Laboratory experiments show that combined ultrasound waves and chemical additives improve rheological parameters in oil, indicating enhanced pipeline efficiency.
"This article presents, for the first time, detailed information on the results of laboratory experiments examining the effects of ultrasound waves as a physical method and the Difron-3970 depressant additive as a chemical method – applied individually and in combination – on the rheological parameters of oil samples. These samples, characterized by a high content of heavy hydrocarbons, were obtained from the Narimanov field of the State Oil Company of the Republic of Azerbaijan (SOCAR). The experiments also investigated the amount of asphaltene-resin-paraffin deposits formed under different conditions. The influence of ultrasound waves on the oil samples was tested for 5, 10, and 15 minutes, with the optimal treatment time determined to be 15 minutes. The study employed varying concentrations of the Difron-3970 depressant additive (100, 200, 300, 400, 500, 600, and 700 g/t), and the optimal concentration was 700 g/t. For the combined effect of ultrasound waves and the depressant additive, the optimal dosage of Difron-3970 was found to be 500 g/t, while the optimal ultrasound exposure time was 10 minutes. The results of laboratory experiments has revealed that the combined physical-chemical method is more effective than the physical or chemical methods applied individually. Furthermore, during individual tests of the Difron-3970 depressant additive, it was observed that the optimal dosage was reduced by 200 g/t, and the optimal ultrasound exposure time was shortened by 5 minutes. This demonstrates that the combined physical-chemical method offers improved cost-efficiency. Therefore, we propose the application of both the Difron-3970 depressant additive and ultrasound waves in field conditions as an economically and environmentally viable method for improving the pipeline transport of high-viscosity, high-freezing-point crude oil."
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gurbanov et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: