polymer solutions; however, they produce large reductions in
the viscosity of the solutions and affect their oil displacement effect. Additionally, the rheological
properties of polymer solutions in partial pressure tools have not yet been studied. The establishment
of mathematical models for the rheological properties of polymer solutions in partial pressure tools
is relatively single sample, lacks theoretical basis, and does not consider the problem of fluid state
transition. Therefore, the establishment of rheological models of partial pressure tools that produce
large pressure drops and low viscosity reductions of polymer solutions is extremely important for
enhanced oil recovery in oilfields.
In this paper, a physical model of a partial pressure tool is established, and the rheological equation
of a polymer solutions in an annular flow channel and throttling section of the partial pressure tool is
deduced according to stress balance analysis. According to the theory of turbulence and dissipation
effect, and through numerical simulation of the polymer solution in the partial pressure tool, the
concept of transition velocity is proposed, and the transition velocity equation is deduced based on the
concept of stability factor. According to the production situation of the oilfield, a polymer solution
with a molecular weight of 1600 × 104 and a concentration of 1000 mg/L is prepared, and shear testing
and numerical fitting are carried out. Relevant parameters are substituted into the rheological equation
in order to obtain the pressure and apparent viscosity values of the polymer solution under different
structural parameters of the partial pressure tool. The degree of influence of the partial pressure tool
on the pressure and apparent viscosity of the polymer solution with different structural parameters is
analyzed, and the optimal structural parameters are obtained. Moreover, the transition velocity of the
polymer solution in the partial pressure tool is calculated in order to judge the flow state.

2. Methodology

2.1. Physical Experiments

Experimental chemicals:
The polymer used to prepare the polymer solution in this experiment was partially hydrolyzed
polyacrylamide (HPAM) with a relative molecular mass of 1600 × 104 , a degree of hydrolysis of 26%,
and a mass fraction of 90.17%. The HPAM was provided by the Daqing Oilfield Production Technology
Research Institute. The experimental water used for preparing the polymer solution was provided by
the No. 1 Oil Production Plant of the Daqing Oilfield; a filter membrane was required before use. The
composition of the experimental water is shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Chemical composition of the experimental water.

Chemical Composition Na+ , K+ HCO3 − CO3 2− SO4 2− Cl− Mg2+ Ca2+

Concentration(mg/L) 132.53 52.65 22.38 25.17 28.72 7.69 14.28

Experimental instruments:
YP-B2003 electronic balance (Huaguang instrument factory, Liaoyang, China); EURO-ST D S25
agitator (IKA, Staufen, Germany); RS-150 rheometer (IKA, Staufen, Germany).
Experimental method:
Polymers 2019, 11, 855 5 of 19
Polymers 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 19

Polymers 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 19

cylinder, and the temperature was kept constant for 20 min so that the temperature of each point of
1. The YP-B2003 electronic balance was used to measure dry powder of the HPAM and experimental
the sample could reach the testing temperature;
cylinder,
waterand the temperature
in proportion was kept
to prepare constant
a polymer for 20 with
solution min so that the temperature
a concentration of each point of
of 1000 mg/L;
4. The shear rate was set from 1 to 1000 s−1, the rheometer was started, and the rheometer’s
the sample
2. could reach
The polymer motherthe liquor
testingwas temperature;
dissolved and agitated using the EURO-ST D S25 electronic
viscosity option was selected for testing. When −1 the indication viscosity value was basically stable,
4. The shear
agitator at 250rate
r/minwasforset
2.5from
h and1thento 1000
left tos stand
, the forrheometer was started,
2 h to ensure and the
full dispersion of rheometer’s
the solution
recording was started, and then recording was performed every 5 min. Four viscosity values were
viscosity option was selected
molecules and a uniform system;for testing. When the indication viscosity value was basically stable,
recorded continuously, and if the deviations between the first value and the three other values did
recording
3. was started, circulation
The thermostatic and then recording
system was wasstarted
performedin theevery
RS-150 5 min. Four viscosity
rheometer, heated tovalues
45 C,were
◦ and
not exceed 5%, the system was considered to have reached dynamic equilibrium.
recorded continuously,
put in homeostasis and if min.
for 15 the deviations
The prepared between the was
solution first put
value and
into the three other
a preheated values
measuring did
outer
not exceed 5%,and
cylinder, thethe
system was considered
temperature was kept toconstant
have reached dynamic equilibrium.
Table 1. Chemical composition offor
the20experimental
min so that the temperature of each point
water.
of the sample could reach the testing temperature;
Table 1. Chemical+, K+ composition 3− of the experimental
SO42−water.
4. Chemical
The shearComposition
rate was set from 1 Na to 1000 s−1 , HCO
the rheometer CO 32−
was started, Cl− rheometer’s
and the Mg2+ viscosity
Ca2+
Concentration(mg/L)
option was
Chemical selected for testing.
Composition 132.53
Na When
+, K+ the HCO52.653−
indication 22.38
viscosity
CO32− value 25.17
SO42−was 28.72
basically
Cl− 7.692+ recording
stable,
Mg 14.28
Ca2+
was started, and then recording
Concentration(mg/L) was performed
132.53 52.65 every22.38
5 min. Four
25.17viscosity values7.69
28.72 were recorded
14.28
2.2. Laminar Flow Model
continuously, andofif the
thePolymer Solution
deviations in thethe
between Partial
firstPressure Toolthe three other values did not
value and
exceed Flow
2.2. Laminar 5%, the system
Model of thewas considered
Polymer Solutionto in
have reachedPressure
the Partial dynamic equilibrium.
Tool
2.2.1. Physical Model of the Partial Pressure Tool
2.2.
2.2.1.Laminar
orderFlow
InPhysical Model
toModel of of
facilitatethethePartial
the Polymer Solution
Pressure
application and in
Tool the Partial Pressure
popularization Tool
of polymer flooding partial pressure
injection technology in oilfield production, it is of great significance to study the partial pressure tool
2.2.1.InPhysical
order to facilitate
Model of the the application
Partial PressureandToolpopularization of polymer flooding partial pressure
model and the rheological characteristics of polymer solutions in the partial pressure tool. First, a
injection technology in oilfield production, it is of great significance to study the partial pressure tool
physicalIn order
model toof
facilitate the pressure
the partial application
tooland popularization
is established of polymer
for this research.flooding
Figures partial
1 and 2pressure
show a
model and the rheological characteristics of polymer solutions in the partial pressure tool. First, a
three‐dimensional and a two‐dimensional representation of the partial pressure pressure
injection technology in oilfield production, it is of great significance to study the partial tool
tool model,
physical model of the partial pressure tool is established for this research. Figures 1 and 2 show a
model and the rheological characteristics of polymer solutions in the partial pressure tool. First, a
respectively.
three‐dimensional and a two‐dimensional representation of the partial pressure tool model,
physical model of the partial pressure tool is established for this research. Figures 1 and 2 show a
respectively.
three-dimensional and a two-dimensional representation of the partial pressure tool model, respectively.

Figure 1. Three‐dimensional representation of the partial pressure tool model.

Figure 1. Three-dimensional representation of the partial pressure tool model.
Figure 1. Three‐dimensional representation of the partial pressure tool model.

Figure 2.
Figure Two-dimensional representation
2. Two‐dimensional representation of
of the
the partial
partial pressure
pressure tool model.

