7092 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.

2009, 48, 70927102

Determination of Water-in-Oil Emulsion Viscosity in Porous Media

Mohamed Arhuoma, Mingzhe Dong, Daoyong Yang,*, and Raphael Idem
Faculty of Engineering, UniVersity of Regina, Regina, SK, Canada S4S 0A2, and Department of Chemical and
Petroleum Engineering, UniVersity of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada T2N 1N4

Experiments have been conducted to determine the viscosities of water-in-oil (W/O) emulsions in porous
media. W/O emulsions were first prepared for different volume fractions of the dispersed phase and then
characterized for their properties and rheological parameters including flow index and consistency constant.
All prepared W/O emulsions with volume fractions between 6.78% and 33.48% were found to behave as
non-Newtonian shear-thinning fluids at fairly high viscosities. The viscosities of the emulsions were measured
during emulsion flow in three types of sandpacks. A correlation of the viscosities of the W/O emulsions in
porous media was developed by performing a regression on the experimentally measured data. The newly
developed correlation was validated, and a sensitivity analysis was performed to examine the effects of tortuosity
and emulsion quality. The emulsion quality has a dominant effect on the viscosity of the W/O emulsions and
has been included in the correlation for the first time to achieve accurate predictions of the viscosities of
W/O emulsions in porous media. The existing correlations for oil-in-water (O/W) emulsions provide
underestimated predictions for the viscosities of W/O emulsions, whereas the droplet size distribution does
not have a significant impact on the viscosity of the W/O emulsions tested in this study.

1. Introduction and emulsion properties, most of which are related to O/W

emulsions rather than W/O emulsions.1,10,11 The power-law
Because heavy oils are often produced from subsurface
model is the simplest representation of the viscosity of non-
reservoirs with water in the form of water-in-oil (W/O)
Newtonian fluids. The O/W emulsion flow in glass beadpacks
emulsions, it is of great interest for petroleum engineers to
of several different meshes has been studied.10 A viscosity model
understand how these mixtures behave during flow within
has been developed to simulate the viscosity of an O/W
porous media. Extensive efforts have been made to determine
emulsion, assuming that the emulsion is a single-phase and
and quantify the viscosity of oil-in-water (O/W) emulsions in
homogeneous fluid,12,13 and a model has been formulated to
porous media both theoretically and experimentally. Few
determine the effective viscosity of non-Newtonian fluids.1 Also,
attempts, however, have been made to determine the viscosity
experiments have been conducted to study the flow mechanism
of W/O emulsions, even though almost two-thirds of crude oil
of emulsions in porous media and to investigate the emulsion
worldwide is mainly produced in the form of W/O emulsions.1
rheology and the blocking or capture effect of emulsions during
Therefore, it is of fundamental and practical importance to
displacement process.11 So far, no efforts have been made
accurately determine and evaluate the viscosity of W/O emul-
available to thoroughly study the viscosity of W/O emulsions
sions in porous media.
in porous media. In addition, because experimentally determin-
As an enhanced oil recovery (EOR) technique, alkaline
ing the viscosities of emulsions is time-consuming, accurate and
flooding has been extensively studied for conventional oils,
well-constructed correlations need to be developed for charac-
including numerous laboratory experiments and some field tests.
terizing W/O emulsion flow in porous media.
Laboratory experiments showed that caustic flooding could
In this study, experiments were performed to determine the
significantly improve oil recovery of waterflood at a concentra-
viscosities of W/O emulsions. The emulsions were first prepared
tion of 0.1% NaOH.2 It is well-accepted that in situ O/W
by the so-called agent-in-water technique.14-16 Then, emulsion
emulsions tend to plug growing water fingers and channels and,
flow tests in sandpacks were performed at different flow rates,
thus, divert flow to improve sweep efficiency. Recent research
and the corresponding differential pressures were recorded when
showed that waterflood recovery of Western Canadian heavy
the flow reached the steady state so that the emulsion viscosities
oils with viscosities from 1000 to over 10000 mPa s could be
were determined accordingly. Subsequently, the experimental
improved considerably by alkaline flooding.3-7 This is ascribed
emulsion viscosity together with the other dependent parameters,
to the fact that alkaline solutions can penetrate into heavy oil
namely, porosity, permeability, flow index, consistency constant,
in porous media by forming W/O emulsions in situ. Because
tortuosity, and flow rate, were used to develop a correlation.
of the high viscosity of W/O emulsions, the resistance to water
flow in the high water saturation zone can be increased
2. Experimental Section
significantly to improve sweep efficiency and thus oil recovery.
In the literature, there exist two major groups of studies for 2.1. Materials. An oil sample from an Alberta heavy oil
determining emulsion viscosities. One determines the viscosity reservoir was used for the experiments; its properties are listed
of an emulsion as a function of emulsion quality and the in Table 1. Oil viscosity was measured using a viscometer (DV-
viscosities of the internal and external phases without consider- II+Pro, Brookfield, Middleboro, MA) with a heating/cooling
ing porous media.1,8,9 The other considers the porous media water bath. The viscometer was equipped with two spindles
(CPE-42 and CPE-52) for low- and high-viscosity measure-
* To whom correspondence should be addressed. Tel.: 1-306-337-
2660. Fax: 1-306-585-4855. E-mail: tony.yang@uregina.ca. ments, respectively. The crude oil used in this study was

University of Regina. considered as a Newtonian fluid because the viscosity of the

University of Calgary. crude oil remains almost constant while being measured with a
10.1021/ie801818n CCC: $40.75 2009 American Chemical Society
Published on Web 07/02/2009

Table 1. Physical Properties of the Pelican Oil Sample
property value
density at 15 C (kg/m3) 970.9
density at 25 C (kg/m3) 964.2
viscosity at 15 C (mPa s) 2440
viscosity at 22 C (mPa s) 1360
viscosity at 25 C (mPa s) 1020
water content (%) <0.5
acid number (mg of KOH/g) 1.07
viscometer at different rotation speeds. Brine with 1.0 wt %
NaCl was used as the water phase for all experiments. The
alkaline solution used in this study was prepared by mixing
distilled water with 1.0 wt % NaCl and 0.2 wt % NaOH. Sands
(U.S. Silica Company, Berkeley Springs, WV) of 40-60,
60-100, and 120-170 meshes were used to make three
different sandpacks. After numerous trials of emulsion prepara-
tion with a wide range of concentrations of NaCl and NaOH in
this study, the above-mentioned concentration combination was
found to lead to consistent and stable emulsions. The emulsion
equality (i.e., water content in volume percentage) was measured
using a Dean-Stark distiller (Style A, Kimax) (Kimble Glass,
Vineland, NJ).
2.2. Experimental Setup. Figure 1 illustrates a block diagram
of the emulsion flow test. The experimental setup consisted of a
syringe pump, three cylinders, a sandpack, a sample cylinder, and
a pressure transducer that was connected to a desktop computer
for continuous recording of the pressure drop. The syringe pump
(500D, Teledyne ISCO, Lincoln, NE) was used to inject fluids at
a desired rate. All emulsion flow tests in this study were conducted
at the ambient temperature of 22 C.
Figure 2 shows the sandpack holder used for all emulsion
flow tests. The holder was composed of a stainless-steel pipe,
two caps, two distributors, and two rubber O-rings. The internal
smooth surface of the holder was roughened by gluing a layer
of sand to it to avoid the bypassing of fluid during flow tests.
The distributors were equipped with a very fine screen to prevent
sand production, and the O-rings offered a tight seal on both
ends. The sandpacks were 60 mm in length and 43 mm in
diameter. A vibration unit was used in preparing sandpacks to
ensure consistent and well-packed porous media.
A mixer (Arrow-850, Arrow Engineering, Hillside, NJ) was
used to agitate the oil and water to make stable emulsions. A
microscope (ME600, Nikon, Tokyo, Japan) equipped with a
digital camera and software was used to determine the droplet
size distributions of the emulsions.
2.3. Experimental Procedures.
2.3.1. Sandpack Preparation and Property Determina-
tion. Sandpacks were prepared at the ambient temperature of
22 C, and fresh sand was used for each test to ensure similar
wettability. Three major steps involved in preparing each porous
medium included seizing the sand, packing the core holder, and
determining properties of the porous medium.
First, the silica sand was classified into three categories,
namely, A, B, and C, each having different meshes: 40-60,
60-100, and 120-170, respectively. The sieving process was
undertaken using a sieve shaker (Rotap CW, Martin Engineer-
ing, Neponset, IL) with different sieves varying from 40 to 220
meshes. Second, the core holder was placed in the vibration
unit in the vertical position and filled with 1.0 wt % NaCl brine,
and then the desired sand was gradually added into the core
holder. A perfect packing was needed for the preparation of
the porous media. Finally, the porosity was measured by two
different methods, namely, the weight and volumetric methods,
and the permeability measurement was conducted using Darcys
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 48, No. 15, 2009 7093
law. Table 2 summarizes the properties of the three types of
porous media used for the emulsion flow tests.
2.3.2. Emulsion Preparation. Each emulsion was prepared
using the so-called agent-in-water technique; that is, the agent
was first mixed thoroughly with water and then agitated with
crude oil using a mixer.14-16 To start, 1.0 wt % NaCl brine
and 0.2 wt % NaOH were well mixed and ready for use in the
experiments. During the experiments, crude oil and caustic
solution were mixed with known volume proportions (6.78%,
12.61%, 16.52%, 24.36%, and 33.48% of water) and then
agitated at 200 rpm for 60 min, which were found to be the
optimum conditions for making emulsions from the caustic
solution and the given crude oil. The prepared emulsions were
found to be of the W/O type with a minimum stability time of
3 days. Thus, such prepared emulsions could be used in the
emulsion flow tests because of their fair stability. All emulsions
were prepared at the ambient temperature of 22 C.
2.3.3. Determination of Emulsion Viscosity. The detailed
procedure for determining the viscosity of the emulsions is
described as follows: An emulsion flow test was initiated after
the properties of the porous medium and the emulsion were
characterized. Once the sandpack was already fully saturated
with brine, it was placed horizontally. Then, the heavy oil was
injected into the sandpack at a flow rate of 15 cm3/h (frontal
velocity ) 0.80 m/day) for a total of 1.0 pore volume (PV) at
which water production was negligible and thus the irreducible
water saturation was reached. At this point, the pressure drop
was usually very stable. Subsequently, the injection flow rate
of crude oil was increased to 20 cm3/h (frontal velocity ) 1.06
m/day) and continued at this rate until the pressure drop became
stable. Accordingly, the same procedure was repeated for other
two flow rates, 25 cm3/h (frontal velocity ) 1.33 m/day) and
30 cm3/h (frontal velocity ) 1.60 m/day).
At the end of each oil injection, the prepared emulsion was
injected at the same flow rate and continued until the following
two conditions were met: a stable pressure drop and equality
of the inlet and effluent emulsion qualities. During the experi-
ments, the pressure drop stability was checked, and then a
sample of the effluent was taken and the quality test was
conducted. As soon as the emulsion quality of the effluent was
found to be equal to that of the inlet, the injection was switched
to a higher flow rate. It should be noted that the injected and
produced emulsion qualities had to be equal before a higher
flow rate was selected. Also, the pressure drop at this point was
used to calculate the viscosity of the emulsion.
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Droplet Size Distribution. It is accepted that the
droplet size distribution is one of the most important
characteristics of O/W emulsions.14 A Nikon microscope and
imaging software were used to determine the droplet size
distribution for all emulsions used in the experiments. The
droplet size distribution for the 6.78%, 12.61%, 16.52%,
24.36%, and 33.48% emulsions were measured and graphi-
cally illustrated. Emulsions with lower water contents, such
as the 6.78% emulsion, have smaller drops and fewer large
drops (see Figure 3a) compared to other emulsions with
higher quality, as shown in Figure 3b. This means that the
percentage of the large drops in an emulsion increases with
increasing water content and vice versa for the small drops.
The droplet size distribution for the 6.78% emulsion had a
droplet size ranging from 0 to 5.35 m, as illustrated in Figure
4a, whereas Figure 4b shows the droplet size distribution
for the 33.48% emulsion, in which the droplet size ranges
7094 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 48, No. 15, 2009

Figure 1. Block diagram used to conduct experiments for emulsion flow in sandpacks.

Figure 2. Photograph of the stainless-steel sandpack holder.

Table 2. Physical Properties of Sandpacks

sandpack
property A B C
k (darcy) 12.0 6.0 2.9
(%) 31.6 31.0 30.6
length (mm) 60 60 60
diameter (mm) 43 43 43
area (mm2) 1451.5 1451.5 1451.5
from 0 to 15.50 m. The average droplet sizes for the 6.78%,
12.61%, 16.52%, 24.36%, and 34.48% emulsions were found
to be 0.961, 1.265, 1.513, 1.618, and 2.931 m, respectively.
Based on the laboratory experiments, it was found that the Figure 3. Photograph of droplet distribution under the microscope: (a) 6.78%
droplet size distribution does not have a significant impact and (b) 33.48% emulsions.
on the viscosity of W/O emulsions. This is contrary to the
previous findings for O/W emulsions. This difference might oil is much higher than that of water in W/O emulsions. This
be due to the fact that all of the emulsions used in this study is experimentally indicated by the facts that the emulsion qualities
with different droplet size distributions showed no trapping at the inlet and outlet reached equality and the pressure drop became
of the droplets in the sandpacks because the viscosity of crude stable and remained almost constant after emulsion flow in the
 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 48, No. 15, 2009 7095

Figure 5. Superposition of the sandpacks and capillary rheograms.

Figure 4. Droplet size distribution: (a) 6.78% and (b) 33.48% emulsions.
Figure 6. Tortuosity vs grain size.
sandpack for a certain time. Therefore, the droplet size has less of
an effect on the flow of W/O emulsions than on that of O/W
emulsions in porous media and is excluded from the corresponding
correlations described herein.
3.2. Tortuosity. Because fluid flows through porous media
within a network simple channel structure, the parameter
tortuosity (R) is used to characterize the fluid flow in the porous
media, which depends on the path structure of the porous
medium.13 In this study, a conventional procedure developed
for determining tortuosity was used to characterize the porous
media used in the experiments.13 This was done by bringing
the flow rheograms of the capillary and porous media into
superposition for determining the tortuosity.
Figure 5 shows the superposition curves used to determine the
tortuosities of the three different sandpacks, A-C. The tortuosity
was found to be 1.820, 1.678, and 1.635 for sandpacks A, B, and
C, respectively. The tortuosities of the sandpacks are plotted against
the sandpack grain size in Figure 6. It can be seen from this figure
that tortuosity is weakly dependent on the grain size.
Figure 7. Pressure drop profiles for oil and 16.52%, 24.36%, and 33.48%
3.3. Viscosities of W/O Emulsions. Figure 7 shows the emulsions flowing through sandpack A.
pressure drop profiles of the flow tests for the oil and the
16.52%, 24.36%, and 33.48% emulsions through sandpack A. In principle, Darcys law can be generalized for both
At a given flow rate, the corresponding pressure drop increases Newtonian and non-Newtonian fluids.9,18 In this study, the
as the emulsion quality increases. This is due to the differences effective viscosity of an emulsion through a porous medium
in viscosity between the injected emulsions.17 Figures 8 and 9 was determined using Darcys law for both emulsion flow
show the pressure drop profiles of flow tests for the oil and the and oil flow in the same sandpack and comparing the
6.78%, 12.61%, 16.52%, and 24.36% emulsions flowing through measured pressure drop of the emulsion flow with that of
sandpacks B and C, respectively. the oil flow at the same flow rate. Then, eq 1 can be easily
7096 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 48, No. 15, 2009

quality decreased as the flow rate increased. This is an indication

of shear-thinning non-Newtonian behavior.19,20

4. Correlation of Emulsion Viscosity

4.1. Mathematical Model. The introduction of the pro-
posed model for calculating the viscosity of W/O emulsions
was initiated from the Ostwald-de Waele model or the
power-law model.9 The power-law model is used to explain
the relationship between the shear rate and shear stress with
the viscosity. The general form of the power-law model for
non-Newtonian fluids is9

Figure 8. Pressure drop profiles for oil and 6.78%, 12.61%, 16.52%, and
24.36% emulsions flowing through sandpack B.
) Kn (2)
where K is the consistency constant (Pa sn), n is the flow
index, is the shear rate (s-1), and is the shear stress (Pa).
The parameters n and K represent the degree of non-
Newtonian behavior. The fluid is considered to be a non-
Newtonian fluid if n * 1. In addition, the degree of
non-Newtonian behavior increases as the flow index, n,
deviates from unity. Then, the power law has the same form
as that for the Newtonian fluid (n ) 1 and K ) ).9 Because
the Pelican crude oil was found to be a Newtonian fluid, n
) 1 and K ) . Traditionally, correlations for determining
the viscosity of emulsions in porous media are based on the
following equation (refer to the Appendix for a detailed
mathematical derivation)

Figure 9. Pressure drop profiles for oil and 6.78%, 12.61%, 16.52%, and
24.36% emulsions flowing through sandpack C.
obtained to calculate the viscosity of an emulsion (e) as a
function of the oil viscosity (o) and the pressure drops of
emulsion flow (Pe) and oil flow (Po) at the same flow
rate through the same sandpack
e Pe oPe
( )
4Vp n-1
eff ) K (3)
Rk
where k is the permeability of the porous medium (m2), Vp
is the average velocity (m/s), eff is the effective emulsion
viscosity (mPa s), R is the tortuosity, and is the porosity
(fraction).
The detailed procedure for developing the correlation is
provided in the Appendix. It was found from the preliminary
results in this study that the existing correlations generated from
eq 3 failed to predict the viscosity of W/O emulsions, and thus,
modifications had to be made. Tables 3-5 demonstrate that
the viscosity of an emulsion is strongly proportional to its
quality. This trend is also reported in the literature for O/W
emulsions.17,20,21 Therefore, eq 3 was modified to the
following form to take emulsion quality into account

( )
) e ) (1) 4Vp n-1
o Po Po
eff ) CaKb (4)
Rk
The calculated viscosities of the emulsions flowing through
sandpacks A-C are listed in Tables 3-5, respectively. As for The constants C, a, and b in eq 4 are to be determined through
each sandpack, the emulsion viscosity at a given emulsion a regression procedure.

Table 3. Emulsion Viscosity for the W/O Emulsions in Sandpack A

flow rate, Q oil pressure drop, Po emulsion pressure drop, Pe
-7
emulsion quality, (%) 3
cm /h 10 m /s 3
mmH2O Pa mmH2O Pa emulsion viscosity, e (mPa s)
16.52 15 2.50 1876 18398 3191 31294 2313.3
20 3.33 2528 24792 4174 40934 2245.5
25 4.17 3080 30206 5013 49162 2213.5
30 5.00 3725 36531 5926 58116 2163.6
24.36 15 2.50 1876 18398 3924 38483 2844.7
20 3.33 2528 24792 5118 50192 2753.4
25 4.17 3080 30206 6112 59940 2698.8
30 5.00 3725 36531 7248 71081 2646.2
33.48 15 2.50 1876 18398 4903 48084 3554.9
20 3.33 2528 24792 6533 64069 3514.5
25 4.17 3080 30206 7882 77299 3480.7
30 5.00 3725 36531 9497 93137 3467.2
 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 48, No. 15, 2009 7097
Table 4. Emulsion Viscosity for the W/O Emulsions in Sandpack B
flow rate, Q oil pressure drop, Po emulsion pressure drop, Pe
emulsion quality, (%) cm3/h 10-7 m3/s mmH2O Pa mmH2O Pa emulsion viscosity, e (mPa s)
6.78 15 2.50 4185 41042 5030 49329 1634.6
20 3.33 5592 54841 6709 65795 1630.8
25 4.17 6850 67178 8190 80319 1626.1
30 5.00 8397 82349 9997 98041 1619.1
12.61 15 2.50 4185 41042 5935 58205 1928.7
20 3.33 5592 54841 7864 77122 1912.5
25 4.17 6850 67178 9571 93863 1900.1
30 5.00 8397 82349 11642 114173 1884.9
16.52 15 2.50 4185 41042 6970 68355 2265.1
20 3.33 5592 54841 8992 88185 2185.7
25 4.17 6850 67178 10905 106945 2164.1
30 5.00 8397 82349 12975 127246 2100.5
24.36 15 2.50 4185 41042 8472 83085 2753.6
20 3.33 5592 54841 11187 109711 2720.1
25 4.17 6850 67178 13394 131355 2659.1
30 5.00 8397 82349 16054 157442 2604.5

Table 5. Emulsion Viscosity for the W/O Emulsions in Sandpack C

flow rate, Q oil pressure drop, Po emulsion pressure drop, Pe
-7
emulsion quality, (%) 3
cm /h 10 m /s 3
mmH2O Pa mmH2O Pa emulsion viscosity, e (mPa s)
6.78 15 2.50 8485 83212 9361 91803 1504.9
20 3.33 11390 111702 12520 122784 1495.1
25 4.17 14226 139514 15570 152695 1488.7
30 5.00 16987 166592 18483 181263 1478.2
12.61 15 2.50 8485 83212 11067 108534 1774.1
20 3.33 11390 111702 14758 144732 1762.3
25 4.17 14226 139514 18329 179753 1752.5
30 5.00 16987 166592 21404 209909 1711.5
16.52 15 2.50 8485 83212 12720 124745 2040.3
20 3.33 11390 111702 16914 165876 2019.2
25 4.17 14226 139514 20980 205751 2006.3
30 5.00 16987 166592 24920 244390 1992.9
24.36 15 2.50 8485 83212 15275 149802 2448.6
20 3.33 11390 111702 20106 197180 2405.3
25 4.17 14226 139514 24904 244234 2381.1
30 5.00 16987 166592 29364 287973 2349.8

4.2. Emulsion Rheological Behavior. The rheological prop-
erties (n and K) of emulsions with qualities of 6.78%, 12.61%,
16.52%, 24.36%, and 33.48% were examined and are plotted
in Figure 10. The parameters n and K are the flow index and
the consistency constant, respectively. It should be noted that
the values of flow index for the emulsions are less than unity.
This means that all of the emulsions behaved as non-Newtonian
fluids.1,13 Also, the flow index decreased with increasing
emulsion quality. As this parameter increases toward unity, the
fluid moves closer to the Newtonian region, and it becomes a
Newtonian fluid when n equals unity. The consistency constant
increased with increasing emulsion quality. This implies that
the viscosity increases as K increases. Thus, the fluid with a
higher K value has a higher viscosity.10 The relationship between
the rheological behavior parameters, n and K, and the emulsion
quality is illustrated in Figure 11. The flow index decreases as
the emulsion quality is increased, whereas the consistency
constant increases as the emulsion quality is increased. This is
because the emulsion behaves as a non-Newtonian fluid as its
quality increases.

Figure 11. Flow index (n) and consistency constant (K) vs emulsion
Figure 10. Rheological behavior of the emulsions. quality.
7098 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 48, No. 15, 2009

Figure 12. Parity chart for the model including emulsion quality (), Figure 13. Parity chart for the model excluding the emulsion quality.
consistency constant (K), flow index (n), average flow velocity (Vp),
permeability (k), porosity (), and tortuosity (R).

4.3. Sensitivity Analysis. A sensitivity analysis was per-

formed to evaluate the newly developed eq 4 for predicting the
viscosity of W/O emulsions with seven parameters, namely, the
experimentally determined flow index (n), the consistency
constant (K), the emulsion quality (), the average velocity (Vp),
the tortuosity (R), the permeability (k), and the porosity ().
The emulsion viscosity correlation was generated using the
following procedure:
(1) Experiments were conducted to determine the above-
mentioned seven parameters, which are included in eq 4.
(2) The nonlinear regression technique was used to generate
the regression for the experimental data. Equation 5 is the
regressed correlation

( )
Figure 14. Parity chart for the model excluding tortuosity.
4Vp n-1
eff ) 3.211 1030.366K0.44 (5)
Rk Table 6. Validation of the Newly Developed Correlation for an
Emulsion of 33.48% in Sandpack A
(3) The regression was repeated excluding the emulsion emulsion viscosity
quality, giving eq 6 as the regressed correlation. A different flow rate (mPa s)
relative error
form of the correlation exists, with a different absolute average cm3/h 10-7 m3/s measured calculated [(exp - cal)/exp] 100%
relative error and R2 value
15 2.50 3554.9 3610.4 -1.56

( )
20 3.33 3514.5 3496.8 0.50
4Vp n-1 25 4.17 3480.7 3411.2 1.99
eff ) 0.76 103K1.31 (6) 30 5.00 3467.2 3342.8 3.58
Rk
of measurements. In this study, the absolute average relative
(4) The regression was repeated for all other parameters error can be written as22,23
excluding the tortuosity, and eq 7 was obtained as the correlation

| exp,i - cal,i
|
n

( )
4Vp n-1
eff ) 3.64 1030.41K0.43 (7)
k
(5) The three correlations were compared in terms of the
absolute average relative errors, R2 values, and parity charts for
each correlation.
The aforementioned three correlations were used to calculate
the viscosities of emulsions. Correspondingly, a parity chart was
generated for each correlation with the absolute average relative
error. The absolute average relative error is defined as the sum
of the relative difference between the experimental and calcu-
lated values of the emulsion viscosity divided by the number
1
a ) 100% (8)
n i)1
exp,i
where n is the number of data points, cal is the calculated
emulsion viscosity (mPa s), exp is the experimental emulsion
viscosity (mPa s), and a is the absolute average relative
error (%).
Figure 12 illustrates the viscosities of emulsions obtained
using eq 5, which represents the viscosity of an emulsion when
all of the interdependent parameters are included. The abso-
lute average relative error and R2 value were found to be 3.11%
and 0.9729, respectively, with an overestimated level of 3.30%
and an underestimated level of 3.00%. As a result, the effective
emulsion viscosity (eff) was ultimately found to be a function
 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 48, No. 15, 2009 7099
Table 7. Comparison between the Newly Developed Correlation and the Existing Models for Determining Emulsion Viscosity in Sandpack A
emulsion viscosity, mPa s
flow rate this study
emulsion quality (%) cm3/h 10-7 m3/s measured calculated Uzoigwe and Marsden10 Christopher and Middkeman24 Gregory and Grisky25
16.52 15 2.50 2313.3 2235.6 609.3 752.1 736.8
20 3.33 2245.5 2186.7 595.9 735.5 720.5
25 4.17 2213.5 2149.5 586.8 724.3 709.6
30 5.00 2163.6 2119.5 578.7 714.3 699.7
24.36 15 2.50 2844.7 2785.6 563.0 698.6 681.7
20 3.33 2753.4 2714.4 548.4 680.5 664.1
25 4.17 2698.8 2660.5 538.9 668.6 652.5
30 5.00 2646.2 2617.2 529.9 657.5 641.6

