驱油用常规聚合物与抗盐聚合物性能全面评价

A Comprehensive Comparative Appraisal of Standard HPAM Polymer and Salt Tolerant Polymer KYPAM for EOR

在模拟克拉玛依七东1区克下组油藏条件下，对比测定了驱油用商品常规聚合物和抗盐聚合物的多项性能。常规聚合物HPAM分子量2．1×10^7，水解度25％～30％；抗盐聚合物代号KYPAM，为梳状分子链AM共聚物，分子量2．3×10^7，水解度25％～30％。聚合物溶液分别用矿化度0．335g／L的清水和矿化度7．637g／L的油田污水配制。实验温度34℃。表观黏度～浓度曲线和黏度～剪切速率曲线表明，KYPAM的增黏性在清水中好于而在污水中远好于HPAM。在清水中KYPAM短时间抗剪切性优于HPAM，剪切时间增加时优势减小。密闭老化90天的KYPAM清水和污水溶液黏度保留率高于HPAM溶液的相应值。在模拟砾岩油藏的河道砂胶结岩心上，水驱之后注入0．6PV浓度0．8、1．0、1、2、1．5g／L的聚合物清水溶液，KYPAM提高采收率6．06％、6，51％、6．61％、7．17％，HPAM则提高采收率8．2％、7．2％、10．0％、10．2％。拉伸细丝直径～时间曲线和0．1～2．2Hz区间溶液储能模量曲线表明，KYPAM溶液的弹性低于相应的HPAM溶液，这是KYPAM岩心驱油效率低于HPAM的原因．图6嘉3参5．

The performance properties of a standard HPAM polymer and a salt tolerant polymer, ＂KYPAM＂, as EOR polymer are investigated comparatively under simulation conditions of oil reservoir of Formation KL in district 7E1, Karamay. HPAM polymer has M^- = 2.1 × 10^7 and HD in range 25-30 % ; KYPAM is a comb-shaped AM copolymer ofM = 2.3 × 10^7 and HD in range 25-30 %. Polymer solutions are prepared in a fresh water （FW） of TSD = 0. 335 g/L for reservoir flooding or a produced water （PW） of TSD = 7. 637 g/L. The experimental temperature is of 3412. App viscosity vz concentration and shear rate curves show that the viscosifying ability of KYPAM is higher in FW and much more higher in PW. The short-term shearing resistance in FW is much more higher than and becomes closer to that of HPAM. The retention of app viscosity of KYPAM FW and PW solutions aged in sealed ampoules over 90 days is higher than corresponding values of HPAM solution. On consolidated riverbed sand packs simulating conglomerate reservoir having waterflooded, injecting 0.6 PV of 0.8, 1.0,1.2, and 1.5 g/L polymer solution in FW results in enhancement in oil recovery of 6.06%, 6.51%, 6.61%, and 7.17% for KYPAM and of 8.2%, 7.2%, 10.0%, and 10.2% for HPAM. The filament diameter vz stretching time and the storage module vz oscillation frequence curves show that the elasticity of KYPAM solutions is lower than that of corresponding HPAM solutions, which is considered to be the reason for lower oil displacement efficiency of KYPAM in comparison with HPAM.