The working Figure 2. Two‐dimensional representationisoftothe partialthe

pressure toolofmodel.
The workingprinciple
principleofofthethe
partial pressure
partial tooltool
pressure reduce
is to reduce pressure
the pressurethe polymer solution
of the polymer
by changing
solution the flow area.
by changing Therefore,
the flow a multistage
area. Therefore, model withmodel
a multistage a variable
withcross-section was designed
a variable cross‐section to
was
The working principle of the partial pressure tool is to reduce the pressure of the polymer
produce a small throttling loss of the polymer solution under a section of a throttling
designed to produce a small throttling loss of the polymer solution under a section of a throttling unit. In this way,
solution by changing the flow area. Therefore, a multistage model with a variable cross‐section was
multiple
unit. throttling
In this units are
way, multiple combined
throttling together,
units and the together,
are combined final cumulative
and thevalue of polymer value
final cumulative solution
of
designed to produce a small throttling loss of the polymer solution under a section of a throttling
pressure drop meets the throttling loss. The throttling section forms a flow channel
polymer solution pressure drop meets the throttling loss. The throttling section forms a flow channel with the inner
unit. In this way, multiple throttling units are combined together, and the final cumulative value of
wall of
with thethe outer
inner cylinder.
wall In order
of the outer to reduce
cylinder. the shear
In order stress the
to reduce of the polymer
shear stresssolution at the minimum
of the polymer solution
polymer solution pressure drop meets the throttling loss. The throttling section forms a flow channel
at the minimum cross‐section area, the convex part of the throttling section is designed in a circular
with the inner wall of the outer cylinder. In order to reduce the shear stress of the polymer solution
at the minimum cross‐section area, the convex part of the throttling section is designed in a circular
Polymers 2019, 11, 855 6 of 19
Polymers 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 19

arc shape, area,

cross-section and in theorder to part
convex makeofthe
the solution
throttlingflow evenly
section in the partial
is designed pressure
in a circular arc tool,
shape,the
andpartial
in
pressure tool is designed axisymmetrically. An annular flow channel is included at the front
order to make the solution flow evenly in the partial pressure tool, the partial pressure tool is designed and back
of the throttlingAn
axisymmetrically. section so that
annular flowthe solution
channel is in a fully
is included developed
at the front andsection
back ofinthe
thethrottling
inlet section andsothe
section
outlet section.
that the solution is in a fully developed section in the inlet section and the outlet section.

2.2.2.
2.2.2. Flow
Flow Model
Model of of
thethe Polymer
Polymer Solution
Solution in in
thethe Annular
Annular Flow
Flow Channel
Channel of of
thethe Partial
Partial Pressure
Pressure Tool
Tool
The
The polymer
polymer solutionused
solution usedininthis
thisstudy
studyisisaanon-Newtonian
non‐Newtonian fluid. Furthermore,
Furthermore,experiments
experimentson
onthe
theeffect
effectofofpolymer
polymerdegradation
degradation onon polymer
polymer flooding
flooding in heterogeneous
in heterogeneous reservoirs
reservoirs[22][22]
andand
the the
effect
of mechanical degradation of the polymer solution on polymer injection performance
effect of mechanical degradation of the polymer solution on polymer injection performance in porous in porous
media
media [23]
[23] have
have proved
proved that
that polymer
polymer solutions
solutions areare power‐law
power-law fluids
fluids in actual
in actual situations.
situations.
Moreover,
Moreover, thethe designed
designed partial
partial pressure
pressure tool
tool is multistage,
is multistage, and
and thethe degree
degree of of
thethe shearing
shearing effect
effect
on the polymer solution is limited. In
on the polymer solution is limited. In the range of controlled shear rates, the polymer solution in thethe
the range of controlled shear rates, the polymer solution in
process
process of of passing
passing through
through thethe partial
partial pressure
pressure tooltool is considered
is considered to be
to be a power‐law
a power-law fluid.
fluid.
According
According to to
thethe shear
shear test,
test, thethe relationship
relationship curve
curve between
between polymer
polymer solution
solution viscosity
viscosity andand shear
shear
rate are plotted in Figure
rate are plotted in Figure 3. 3.

Figure Rheological
3. 3.
Figure curve
Rheological of of
curve thethe
polymer solution
polymer with
solution a polymer
with concentration
a polymer of of
concentration 1000 mg/L.
1000 mg/L.

Figure
Figure3 shows
3 shows that thethe
that polymer
polymersolution conforms
solution conformsto to
thethe
flow
flowcharacteristics of of
characteristics a power-law
a power‐law
fluid. That is, with increasing shear rate, the viscosity decreases. Thus, the polymer solution
fluid. That is, with increasing shear rate, the viscosity decreases. Thus, the polymer solution is a power
is a
law fluid.law fluid.
power
Constitutive
Constitutive Equation
Equationof of
Polymer
PolymerSolution:
Solution:
 n1 1
. τ
f (τ) =f (γ )=
   ( ) n (1)(1)
k k
where
where τ is the
is the shear
shear stress,
stress, in Pa;
in Pa; k is
k is the the consistency
consistency coefficient
coefficient to characterize
to characterize the viscosity
the viscosity of the of
the polymer
polymer solution, solution,
in Pa·s;inn isPa∙s; n is the rheological
the rheological index of theindex of theindicating
solution, solution,the indicating
degree tothe degree
which the to
and  strain
.
which
flow the flow characteristics
characteristics deviate from deviate from afluid;
a Newtonian and γ isfluid;
Newtonian the average is therate, in s−1strain
average . rate, in
s−1.Before the polymer solution enters the throttling section of the partial pressure tool, the solution
flows inBefore
the annular flow channel,
the polymer solution as shown
enters the in Figure 4.
throttling It is assumed
section that the
of the partial flow of
pressure thethe
tool, polymer
solution
solution
flows inalways conforms
the annular to the
flow flow characteristics
channel, of a power-law
as shown in Figure fluid, that
4. It is assumed thatthe flow
the state
flow is laminar,
of the polymer
that the temperature
solution of the polymer
always conforms solution
to the flow does not change
characteristics during the flow,
of a power‐law fluid,andthatthat
thethe
floweffect of is
state
gravity on the
laminar, thatsolution is nil.
the temperature of the polymer solution does not change during the flow, and that the
effect of gravity on the solution is nil.
Polymers 2019, 11, 855 7 of 19
Polymers 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 19

Representationof
Figure 4. Representation ofthe
theannular
annularflow
flowchannel
channelwith lengthL.L. RR00 is the radius of the outer
withlength
cylinder; Ri i is the radius of the inner cylinder; r is annularthickness;
cylinder; R is the radius of the inner cylinder; r is annular flow inner diameter
flow thickness; of annular
inner diameter of
flow = 12 (Ro + R1i ) − r and outer diameter of annular flow = 12 (Ro + Ri ) 1+ r.
annular flow = ( R o  R i )  r and outer diameter of annular flow = ( R o  R i )  r .
2 2
Annular flow channel of the partial pressure tool typical sizes are showed in Table 2.
Annular flow channel of the partial pressure tool typical sizes are showed in Table 2.
Table 2. Structural parameters of the annular flow channel.

Radius of the OuterTable 2. Structural

Cylinder R0 parameters
Radius of the Cylinder
of the Inner annular flow Length
channel.of the Annular Flow
(mm) Ri (mm) Channel L (mm)
Radius of the Outer Radius of the Inner Length of the Annular Flow
24 12 60
Cylinder R0 (mm) Cylinder R i (mm) Channel L(mm)
24 12 60
According to the balance between pressure and shear stress:
According
( to the balance
2 between pressure 2 )and shear stress:
1 1 1 1
   