Table 8. Comparison between the Newly Developed Correlation and the Existing Models for Determining Emulsion Viscosity in Sandpack B
emulsion viscosity, mPa s
flow rate this study
emulsion quality (%) cm3/h 10-7 m3/s measured calculated Uzoigwe and Marsden10 Christopher and Middkeman24 Gregory and Grisky25
6.78 15 2.50 1634.6 1562.9 791.6 954.3 951.1
20 3.33 1630.8 1557.1 788.7 950.6 947.5
25 4.17 1626.1 1552.5 786.6 948.1 945.0
30 5.00 1619.1 1548.9 784.5 945.7 942.6
12.61 15 2.50 1928.7 1892.9 666.6 815.0 803.9
20 3.33 1912.5 1864.8 656.4 802.5 791.6
25 4.17 1900.1 1843.2 649.3 793.9 783.1
30 5.00 1884.9 1825.8 642.4 785.4 774.7
16.52 15 2.50 2265.1 2160.2 585.9 723.3 708.5
20 3.33 2185.7 2112.9 573.6 708.1 693.6
25 4.17 2164.1 2076.9 564.5 696.8 682.5
30 5.00 2100.5 2048.0 556.3 686.7 672.7
24.36 15 2.50 2753.6 2676.6 538.4 668.0 651.9
20 3.33 2720.1 2608.2 523.8 649.9 634.2
25 4.17 2659.1 2556.3 514.5 638.4 623.0
30 5.00 2604.5 2514.7 505.4 627.1 612.0

Table 9. Comparison between the Newly Developed Correlation and the Existing Models for Determining Emulsion Viscosity in Sandpack C
emulsion viscosity, mPa s
flow rate this study
emulsion quality (%) cm3/h 10-7 m3/s measured calculated Uzoigwe and Marsden10 Christopher and Middkeman24 Gregory and Grisky25
6.78 15 2.50 1504.9 1554.3 789.3 951.4 948.3
20 3.33 1495.1 1548.5 786.3 947.8 944.7
25 4.17 1488.7 1544.0 784.0 945.1 942.0
30 5.00 1478.2 1540.4 782.3 942.9 939.8
12.61 15 2.50 1774.1 1851.7 658.3 804.8 793.9
20 3.33 1762.3 1824.1 648.0 792.2 781.5
25 4.17 1752.5 1803.0 640.3 782.8 772.2
30 5.00 1711.5 1786.0 634.9 776.2 765.7
16.52 15 2.50 2040.3 2091.0 575.9 710.9 696.4
20 3.33 2019.2 2045.2 562.4 694.2 680.0
25 4.17 2006.3 2010.4 552.4 681.8 667.9
30 5.00 1992.9 1982.4 544.5 672.1 658.4
24.36 15 2.50 2448.6 2576.6 528.1 655.3 639.5
20 3.33 2405.3 2510.8 514.0 637.7 622.3
25 4.17 2381.1 2460.9 503.2 624.4 609.3
30 5.00 2349.8 2420.8 495.1 614.3 599.5