∆pπ (Ro + Ri ) + r − 2 (Ro + Ri ) − r 2 = 2π ( R + R ) + r + ( R + R ) − r Lτ (2)
 
o i o i
2  1 2  1 21  1 2 
p  (Ro  Ri )  r    (Ro  Ri )  r    2  (Ro  Ri )  r    (Ro  Ri )  r   L (2)
 2  2    2  2 
∆pr
τ= (3)
L
pr
 
where ∆p is the pressure drop in the polymer solution, in Pa. (3)
L
At the outer wall of the annular flow channel:
where p is the pressure drop in the polymer solution, in Pa.
∆p(Ro − Ri )
At the outer wall of the annular flowτchannel:
ω = (4)
2L
p ( R  R )
  polymer
It is assumed that the flow velocity of the
o i
(4)
solution in the partial pressure tool conforms
2L
to simple shear flow, that the shear rate is the same as the velocity gradient, and that the flow direction
is theItopposite,
is assumed that
that is: the flow velocity of the polymer solution in the partial pressure tool conforms
to simple shear flow, that the shear rate is the same
. asdu
the velocity gradient, and that the flow direction
γ=− (5)
is the opposite, that is: dr
Z 1 (Ro −Ri )
2 du
u=    f (τ)dr (6)
(5)
0 dr
where u is the velocity of the polymer solution, in m/s.
1
Integral variable substitution is as follows: ( Ro  Ri )
2u  0 f ( )d r (6)
Ro − Ri τω
Z
where u is the velocity of the polymer u= solution, in m/s. f (τ)dτ (7)
2τω τ
Integral variable substitution is as follows:
! 1   n+n 1

n ∆p nR o1 Ri 
u   (Ro − fR(i ))d − r n 
 
n+1 
u= (8)
(7)

n + 1 kL 22 
 


Polymers 2019, 11, 855 8 of 19

Flow rate is expressed in integral form thus:

1 1
   
dQ = u × 2π (Ro + Ri ) + r dr + u × 2π (Ro + Ri ) − r dr (9)
2 2
Z 1 (R −R )
2 o i
Q = 2π(Ro + Ri ) udr (10)
0

where Q is flow rate, in m/s3 .

Integrating by parts Equation (10), when r = 21 (Ro − Ri ), u = 0:

 ∆p ! n1   n+1
n Ro − Ri n

Q = π(R2o − R2i ) (11)
2n + 1 kl 2

Equation (11) converts variables in order to obtain the analytical equation of pressure drop:
 n
2Q 2n + 1  2kl
∆p = 

(12)
π(R2o − R2i )(Ro − Ri ) n

Ro − Ri

The average shear rate is:

Z 1 (R −R )
. 2 o i 2γ
γ= dr (13)
0 Ro − Ri
Putting Equation (3) into Equation (1), the shear rate is:
! n1
. ∆p 1
γ= rn (14)
kl

The average shear rate is integrated and then put into the analytic equation of the flow rate:

. 2Q 2n + 1
γ= (15)
π(R2o 2
− Ri )(Ro − Ri ) n + 1

. . n . .
Based on τ = k(γ) , τ = µγ, the average viscosity of a polymer solution is:

. n−1
µ = k (γ) (16)

where µ is the average viscosity, in Pa·s.

Putting Equation (16) into Equation (15) gives:
 n−1
2Q 2n + 1 
µ = k

(17)
π(R2o − R2i )(Ro − Ri ) n + 1


2.2.3. Flow Model of the Polymer Solution in the Throttling Section of the Partial Pressure Tool
When the polymer solution flows into the throttling section from the annular flow channel, as
shown in Figure 5, the flow state is consistent with that in the annular flow channel. However, the
flow of the polymer solution in the throttling section is a variable cross-sectional flow. In the process
of solution flow, the flow cross-section changes periodically from a state of contraction to a state of
expansion. In this process, the polymer solution produces differential throttling pressure.
Polymers 2019, 11, 855 9 of 19
Polymers 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 19

Figure
Figure5. 5.Representation
Representationofofthethethrottling
throttlingsection
sectionflow channel.RR0 0 is the radius of
flowchannel. of the
theouteroutercylinder;
cylinder;
Rii is the radius of the inner cylinder; 1l1 is the length of the annular
R is the radius of the inner cylinder; l is the length of the annular flow channel; l 2l 2 is the length
is the length of
thethe
of contraction partpart
contraction of the
of single throttling
the single section;
throttling l3 is thel length
section; 3
of the
is the intermediate
length constricting
of the intermediate
part of the single throttling section; l is the length of the intermediate expansion
constricting part of the single throttling section; l 4 is the length of the intermediate expansion
4 section of the single
throttling section; l5 is the length of the expansion section of the single throttling section; c is the total
section of the single throttling section; l 5 is the length of the expansion section of the single
length of the single throttling section; ro is the radius of the intermediate arc; θ is the front groove
throttling section; c is the total length of the single throttling section; ro is the radius of the
angle of the single throttling section—it is the convex angle of the contraction section relative to the
intermediate arc; andisαthe
horizontal section; front
is the groove
rear groove angle
angleofofthe
thesingle
singlethrottling
throttlingsection—it
section—itisisthe theconvex
convexangle
angle
of the contraction section relative to the horizontal
of the expansion section relative to the horizontal section. section; and  is the rear groove angle of the
single throttling section—it is the convex angle of the expansion section relative to the horizontal
Typical sizes of the throttling section of the partial pressure tool are shown in Table 3.
section.

Typical sizes of the throttling section ofparameters

Table 3. Structural the partial
of pressure toolsection.
the throttling are shown in Table 3.

Angle Angle Length Length Length Length Length Radius Radius Radius
Table 3. Structural parameters of the throttling section.
θ α l1 l2 l3 l4 l5 ro Ro Ri
◦ (◦ )
Angle( ) Angle
(mm)
Length
(mm)
Length (mm)
Length (mm)
Length (mm) Length (mm)Radius (mm)
Radius (mm)
Radius

30
 45 60
l1 13.392
l2 1
l3 1.414
l4 7.414
l5 2
ro 24
Ro 12
Ri

(°) (°) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)
The pressure drop Equation (13) and the viscosity Equation (18) of the annulus flow channel in
30 45 60 13.392 1 1.414 7.414 2 24 12
the laminar flow state are changed to the equation of the variable cross section:
The pressure drop Equation (13)" and the viscosity Equation#n (18) of the annulus flow channel in
the laminar flow state are changed 2Q 2n + 1 2kl
∆p =to the 2equation of the variable cross section: (18)
π(Ro − a )(Ro − a) n n Ro − a
2
 2Q 2n  1 2kl
p "  2 2  #n−1 (18)
 (Ro  a2Q 1o  a
)(Ro  a) n2n + R
µ=k (19)
π(R2o − a2 )(Ro − a) n + 1
n1
where a is the variable cross-sectional inner  diameter,2Q in 2m; 1 is the number of throttling sections
n m
 k 2 2  (19)
(0 < m ≤ 8); x is the length of the partial pressure  (Ro  atool o  a) n  1
)(Rthrough 
which the polymer solution flows, in m.
When the polymer solution flows through different sections of the throttling section of the partial
where a is the
pressure tool, the solution’s
variable cross‐sectional
pressure drops and inneritsdiameter, in m; mand
viscosity changes, is the
themodified
number pressure
of throttling
drop
sections ( 0  m  8 ); x is
and viscosity equations are: the length of the partial pressure tool through which the polymer solution
flows, in m.
1. When
When thex ≤ polymer
l1 , the polymer solution
solution flows flows through in the annulussections
different flow channel:
of the throttling section of the
partial pressure tool, the solution’s pressure drops and its viscosity changes, and the modified
pressure drop and viscosity equations are: a = Ri (20)
1. When x  l1 , the polymer solution flows in the annulus flow channel:
  n
2Q 2n + 1  2kl
∆p = 

(21)
π(R2o − R2i )(aRoR− n  Ro − Ri

i Ri ) (20)
" #n−1
2Q 2nn + 1
µ = k 2Q 2n  1 2kl (22)
p   π2 (R2o 2− a2 )(Ro − a) n + 1 (21)
  (Ro  Ri )(Ro  Ri ) n  Ro  Ri
Polymers 2019, 11, 855 10 of 19