of emulsion quality (), consistency constant (K), flow index
(n), average flow velocity (Vp), permeability (k), porosity (),
and tortuosity (R).
Figure 13 is the parity chart for the experimental and
correlated emulsion viscosities generated using eq 6 with all
of the parameters except the emulsion quality. In this case,
the absolute average relative error and R2 value were found
to be 5.30% and 0.9121, respectively, with an overestimated
level of 7.10% and an underestimated level of 4.00%. This
is mainly due to the contribution of emulsion quality and its
significant impact on the viscosity of emulsions. Emulsion
viscosity was found to rapidly increase with increasing
emulsion quality. This explains the deformation in the overall
trend when emulsion quality is excluded from the emulsion
viscosity correlation.
Figure 14 is the parity chart for the experimental and
correlated emulsion viscosities based on eq 7, which excludes
tortuosity. The absolute average relative error and R2 value were
determined to be 3.27% and 0.9675, respectively, with an
overestimated average error of 3.70% and an underestimated
average error of 3.00%. The tortuosity has a minor effect on
the viscosity of emulsions, as demonstrated in the experiments.
In practice, it is difficult and time-consuming to experimentally
determine the tortuosity. The tortuosity can be excluded when
determining the viscosity of an emulsion because the correlation
is still sufficiently accurate for determining the viscosity of W/O
7100 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 48, No. 15, 2009
emulsions. The final form of the developed correlation can be
expressed as in eq 5.
4.4. Correlation Validation. After the correlation was
constructed, we conducted a validation test to ensure its
applicability for out-of-range predictions. The emulsion with
33.48% quality, which was not included in the data for
generating the correlation, was used to validate the correla-
tion. Equation 5, the newly developed correlation, was used
to predict the viscosity for the 33.48% emulsion in sandpack
A. At four different flow rates, namely, 15, 20, 25, and 30
cm3/h, the emulsion viscosities were calculated correspond-
ingly. Table 6 lists the experimental emulsion viscosities and
the data calculated using eq 5 for the 33.48% emulsion. The
maximum relative error was found to be 3.58%. This indicates
that the newly developed correlation can predict the viscosity
of W/O emulsions flowing through porous media with a small
relative error. It was found that the emulsion viscosity
decreases as the flow rate increases, as indicated in Table 6.
Thus, the W/O emulsions tested in this study behave as non-
Newtonian fluids.
4.5. Correlation Comparison. The newly developed cor-
relation in this study was compared with some avail-
able models.10,24,25 Tables 7-9 include comparisons of the
experimentally measured W/O emulsion viscosities and the
calculated data from the aforementioned models for all three
sandpacks, A-C. It can be seen that the emulsion viscosities
are underestimated by all three existing models. This is
mainly due to the fact that all of the existing models were
generated for O/W emulsions rather than W/O emulsions.
The first model was developed for O/W emulsions with very
low viscosities.10 The second model was developed using
packed tubes and not a true porous medium,24 and the third
model was developed for molten polymers rather than for
emulsions.25 In particular, the fluids used in all of the
experiments were tap water and Soltrol with a viscosity of
1.3 mPa s, and glass beads of five different ranges of mesh
size rather than actual sands were used.
5. Conclusions
Experiments have been conducted in this study to determine
the viscosities of W/O emulsions using three types of sand as
porous media at different flow rates. The major conclusions that
can be drawn from this study are as follows:
(1) The droplet size distribution did not have a significant
impact on the viscosity of the W/O emulsions prepared in this
study. This is contrary to the previous findings for O/W
emulsions. This difference can be ascribed to the fact that all
emulsions used in this study with different droplet size distribu-
tions showed no trapping of the droplets in the sandpacks
because the viscosity of crude oil is much higher than that of
water in W/O emulsions. This is experimentally indicated by
the emulsion qualities at the inlet and outlet reaching equality
and by the pressure drop becoming stable and remaining almost
constant.
(2) The measured emulsion viscosity decreased as the flow
rate increased. The degree of reduction was higher for emulsions
of higher quality compared with those of lower quality. The
reduction is mainly due to the fact that all of the emulsions
showed shear-thinning behavior. The reduction was stronger in
low-permeability porous media because the shear rate is higher
in lower-permeability porous media at the same flow rate.
(3) A correlation was developed for determining the viscosity
of W/O emulsions in porous media. The emulsion quality has
a dominant effect on the viscosity of W/O emulsions and was
therefore included in the correlation for the first time to achieve
accurate predictions of the viscosities of W/O emulsions in
porous media.
(4) Emulsion quality was found to be a significant parameter
affecting the overall accuracy of the correlation. The absolute
average relative error and R2 value were found to be 3.11%
and 0.9725, respectively, with overestimated and underestimated
levels of 3.30% and 3.00%, respectively. A sensitivity analysis
showed that the tortuosity has a minor effect on the viscosity
of emulsions for the homogeneous porous media used in this
study and can be excluded from the correlation.
(5) The new correlation was validated using experimentally
measured emulsion viscosities for a 33.48% emulsion. The
maximum relative error was found to be 3.58%. This means
that the correlation can be used to accurately predict the
viscosities of W/O emulsions.
(6) Compared with the newly developed model, the existing
models for O/W emulsions usually provide underestimated
predictions for the viscosities of W/O emulsions.
Acknowledgment
We thank the Petroleum Technology Research Centre (PTRC),
the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC)
of Canada, and the Canada Foundation for Innovation (CFI)
for financial support of this work.
Nomenclature
Variables
d ) capillary diameter, m
k ) permeability of porous medium, m2
K ) consistency constant, Pa sn
n ) flow index
Q ) flow rate, m3/s
rc ) capillary tube radius, m
Vc ) flow velocity for capillary tube, m/s
Vp ) average velocity in porous media defined in eq 3, m/s
Vjc ) average velocity defined in eq (A-5), m/s
Vjp ) average velocity defined in eq (A-7), m/s
Greek Symbols
R ) tortuosity
) shear rate, s-1
c ) shear rate for capillary tube, s-1
p ) shear rate for porous medium, s-1
Lc ) capillary tube length, m
Lp ) length of porous medium, m
P ) pressure drop, Pa
Pc ) pressure drop across capillary tube, Pa
Pe ) pressure drop of emulsion flow, Pa
Po ) pressure drop of oil flow, Pa
Pp ) pressure drop across porous medium, Pa
) relative average error, %
a ) absolute average relative error, %
) emulsion quality, %
cal ) calculated emulsion viscosity, mPa s
e ) viscosity of external phase or emulsion, mPa s
eff ) effective emulsion viscosity, mPa s
exp ) experimental emulsion viscosity, mPa s
o ) viscosity of suspending medium or oil phase, mPa s
) shear stress, Pa
c ) shear stress for capillary tube, Pa
p ) shear stress for porous medium, Pa
) porosity, fraction
 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 48, No. 15, 2009 7101
Subscripts 4Vp
p ) (A-10)
a ) absolute Rk
c ) capillary tube
cal ) calculated Rk/Pp
e ) emulsion p ) (A-11)
2Lp
eff ) effective
exp ) experimental Because the viscosity is equal to the shear stress divided by the
o ) oil shear rate, it can be written in the form
p ) porous medium
Kn
Appendix eff ) ) ) Kn-1 (A-12)

The general form of the power-law model for a non-
This form of the viscosity is known as the effective viscosity,
Newtonian fluid is9
which is mainly a function of the shear rate in the case of non-
) Kn (A-1) Newtonian fluids. In other words, the effective viscosity is the
viscosity of a fluid at a specific shear rate.18
The first step for developing the proposed model was to Finally, substituting eq A-10 into eq A-12 yields the
determine the shear rate and shear stress formulas and their expression

( )
relationships with viscosity. Equations A-2 and A-3 can be used
4Vp n-1
to calculate the shear rate and shear stress, respectively, for a eff ) K (3)
capillary tube13 Rk
8Vc In addition, as discussed previously, the emulsion quality ()
c ) (A-2) significantly affects the emulsion viscosity and is added into
d
eq 3 to yield the final form

( )
rcPc
c ) (A-3) 4Vp n-1
2Lc eff ) CaKb (4)
Rk
According to Hagen-Poiseulle theory, the volumetric flow rate
for laminar flow in a capillary tube, Q, can be expressed as26 The constants C, a, and b in eq 4 are to be determined through
the regression procedure as described previously.