2. When l1 + (m − 1)c < x ≤ (m − 1)c + l1 + l2 , the polymer solution flows into the throttling section
and flows through the contraction part of the throttling section:

a = tan θ[x − l1 − (m − 1)c] + Ri (23)

n
 2Q(Ro − tan θ[x − l1 − (m − 1)c] − Ri )−1 2n + 1 

2kl
∆p =   (24)
2  2
π(Ro − tan θ[x − l1 − (m − 1)c] + Ri ) n
 Ro − tan θ[x − l1 − (m − 1)c] − Ri
n−1
 2Q(Ro − tan θ[x − l1 − (m − 1)c] − Ri )−1 2n + 1 

µ = k  (25)
π(R2 − tan θ[x − l1 − (m − 1)c] + Ri 2 ) n + 1
 
o

3. When l1 + l2 + (m − 1)c < x ≤ (m − 1)c + l1 + l2 + l3 , the polymer solution flows into the throttling
section and flows through the middle arc contraction part of the throttling section:
q
ro 2 − sin θro − [x − l1 − l2 − (m − 1)c]2 + tan θl2 − cos θro + Ri
n o
a= (26)
  q n n
 2Q R − r 2 − sin θr −[x−l −l −(m−1)c]2 o+tan θl −cos θr +R −1


o o o 1 2 2 o i
2n+1 
∆p = 
 
2 n 
q  !
 π R2 − r 2 − sin θr−[x−l −l −(m−1)c]2 +tan θl −cos θr +R
n o 
o o 1 2 2 o  i (27)
2kl
× q 
ro 2 − sin θro −[x−l1 −l2 −(m−1)c]2 +tan θl2 −cos θro +Ri
n o
Ro −

  q n n−1
 2Q R − r 2 − sin θr −[x−l −l −(m−1)c]2 o+tan θl −cos θr +R −1


o o o 1 2 2 o i
2n+1 
µ = k

q 2 !
n+1 

(28)
 π R2 − r 2 − sin θr −[x−l −l −(m−1)c]2 +tan θl −cos θr +R
n o 
o o o 1 2 2 o i


4. When l1 + l2 + l3 + (m − 1)c < x ≤ (m − 1)c + l1 + l2 + l3 + l4 , the polymer solution flows into the
throttling section and flows through the middle arc expansion part of the throttling section
q
a= ro 2 − [x − l1 − l2 − l3 − (m − 1)c]2 + tan θl2 − cos θro + Ri (29)
 (q )!−1 n
 2Q Ro − ro 2 −[x−l −l −l −(m−1)c]2 +tan θl −cos θro +R 
 1 2 3 2 i 
2n+1 
∆p =  
  (q )2 
n


 πR2 − r2 −[x−l −l −l −(m−1)c]2 +tan θl −cos θr +R 
(30)

 o o 1 2 3 2 o i 

2kl
× (q )
Ro − ro 2 −[x−l1 −l2 −l3 −(m−1)c]2 +tan θl2 −cos θro +Ri

 (q )!−1 n−1
2
r2 − [x − l1 − l2 − l3 − (m − 1)c] + tan θl2 − cos θro + Ri
 
 2Q Ro − 
2n + 1 
 
µ = k 

(q )2 n + 1 
 (31)
 
 πR2 − 2
r2 − [x − l1 − l2 − l3 − (m − 1)c] + tan θl2 − cos θro + Ri 
 

  o 

5. When l1 + l2 + l3 + l4 + (m − 1)c < x ≤ mc + l1 , the polymer solution flows into the throttling
section and flows through the contraction part of the throttling section

a = c − [x − (m − 1)c − l1 ] tan α + Ri

(32)
" −1
#n
2Q(Ro −{c−[x−(m−1)c−l1 ]} tan α−Ri ) 2n+1
∆p =  2

n
π R2o −{{c−[x−(m−1)c−l1 ]} tan α+Ri } (33)
2kl
× R − c−[x−(m−1)c−l ] tan α+R
o {{ 1 } i}
 n
 
2 Q ( Ro  c   x  ( m  1) c  l1  tan   Ri )  1 2 n  1 
p  
 n 

  ( Ro  c   x  ( m  1) c  l1  tan   Ri ) 
2 2
 (33)
2 kl


Ro  c   x  ( m  1) c  l1  tan   Ri 
Polymers 2019, 11, 855 11 of 19
n 1
2Q( Ro  c   x  (m  1)c  l1  tan   Ri ) 2n  1
 1 
 k
n−1
(34)

−1
 α 
µ = k   (Ro c   x  (m  1)c  l1  tan   Ri  ) 2  

2 R )
( R − c − [ x − ( m − ) c − l ] + in  1
 2Q o 2 1 tan 2n + 1 
1
(34)
 
n+1 

 π R2 − c − [x − (m − 1)c − l ] tan α + R
o 1 i
The function of the partial pressure tool is to reduce the pressure of the polymer solution and to
ensure
Thethat the apparent
function viscosity
of the partial reduction
pressure tool isof to
thereduce
polymer the solution
pressure during the flowsolution
of the polymer is small.and
Fromto
the derived
ensure that pressure dropviscosity
the apparent and apparent viscosity
reduction of theequations,
polymer itsolutioncan be seen thatthe
during theflow pressure dropFrom
is small. and
apparent
the derivedviscosity
pressurearedrop
related
andto the properties
apparent viscosity of equations,
the polymer solution
it can be seenandthat
thethe
mechanical structure
pressure drop and
of the partial
apparent pressure
viscosity tool. That
are related is, when
to the different
properties of thepolymer
polymersolutions
solution flow through
and the a partial
mechanical pressure
structure of
tool with different
the partial structural
pressure tool. That is,parameters,
when different thepolymer
pressuresolutions
drop and flowapparent
through aviscosity change tool
partial pressure are
different.
with different structural parameters, the pressure drop and apparent viscosity change are different.

2.2.4. Transition
2.2.4. Transition Velocity
Velocity of
of the
the Polymer
Polymer Solution
Solution in
in the
the Partial
Partial Pressure
PressureTool
Tool
As the
As the polymer
polymersolution
solutionflows
flows in ainlaminar flowflow
a laminar statestate
in theinpartial pressure
the partial tool, thetool,
pressure flowthe
velocity
flow
changes changes
velocity when thewhen solution
the flows
solutionthrough
flows the variable
through thecross-section of the throttling
variable cross‐section of the tool. Whentool.
throttling the
velocity reaches a certain value, the degree of perturbation of the flow increases
When the velocity reaches a certain value, the degree of perturbation of the flow increases and the and the flow state
changes
flow statefrom laminar
changes fromtolaminar
turbulent, as is consistent
to turbulent, with the with
as is consistent theory theoftheory
turbulent flow [24]flow
of turbulent and[24]
the
formation
and law of non-Newtonian
the formation law of non‐Newtonianfluid turbulence [25].
fluid turbulence [25].
In order to more clearly observe the change in the
In order to more clearly observe the change in the flow state flow state of
of the
the polymer
polymer solution
solution in in the
the partial
partial
pressure tool
pressure tool from
fromlaminar
laminarflow
flowtototurbulent
turbulentflow,
flow,asaswell
wellasasthe influence
the influence of ofthethe
change
change in flow state
in flow on
state
the the
on pressure of theofsolution,
pressure the Fluent
the solution, software(ANSYS,
the Fluent software(ANSYS,Pittsburgh, PA, USA)PA,
Pittsburgh, wasUSA)
used wasfor numerical
used for
simulation.simulation.
numerical During theDuring
simulation process, theprocess,
the simulation model structure
the model was not changed,
structure was notwhile the flow
changed, rate
while
was gradually
the flow rate wasincreased,
gradually thus obtaining
increased, a vectorgraph
thus obtaining a and a pressure
vectorgraph and nephogram
a pressureof the polymer
nephogram of
solution under both a laminar flow and a turbulent flow state. Figure 6 is the
the polymer solution under both a laminar flow and a turbulent flow state. Figure 6 is the laminar laminar flow vectorgraph
of thevectorgraph
flow polymer solution in the partial
of the polymer solutionpressure
in the tool,
partialFigure
pressure7 is tool,
the turbulent
Figure 7 is flow
the vectorgraph
turbulent flow of
polymer solution
vectorgraph in the partial
of polymer pressure
solution in the tool, Figure
partial 8 is the
pressure tool,laminar
Figureflow 8 is pressure
the laminarnephogram of the
flow pressure
polymer solution in the partial pressure tool, and Figure 9 is the turbulent
nephogram of the polymer solution in the partial pressure tool, and Figure 9 is the turbulent flow flow pressure nephogram of
polymer solution
pressure nephogram in the partial pressure
of polymer solutiontool.in the partial pressure tool.