Q) ( )
rc4 Pc
8 Lc
(A-4) Literature Cited
(1) Abou-Kassem, J. H.; Farouq Ali, S. M. Modelling of Emulsions Flow
Dividing both sides by the cross-sectional area gives in Porous Media. J. Can. Pet. Technol. 1995, 34, 30.
(2) Jennings, H. Y., Jr.; Johnson, C. E., Jr.; McAuliffe, C. D. A

( )( )
Caustic Waterflooding Process for Heavy Oils. J. Pet. Technol 1974,
1 rc 2 Pc
Vjc ) (A-5) 26, 1344.
2 2 Lc (3) Ma, S. Enhanced Oil Recovery by Dilute Alkaline Flooding. M.Sc.
Thesis, University of Regina, Regina, SK, Canada, 2005.
Furthermore, Darcys law can be arranged in the following form (4) Liu, Q. Interfacial Phenomena in Enhanced Heavy Oil Recovery by
Alkaline Flood. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Regina, Regina, SK,
kA P Canada, 2006.
Q) ( )
L
(A-6) (5) Liu, Q.; Dong, M.; Yue, X.; Hou, J. Synergy of Alkali and
Surfactant in Emulsification of Heavy Oil in Brine. Colloids Surf. A
2006, 273, 219.
Applying the Dupuit-Forchheimer correlation, which states that (6) Ma, S.; Dong, M.; Li, Z.; Shirif, E. Evaluation of the Effectiveness
the average pore velocity equals the average velocity divided of Chemical Flooding Using Heterogeneous Sandpack Flood Test. J. Pet.
by the porosity, transforms eq A-6 into13 Sci. Eng. 2007, 55, 294.
(7) Liu, Q.; Dong, M.; Ma, S.; Tu, Y. Surfactant Enhanced Alkaline

( )
Flooding for Western Canadian Heavy Oil Recovery. Colloids Surf. A 2007,
k Pp
Vjp ) (A-7) 293, 63.
Lp (8) Mooney, M. The Viscosity of a Concentrated Suspension of Spherical
Particles. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 1951, 6, 162.
Combining eqs A-5 and A-7 yields (9) Bird, R. B.; Stewart, W. E.; Lightfoot, E. N. Transport Phenomena;
Wiley: New York, 2002.

( ) ( )( ) ()
(10) Uzoigwe, A. C.; Marsden, S. S., Jr. Emulsion Rheology and Flow
k Pp 1 rc 2 Pc k 1 rc 2
) ) (A-8) Through Unconsolidated Synthetic Porous Media. Presented at the SPE-
Lp 2 2 Lc 2 2 AIME 45th Annual Fall Meeting, Houston, TX, Oct 4-7, 1970; Paper SPE
3004.
Equation A-8 implies that a parameter can be used to super- (11) Khambharatana, F. Flow of Emulsions in Porous Media. Ph.D.
Dissertation, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada, 1993.
impose the rheological properties of the capillary and sandpack, (12) Alvarado, D. A. The Flow of Macroemulsions Through Porous
which is termed the tortuosity (R).13 Consequently, eq A-8 can Media. Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Stanford
be rearranged as University, Stanford, CA, 1975.
(13) Alvarado, D. A.; Marsden, S. S., Jr. Flow of Oil-in-Water Emulsions
rc ) Rk/ (A-9) Through Tubes and Porous Media. SPE J. 1979, 19, 369.
(14) Bennett, H. Practical Emulsions; Chemical Publishing Company:
Brooklyn, NY, 1967.
Substituting rc in eqs A-2 and A-3 by its equivalent from eq (15) Becher, P. Emulsions: Theory and Practice; American Chemical
A-9 results in eqs A-10 and A-11, respectively Society: Washington, DC, 2001.
7102 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 48, No. 15, 2009
(16) Rastogi, M. C. Surface and Interfacial Science: Applications to
Engineering and Technology; Alpha Science: Oxford, UK, 2003.
(17) Sjoblom, J. Encyclopedic Handbook of Emulsion Technology;
Marcel Dekker: New York, 2001.
(18) Sadowski, T. J.; Bird, R. B. Non-Newtonian Flow through Porous
Media. I. Theoretical. J. Rheol. 1965, 9, 243.
(19) Darley, H. C. H.; Gary, G. Composition and Properties of
Drilling and Completion Fluids; Gulf Professional Publishing: Houston,
TX, 1988.
(20) Schramm, L. L. Emulsions: Fundamentals and Applications in
the Petroleum Industry; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC,
1992.
(21) Sherman, P. Emulsion Science; Academic Press: New York, 1968.
(22) Behkish, A. Hydrodynamic and Mass Transfer Parameters in Large-
Scale Slurry Bubble Column Reactors. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of
Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, 2004.
(23) Sahinoglu, M. Trustworthy Computing: Analytical and QuantitatiVe
Engineering EValuation; John Wiley & Sons: New York, 2007.
(24) Christopher, R. H.; Middleman, S. Power-Law Flow through a
Packed Tube. Ind. Eng. Chem. Fundam. 1965, 4, 422.
(25) Gregory, D. R.; Grisky, R. G. Flow of Molten Polymers Through
Porous Media. AIChE J. 1967, 13, 122.
(26) Papanastasiou, T.; Georgiou, G.; Alexandrou, A. Viscous Fluid
Flow; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, 2000.
ReceiVed for reView November 26, 2008
ReVised manuscript receiVed June 9, 2009
Accepted June 10, 2009
IE801818N