Polymers 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW Figure 6. Laminar

Laminar flow
flow vectorgraph. 12 of 19

Figure 7. Turbulent flow vectorgraph.

vectorgraph.
Polymers 2019, 11, 855 12 of 19
Figure 7. Turbulent flow vectorgraph.

Figure 8.
Figure 8. Laminar
Laminar flow
flow pressure nephogram.
pressure nephogram.

Figure 9. Turbulent flow pressure nephogram.

nephogram.

Figure
Figure 66 shows
showsthatthatwhen
whenthe thepolymer
polymersolution
solution flows
flowsthrough
through thethe
throttling
throttlingsection, although
section, althoughthe
flow direction
the flow direction changes, eacheach
changes, layer of fluid
layer maintains
of fluid maintains its own
its ownflowflowstate, doesdoes
state, not interfere withwith
not interfere the
other layers,
the other and maintains
layers, and maintainsa laminar flow state.
a laminar flowHowever, as shownasinshown
state. However, Figure in7, when
Figurethe 7, velocity
when the of
the polymer
velocity of thesolution increases,
polymer solution the fluid layersthe
increases, cannot
fluidmaintain their respective
layers cannot maintainflow theirstates, the laminar
respective flow
flow state
states, the is destroyed,
laminar flow and
statethere is slidingand
is destroyed, andthere
mixing between
is sliding and the adjacent
mixing flow layers,
between eventually
the adjacent flow
forming turbulent flow.
layers, eventually forming Theturbulent
degree offlow. perturbation
The degree of theofpolymer
perturbation solution is greatest
of the polymer at solution
the lowest is
point of the
greatest flow
at the channel.
lowest point Byofconsidering
the flow channel. the dissipation effect [26,27]
By considering and the turbulent
the dissipation perturbation
effect [26,27] and the
theory
turbulent [28], it is concluded
perturbation theory that theitturbulence
[28], is concluded intensity
that thegenerated
turbulencebyintensity
the flowgenerated
disturbance andflow
by the the
energy loss of
disturbance andthethe
solution
energyare losslargest
of theinsolution
the partial
are pressure
largest intool.
the partial pressure tool.
Figures 8
Figures 8 and 9and 9 are pressure
pressure nephograms of the polymer solution
nephograms of the polymer solution flowing
flowing in in the
the partial pressure
tool
tool under
under laminar
laminar and and turbulent
turbulent states. Under the
states. Under the laminar
laminar flow state, the pressure pressure change
change of of the
the
polymer
polymer solution
solutionisisrelatively
relativelyuniform.
uniform.Under Underthe theturbulent
turbulent flow
flow state, at the
state, place
at the placein the tooltool
in the where
wherethe
perturbation
the perturbation zone is generated,
zone the pressure
is generated, suddenlysuddenly
the pressure becomes smallerbecomes upstream
smallerofupstream
the perturbation
of the
zone and becomes
perturbation larger
zone and downstream
becomes larger of the perturbation
downstream of thezone, causing zone,
perturbation an unevencausingchange in the
an uneven
pressure
change inofthe thepressure
polymer of solution,
the polymer whichsolution,
causes thewhichoverall pressure
causes in the tool
the overall to drop.
pressure inThis is consistent
the tool to drop.
with
This the analysis ofwith
is consistent the dissipation
the analysis effect
of the described
dissipationabove. Thedescribed
effect development of turbulence
above. accelerates
The development of
the energy consumption
turbulence accelerates the of the polymer
energy solution compared
consumption of the polymerwith the laminar
solution flow. Thewith
compared pressure drop is
the laminar
larger thanpressure
flow. The the laminardropflow, so itthan
is larger is verytheimportant
laminar flow, to study thevery
so it is transition
importantfromtolaminar
study theto transition
turbulent
flow
fromof the polymer
laminar solution
to turbulent in of
flow thethepartial
polymerpressure
solutiontool.in the partial pressure tool.
For Newtonian fluids, the critical Reynolds number Rec is the criterion for judging the flow state;
when its value reaches 2100, the flow changes from laminar to turbulent. For non-Newtonian fluids,
the critical Reynolds number signifying the change from laminar to turbulent flow is different for
different rheological indices. Studies have found that the stability parameter Z can distinguish the flow
state of non-Newtonian fluids [29,30]. When Z is equal to 808, it is considered that the fluid changes
from laminar to turbulent flow. Therefore, in the present study, the stability parameter Z is adopted as
the criterion for judging when the flow state of the polymer solution changes as it flows through the
partial pressure tool.
In fact, the transition from laminar to turbulent flow is not achieved simultaneously in all parts of
the partial pressure tool. Usually, the streamline of the most turbulent fluid layer is the first to bend. As
Polymers 2019, 11, 855 13 of 19

the intensity of turbulence increases, the fluctuation of the streamline increases and the fluid changes
from fluctuation to spiral motion and eventually to vortex motion, and as the turbulence intensity
continues to increase, the vortex motion accelerates until it becomes turbulent. This is consistent with
the research theory of Manneville [31], and moreover similar results were obtained by Gavrilov in a
study of the turbulent flow of power-law fluids in circular tubes [32]. In the partial pressure tool, the
main change in the transition from laminar to turbulent flow occurs in the fluid layer with the most
turbulent annular section. The maximum Reynolds number of the fluid in this layer (Rer )m , which is
the stability parameter Z, was used to judge the flow state. Based on the stability parameter, the velocity
equation of the flow state transition is established, and is termed the transition velocity equation.
Based on the centerline of any liquid layer in an annular flow in the partial pressure tool, the
Reynolds number at position r from the centerline is given by:
ρur
Rer = (35)
µ

where:
! n−1
. n−1 ∆p n n−1
µ = k (γ) =k r n (36)
kl
Putting Equations (8) and (36) into the Reynolds number calculation Equation (35) gives:
! 2−n 
 n+n 1

ρ n ∆p n 
 1

1

n+2 
Rer = ( R − R ) r n −r n  (37)

o i
k n + 1 kl  2

 


Solve the maximum value of Rer :

dRer
=0 (38)
dr
" # n
1 1+n ( R − R )
o i
r= (39)
(n + 2) 2
 
 2−n i n+n 1   1  1  n+2  n+2 
ρ n ∆p
 
 h
n  1 1+n R −R  n 1+n R −R  n 
1 o i 1 o i
Z = (Rer )m = (R − Ri ) − (n+2) (40)

k n+1 kl  2 o (n+2) 2 2

 



The average velocity of the polymer solution in the cross-section of the partial pressure tool:

Q
v= (41)
π(R2o − R2i )

Putting Equation (11) into Equation (41) gives:

 ∆p ! n1   n+1
n Ro − Ri n

v= (42)
2n + 1 kl 2

Equation (42) is connected with the stability parameter Z, and then variable substitution
is performed:
 1
 2−n
 n−2   (n−2)(n n+1) 
n+1 k 2n+1

2
Z n ρ n

 

Ro −Ri

 

v= (43)

 n + 2  1 2 + n  

R −R
  n 1 1+n 1 1+n 
 o i

− (n+2)

 
 2 (n+2) 

Equation (43) is the transition velocity of the polymer solution in the partial pressure tool, which
is related to the characteristics of the polymer solution and the structural parameters of the partial
pressure tool. When the characteristics of the polymer solution and the structural parameters of the
partial pressure tool are determined, the transition velocity, which is a fixed value, can be determined.
Polymers 2019, 11, 855 14 of 19

When the average velocity of the polymer solution flowing through the cross-section of the partial
pressure tool exceeds the transition velocity, the flow state of the polymer solution changes from
a laminar to a turbulent flow state, and consequently the energy loss and the pressure drop of the
polymer solution increase.

3. Numerical Solution of Polymer Solution Flow in the Partial Pressure Tool

The consistency coefficient and rheological index of the shear flow equation were obtained by
fitting based on Figure 3, as shown in Table 4.

Table 4. Constitutive equation of polymer solution.

Concentration Rheological
Consistency Coefficient k Constitutive Equation
(mg/L) Index n
· −0.39
1000 20.26 0.61 µ = 20.26(γ)

According to factors such as actual manufacturing difficulty and economy of partial pressure tools,
Daqing oilfield provides structural parameters of several partial pressure tools. Specific structural
parameters of the partial pressure tool are shown in Table 5, and the meanings of the parameters are
the same as those of Figure 4.

Table 5. Structural parameters.

Angle Angle Length Length Length Length Length Radius Radius Radius
θ α l1 l2 l3 l4 l5 ro Ro Ri
(◦ ) (◦ ) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)
30 45 60 13.392 1 1.414 7.414 2 24 12
45 30 60 7.732 1.414 1 12.841 2 24 12
60 15 60 2.830 1.732 0.518 17.542 2 24 12
30 45 60 13.392 1 1.414 7.414 2 24 12
30 45 60 13.392 1 1.414 7.414 2 24.5 12
30 45 60 13.392 1 1.414 7.414 2 25 12

The constitutive equation of the polymer solution, the consistency coefficient and rheological
index of the shear flow equation obtained by actual fitting, and the structural parameters of the partial
pressure tool, are put into the obtained flow characteristic equation, and specific numerical solutions
are calculated in order to study the effect of different structural parameters on the pressure drop and
viscosity of the polymer solution. Then, the best structural parameters to solve the transition velocity
are selected, and the limit value of the flow transition is obtained. The calculated pressure and apparent
viscosity of the polymer solution in the partial pressure tools are plotted, as shown in Figures 10 and 11.
The inlet pressure of the polymer solution entering the partial pressure tool was 1.8 MPa, the
injection amount was 50 m3 /d, the front groove angles/rear groove angles of the partial pressure tool
were 30◦ /45◦ , 45◦ /30◦ , and 60◦ /15◦ , and the outer cylinder radiuses of the partial pressure tool were 24,
24.5, and 25 mm. By putting the variables into the pressure drop equation, the pressure curve of the
polymer solution in the partial pressure tool was obtained, as shown in Figure 10.
Polymers 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 15 of 19

viscosity of the polymer solution. Then, the best structural parameters to solve the transition velocity
are selected, and the limit value of the flow transition is obtained. The calculated pressure and
apparent viscosity of the polymer solution in the partial pressure tools are plotted, as shown in
Polymers
Figures2019, 11, 855
10 and 11. 15 of 19

Polymers 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 19

structural parameters investigated in this study. This is due to the fact that, with increasing outer
cylinder radius, the minimum cross‐section area through which the polymer solution flows increases,
the flow rate reduces, and the energy consumed by the solution reduces, resulting in a reduction of
solution pressure loss.
From Figure 10, it can be seen that, for front groove angles/rear groove angles of the partial
pressure tool of 30°/45°, 45°/30°, and 60°/15°, the pressure drop of the polymer solution reaches 1.77,
1.40, and 1.07 MPa, respectively, and for outer cylinder radiuses of 24, 24.5, and 25 mm, the pressure
drop reaches 1.32, 1.10, and 0.846 MPa, respectively. In summary, when the front groove angle is 30°,
(a) (b)
the rear groove angle is 45°, and the outer cylinder radius is 24 mm, the pressure drop of the polymer
solution is the
Figure 10. largest
10.Pressure
Pressureand the
curve
curve throttling
of the polymer
of the effect
polymer is the
solution
solutionbest.
flowing through
flowing partial partial
through pressurepressure
tools with different
tools with
structural parameters.
different structural (a) Front groove
parameters. angle/rear
(a) Front groove groove angle.
angle/rear (b) Radius
groove angle.of(b)
theRadius
outer cylinder.
of the outer
cylinder.

The inlet pressure of the polymer solution entering the partial pressure tool was 1.8 MPa, the
injection amount was 50 m3/d, the front groove angles/rear groove angles of the partial pressure tool
were 30°/45°, 45°/30°, and 60°/15°, and the outer cylinder radiuses of the partial pressure tool were
24, 24.5, and 25 mm. By putting the variables into the pressure drop equation, the pressure curve of
the polymer solution in the partial pressure tool was obtained, as shown in Figure 10.
As can be seen from Figure 10, when the polymer solution passes through the front and rear
annular flow channels, the overall pressure of the polymer solution decreases (however, the decrease
is extremely small, and is therefore hard to discern in the figure). However, when the polymer
solution passes through the throttling section, the pressure of the solution drops rapidly and to a
larger degree, while the trend of the pressure drop changes periodically. This is due to the fact that
during the flow of the solution, the polymer molecular chains are always in a deformation process of
elongation and contraction, so that part of the flow energy is consumed by the deformation and
recovery of the chains, which (a) generates local energy loss and pressure(b) reduction. This clearly shows
that the partial pressure tool can reduce the pressure of the polymer solution.
Figure
Figure
The 11.Viscosity
11.
influenceViscosity curve
curve
of different of the polymer
of the
variables onsolution
polymer flowing
thesolution
pressure isthrough
flowing partial partial
also through
different. pressure tools with
pressure
For example, different
tools
when with
the front
structural
different parameters.
structural (a) Front
parameters. groove
(a) angle/rear
Front groove groove angle.
angle/rear (b)
groove Radius
angle.
groove angle is increased, and the rear groove angle consequently decreases, the pressure drop of the of the
(b) outer
Radius cylinder.
of the outer
cylinder.
polymer solution first becomes larger and then smaller, after flowing through the whole throttling
As can be seen from Figure 10, when the polymer solution passes through the front and rear
section, and the total pressure drop is the smallest for a front groove angle of 60°. This is due to the
annular
Theflow channels,
setting the overall and
of solution
parameters pressure the of the polymer
selection solution decreases
of variables (however, thethedecrease is
fact that, during the flow, a larger front groove angle and are lower consistent
rear groove with angle pressure
results in
extremely
calculation. small, and is therefore hard to discern in the figure). However, when the polymer solution
the polymer Viscosity curves of
solution flowing the polymer
through a smaller solution flowingarea
cross‐section through
in thepartial
contractionpressure toolsofwith
section the
passes
differentthrough the
structural throttling
parameters section,
are the
shown pressure
in of
Figure the
11. solution
It can be drops
seen rapidly
that the and to
apparent a larger degree,
viscosity of
throttling section; the more obvious the throttling effect on the solution, the larger the pressure drop
while
the the trend
polymer of the pressure
solution before drop
and changes
after flowing periodically.
through This
the is duepressure
partial to the fact thatdoes
tools duringnot the flow
change,
of the solution in the initial stage. However, increasing the front groove angle and decreasing the rear
of thechanges
with solution,onlythe polymer
occurring molecular chains areflows
always in a deformation process of elongation and
groove angle also reduces the while
number theof solution
throttling areas through
throughthe throttling
which section.
the solution This change
passes, resultingin
contraction,
viscosity so
is due that part
to the of the flow
fact thatdrop; energy
the polymer is consumed by the deformation and recovery of the chains,
in a smaller overall pressure thus, themolecules
accumulated are distributed
pressure drop in aqueous
is at thesolution
minimum in the
afterform
the
which
of generates
particles, local energy
dendritic loss and
structures, and network
pressure structures,
reduction. This and clearly
the shows chains
molecular that theare partial pressure
flexible chain
polymer solution passes through the throttling section.
tool can reduce
structures. thethepressure of the polymer solution.
When When the radius flow
of thecross‐section
outer cylinder area of the solution
increases, decreases
the pressure dropduring
in each the throttling
flow process, the
section
flow The
speedinfluence
increases of different
and the variables
polymer on the
molecules pressure
are is also different.
elongated along Forflow
the example, whenWhen
direction. the front
the
decreases, and, for the maximum radius of 25 mm, the total pressure drop after the solution
groove
polymer angle is increased,
molecules are and the rear
elongated to a groove extent
certain angle consequently
and exceed decreases,
the strength the
of pressure
the drop chain,
molecular of the
completely flows through the throttling section is the smallest for any of the partial pressure tool
polymer
the shearsolution first on
stress acting becomes larger and
the molecular chainthencansmaller, after flowing
cause changes through
in the shape and thesizewhole
of thethrottling
polymer
section, and the total pressure drop is the smallest for a front groove angle of 60 ◦ . This is due to the
molecules, resulting in a decrease in the molecular weight of the polymer and a consequent decrease
fact that,
in the duringof
viscosity thethesolution
polymer flow, a larger
solution. front groove
However, whenangle and lower rearflow
the cross‐sectional groove areaangle resultsthe
decreases, in
the polymer
molecular solution
chains flowing
return through
to their previous a smaller
state cross-section area in theresulting
due to their elasticity, contraction in ansection of the
increase in
solution viscosity. In the annular flow channel, the polymer molecular morphology changes
similarly, so the solution viscosity does not change.
With increasing front groove angle, and consequently decreasing rear groove angle, the rate of
the initial decrease in solution viscosity increases; however, the magnitude of the viscosity decrease
is reduced, and the viscosity values start to recover earlier. This is due to the fact that, with increasing
Polymers 2019, 11, 855 16 of 19

throttling section; the more obvious the throttling effect on the solution, the larger the pressure drop of
the solution in the initial stage. However, increasing the front groove angle and decreasing the rear
groove angle also reduces the number of throttling areas through which the solution passes, resulting
in a smaller overall pressure drop; thus, the accumulated pressure drop is at the minimum after the
polymer solution passes through the throttling section.
When the radius of the outer cylinder increases, the pressure drop in each throttling section
decreases, and, for the maximum radius of 25 mm, the total pressure drop after the solution completely
flows through the throttling section is the smallest for any of the partial pressure tool structural
parameters investigated in this study. This is due to the fact that, with increasing outer cylinder
radius, the minimum cross-section area through which the polymer solution flows increases, the flow
rate reduces, and the energy consumed by the solution reduces, resulting in a reduction of solution
pressure loss.
From Figure 10, it can be seen that, for front groove angles/rear groove angles of the partial
pressure tool of 30◦ /45◦ , 45◦ /30◦ , and 60◦ /15◦ , the pressure drop of the polymer solution reaches 1.77,
1.40, and 1.07 MPa, respectively, and for outer cylinder radiuses of 24, 24.5, and 25 mm, the pressure
drop reaches 1.32, 1.10, and 0.846 MPa, respectively. In summary, when the front groove angle is 30◦ ,
the rear groove angle is 45◦ , and the outer cylinder radius is 24 mm, the pressure drop of the polymer
solution is the largest and the throttling effect is the best.
The setting of parameters and the selection of variables are consistent with the pressure calculation.
Viscosity curves of the polymer solution flowing through partial pressure tools with different structural
parameters are shown in Figure 11. It can be seen that the apparent viscosity of the polymer solution
before and after flowing through the partial pressure tools does not change, with changes only occurring
while the solution flows through the throttling section. This change in viscosity is due to the fact
that the polymer molecules are distributed in aqueous solution in the form of particles, dendritic
structures, and network structures, and the molecular chains are flexible chain structures. When the
flow cross-section area of the solution decreases during the flow process, the flow speed increases
and the polymer molecules are elongated along the flow direction. When the polymer molecules are
elongated to a certain extent and exceed the strength of the molecular chain, the shear stress acting
on the molecular chain can cause changes in the shape and size of the polymer molecules, resulting
in a decrease in the molecular weight of the polymer and a consequent decrease in the viscosity of
the polymer solution. However, when the cross-sectional flow area decreases, the molecular chains
return to their previous state due to their elasticity, resulting in an increase in solution viscosity. In the
annular flow channel, the polymer molecular morphology changes similarly, so the solution viscosity
does not change.
With increasing front groove angle, and consequently decreasing rear groove angle, the rate of the
initial decrease in solution viscosity increases; however, the magnitude of the viscosity decrease is
reduced, and the viscosity values start to recover earlier. This is due to the fact that, with increasing
front groove angle and decreasing rear groove angle, the cross-section area through which the polymer
solution flows in the contraction section decreases, the velocity changes sharply, the shearing effect on
the polymer molecules increases, the viscosity of the solution decreases more quickly, and the polymer
solution passes from the contraction section to the expansion section earlier.
With increasing outer cylinder radius, the initial viscosity of the polymer solution increases;
however, the viscosity changes of the polymer solution during the flow process are basically similar
for all radiuses studied. The viscosity of the polymer solution is higher for larger outer cylinder
radiuses due to the fact that, with increasing outer cylinder radius, the cross-sectional area through
which the polymer solution flows increases, the velocity decreases, the shearing effect on the polymer
solution decreases, the degree of shearing damage to the long molecular chain of polymer molecules is
consequently reduced, and the change in molecular weight change is not obvious. The change trend
of polymer solution viscosity is similar for all of the studied outer cylinder radiuses due to the fact
Polymers 2019, 11, 855 17 of 19

that the limited increase in radius does not lead to a variation in the shear mechanism acting on the
polymer solution.
It can also be seen from Figure 11 that, for all studied parameter values, the viscosity of the
polymer solution does not change after flowing through the throttling section, showing that the partial
pressure tool has no influence on the viscosity of the polymer solution.
Through the analysis of pressure and viscosity curves, we have shown that the partial pressure
tool has only a small influence on the viscosity of the polymer solution and can produce a large pressure
drop, which meets the design purpose. Among the parameters provided, the ones which produced
the largest pressure drop were a front groove angle of 30◦ , a rear groove angle of 45◦ , and an outer
cylinder radius of 24 mm. Based on the transition velocity equation, the calculated transition velocity
of the polymer solution is 50.29 m/s, and when the flow velocity exceeds 50.29 m/s, the flow state of the
polymer solution changes from laminar flow to turbulent flow, resulting in a significant pressure drop
of the polymer solution.

4. Conclusions
In this paper, the physical model of the partial pressure tool is established, then the flow
characteristic equation and transition velocity equation of polymer solution in the partial pressure tool
are deduced, and the following conclusions are obtained through specific analysis based on actual data:

(1) According to the deduced rheological equation, the pressure and apparent viscosity of the polymer
solution flowing through the partial pressure tools are related to the characteristics of the polymer
solution and the structural parameters of the partial pressure tools;
(2) When the polymer solution passes through the throttling section of the partial pressure tool, with
decreasing front groove angle (and consequently increasing rear groove angle) and decreasing
outer cylinder radius, the total pressure drop of the polymer solution increases. When the front
groove angle and rear groove angle are 30◦ and 45◦ , respectively, the pressure drop reaches a
maximum value of 1.77 MPa, and when the outer cylinder radius is 24 mm, the pressure drop
reaches a maximum value of 1.32 MPa;
(3) The apparent viscosity of the polymer solution is the same before and after flowing through
the partial pressure tool. With increasing front groove angle (and consequently decreasing rear
groove angle), the rate of the apparent viscosity decrease increases; however, the magnitude of
the decrease is reduced. With increasing outer cylinder radius, the initial value of the apparent
viscosity of the polymer solution increases.
(4) Based on the concept of stability factor, the transition velocity equation is established, and the
transition velocity of the polymer solution is calculated to be 50.29 m/s. When the velocity exceeds
50.29 m/s, the flow of the polymer solution changes from a laminar state to a turbulent state.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, B.H. and X.H.; Methodology, C.L.; Software, X.H.; Formal analysis, Y.W.;
Investigation and Writing—Original Draft Preparation, B.H. and X.H.; Writing—Review & Editing, Supervision
and Project Administration, B.H. and C.F.; Writing—Review & Editing, X.A. & Y.W.
Funding: National Natural Science Foundation of China (51804077), Excellent Scientific Research Talent Cultivation
Fund of Northeast Petroleum (SJQHB201803).
Acknowledgments: This work was supported by materials and experiments of Daqing Refining &
Chemical Company.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Polymers 2019, 11, 855 18 of 19

References
1. Shao, Z.B.; Zhou, J.S.; Sun, G. Studies on Mechanical degradation of partially hydrolized polyacrylamidein
course of polymer flooding: Changes in relative molecular mass, viscosity and related parameters. Oilfield
Chem. 2005, 22, 73–76.
2. Belden, W.M. Design and operations micellar-polymer pilot project facilities bell creek field. In Proceedings
of the SPE Rocky Mountain Regional Meeting, Casper, WY, USA, 14–16 May 1980.
3. Wu, D.; Ai, G.; Chen, Y.; Han, L.; Lin, S.; Meng, X.; Liang, H. Rheology and stability of IOR produced liquid
in daqing oilfield. In Proceedings of the SPE Asia Pacific Improved Oil Recovery Conference, Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia, 25–26 October 1999.
4. Meyers, J.J. Alkaline-Surfactant-Polymer flood of the west kiehl, minnelusa unit. In Proceedings of the
SPE/DOE Eighth Symposium on Enhanced Oil Recovery, Tulsa, Oklahoma, 22–24 April 1992.
5. Clark, S.R. Design and Application of an Alkaline-Surfactant-Polymer Recovery System for the West Kiehl
Field. SPE Adv. Technol. Ser. 1993, 1, 172–179. [CrossRef]
6. Denny, D. Effect of elasticity on displacement efficiency: High concentration polymer flooding. J. Pet. Technol.
2009, 61, 50–51. [CrossRef]
7. Wassmuth, F.R.; Gree, N.K. Polymer flood application to improve heavy oil recovery at east bodo. J. Can. Pet.
Technol. 2009, 48, 55–61. [CrossRef]
8. White, P.D.; Moss, J.T. Thermal Recovery Methods; PennWell Publishing Company: Tulsa, OK, USA, 1983.
9. Swulius, T.M. Porosity calibration of neutron logs, SACROC unit. In Proceedings of the SPE Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition, Houston, TX, USA, 16–19 September 1984.
10. Lerma, M.K.; Giuliani, M.A. Cost-effective methods of profile control in mature waterflood injectors.
In Proceedings of the SPE Western Regional Meeting, Long Beach, CA, USA, 23–25 March 1994.
11. Yin, H.J.; Wang, D.M.; Zhong, H.Y. Study on flow behavoirs of viscoelastic polymer solution in micropore
with dead end. In Proceedings of the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, TX,
USA, 24–27 September 2006.
12. Lee, S.J.; Kim, D.H.; Huh, C.; Pope, G.A. Development of a comprehensive rheological property database for
EOR polymers. In Proceedings of the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, LA,
USA, 4–7 October 2009.
13. Silva, I.P.G.; Aguiar, A.A.; Amaury, A.; Rezende, V.P.; Viviane, P. A polymer flooding mechanism for mature
oil fields: Laboratory measurements and field results interpretation. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 2018, 161, 468–475.
[CrossRef]
14. Li, H.C. Overview of separate injection technique for polymer flooding in Daqing oilfield. Oil Gas Geol. 2012,
33, 296–301.
15. Geng, C.H.; Liu, Q.W. Study on Polymer Single Pipe Layered Injection Process. Pet. Geol. Oilfield Dev. Daqing
2006, 25, 38–41.
16. Wu, G.H.; Chen, C.K.; Ju, S.H. On the flow of a polymer melt passing over a transverse slot. J. Polym. Eng.
1999, 19, 175–196. [CrossRef]
17. Huang, B.; Li, X.; Fu, C.; Wang, Y.; Cheng, H. Study rheological behavior of polymer solution in
different-medium-injection-tool. Polymers 2019, 11, 319. [CrossRef]
18. Malkus, D.S.; Bernstein, B. Flow of a curtiss-bird fluid over a transverse slot using the finite element
drift-function method. J. Non-Newton. Fluid Mech. 1984, 16, 77–116. [CrossRef]
19. Wang, Y.; Cui, H.Q.; Yang, Y.J. Pressure distribution on the wall of the inner cylinder reciprocating axially to
the unsteady flow of viscoelastic fluid in eccentric annulus. J. Hydrodyn. 2006, 18, 606–612. [CrossRef]
20. Hidema, R.; Murao, I.; Komoda, Y.; Suzuki, H. Effects of the extensional rheological properties of
polymer solutions on vortex shedding and turbulence characteristics in a two-dimensional turbulent
flow. J. Non-Newton. Fluid Mech. 2018, 254, 1–11. [CrossRef]
21. Wouter, J.T.; Robert, R. Dissipation in unsteady turbulence. Phys. Rev. Fluids 2017, 2, 022601.
22. Xin, X.K.; Yu, G.M.; Chen, Z.G.; Wu, K.L.; Dong, X.H.; Zhu, Z.Y. Effect of polymer degradation on polymer
flooding in heterogeneous reservoirs. Polymers 2018, 10, 857. [CrossRef]
23. Al-Shakry, B.; Skauge, T.; Shiran, B.S.; Skauge, A. Impact of mechanical degradation on polymer injectivity in
porous media. Polymers 2018, 10, 742. [CrossRef]
Polymers 2019, 11, 855 19 of 19

24. Takamure, K.; Sakai, Y.; Ito, Y.; Iwano, K.; Hayase, T. Dissipation scaling in the transition region of turbulent
mixing layer. Int. J. Heat Fluid Flow 2019, 75, 77–85. [CrossRef]
25. Dodge, D.W.; Metzner, A.B. Turbulent flow of non-newtonian systems. AICHE J. 2010, 5, 189–204. [CrossRef]
26. Chen, J.G.; Zhou, Y.; Antonia, R.A.; Zhou, T.M. Characteristics of the turbulent energy dissipation rate in a
cylinder wake. J. Fluid Mech. 2018, 835, 271–300. [CrossRef]
27. Shukhman, I.G.; Tewner, S.W.; Cohen, J. Vortical disturbances in a linearly stratifed linear shear flow. I. linear
theory. Phys. Fluids 2015, 27, 024104. [CrossRef]
28. Vassilicos, J.C. Dissipation in turbulent flows. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 2015, 47, 95–114. [CrossRef]
29. Liu, N.Z.; Wang, Y.R.; Liu, X.L.; Liu, C.J. Stability of non-newtonian fluid and its flow pattern discrimination.
Nat. Gas Ind. 2003, 23, 53–57.
30. Liu, C.J.; Liu, H.X. Discussion on the z value of the quasi number for judging liquid flow state. J. Southwest
Pet. Inst. 1981, 2, 12–23.
31. Manneville, P. Laminar-turbulent patterning in transitional flows. Entropy 2017, 19, 316. [CrossRef]
32. Gavrilov1, A.A.; Rudyak, V.Y. Direct numerical simulation of the turbulent flows of power-law fluids in a
circular pipe. Thermophys. Aeromech. 2016, 23, 473–486. [CrossRef]

© 2019 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/).