Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Complexation of Surfactant/β-Cyclodextrin to Inhibit Surfactant Adsorption onto Sand, Kaolin, and Shale for Applications in Enhanced Oil Recovery Processes. Part I: Static Adsorption Analysis

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Surfactants and Detergents

Abstract

Surfactant adsorption onto solid surfaces is a major issue during surfactant flooding in enhanced oil recovery applications; it decreases the effectiveness of the chemical injection making the process uneconomical. Therefore, it was hypothesized that the adsorption of surfactant onto solid surfaces could be inhibited using a surfactant delivery system based on the complexation between the hydrophobic tail of anionic surfactants and β-cyclodextrin (β-CD). Proton nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy was used to confirm the complexation of sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS)/β-CD. Surface tension analysis was used to establish the stoichiometry of the complexation and the binding constant (K a). Static adsorption testing was applied to determine the adsorption of surfactant onto different solids (sandstone, shale, and kaolinite). The release of the surfactant from the β-CD cavity was qualitatively evaluated through bottle testing. The formation of the inclusion complex SDS/β-CD with a 1:1 stoichiometry was confirmed. The K a of the complexations increases as salinity and hardness concentration increases. The encapsulation of the surfactant into the β-CD cavity decreases the adsorption of surfactant onto solid surfaces up to 79 %. Qualitative observations indicate that in the presence of solid adsorbents partially saturated with crude oil, the β-CD cavity releases surfactant molecules, which migrate towards the oil–water interface.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

CD:

Cyclodextrin

CMC:

Critical micelle concentration

CMC*:

Apparent critical micelle concentration

DW:

Distilled water

EOR:

Enhanced oil recovery

1H NMR:

Proton nuclear magnetic resonance

SDS:

Sodium dodecyl sulfate

ST:

Surface tension

STDEVA:

Standard deviation

TDS:

Total dissolved solids

TOC:

Total organic carbon

α-CD:

Alpha-cyclodextrin

β-CD:

Beta-cyclodextrin

γ-CD:

Gamma-cyclodextrin

δ :

Chemical shift

References

  1. Salager JL, Forgiarini AM, Bullón J (2013) How to attain ultralow interfacial tension and three-phase behavior with surfactant formulation for enhanced oil recovery: a review. Part 1. Optimum formulation for simple surfactant–oil–water ternary systems. J Surfactants Deterg 16:449–472

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Salager JL, Forgiarini AM, Márquez L, Manchego L, Bullón J (2013) How to attain an ultralow interfacial tension and a three-phase behavior with a surfactant formulation for enhanced oil recovery: a review. Part 2. performance improvement trends from Winsor’s premise to currently proposed inter-and intra-molecular mixture. J Surfactants Deterg 16:631–663

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Salager JL, Manchego L, Márquez L, Bullón J, Forgiarini A (2014) Trends to attain a lower interfacial tension in a revisited pure alkyl polyethyleneglycol surfactant–alkane–water ternary system. Basic concepts and straightforward guidelines for improving performance in enhanced oil recovery formulations. J Surfactants Deterg 15:199–213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Muherei MA, Junin R, Bin Merdhah AB (2009) Adsorption of sodium dodecyl sulfate, Triton X100 and their mixtures to shale and sandstone: a comparative study. J Pet Sci Eng 67:149–154

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Zhang R, Somasundaran P (2006) Advances in adsorption of surfactants and their mixtures at solid/solution interfaces. Adv Colloid Interface Sci 123:213–229

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Paria S, Khilar KC (2004) A review on experimental studies of surfactant adsorption at the hydrophilic solid–water interface. Adv Colloid Interface Sci 110:75–95

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Xu Q, Vasudevan TV, Somasundaran P (1991) Adsorption of anionic—nonionic and cationic—nonionic surfactant mixtures on kaolinite. J Colloid Interface Sci 142:528–534

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Scamehorn JF, Schechter RS, Wade WH (1982) Adsorption of surfactants on mineral oxide surfaces from aqueous solutions. I: Isomerically pure anionic surfactants. J Colloid Interface Sci 85:463–478

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Scamehorn JF, Schechter RS, Wade WH (1982) Adsorption of surfactants on mineral oxide surfaces from aqueous solutions. II: Binary mixtures of anionic surfactants. J Colloid Interface Sci 85:479–493

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Scamehorn JF, Schechter RS, Wade WH (1982) Adsorption of surfactants on mineral oxide surfaces from aqueous solutions: III. Binary mixtures of anionic and nonionic surfactants. J Colloid Interface Sci 85:494–501

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Somasundaran P, Krishnakumar S (1997) Adsorption of surfactants and polymers at the solid-liquid interface. Colloids Surf A 123:491–513

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Somasundaran P, Huang L (2000) Adsorption/aggregation of surfactants and their mixtures at solid–liquid interfaces. Adv Colloid Interface Sci 88:179–208

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Trogus FJ, Sophany T, Schechter RS, Wade WH (1977) Static and dynamic adsorption of anionic and nonionic surfactants. SPE J 17:337–344

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Flaaten A, Nguyen QP, Pope GA, Zhang J (2009) A systematic laboratory approach to low-cost high-performance chemical flooding. SPE Reservoir Eval Eng 12:713–723

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Hirasaki G, Miller CA, Puerto M (2011) Recent advances in surfactant EOR. SPE J 16:889–907

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Levitt D, Jackson A, Heinson C, Britton LN, Malik T, Dwarakanath V, Pope GA (2009) Identification and evaluation of high-performance EOR surfactants. SPE Reservoir Eval Eng 12:243–253

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Puerto M, Hirasaki GJ, Miller CA, Barnes JR (2012) Surfactant systems for EOR in high-temperature high-salinity environments. SPE J 17:11–19

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Zhang J, Nguyen QP, Flaaten A, Pope GA (2009) Mechanisms of enhanced natural imbibition with novel chemicals. SPE Reservoir Eval Eng 12:912–920

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Sheng J (2010) Modern chemical enhanced oil recovery: theory and practice. Gulf Professional Publishing Burlington. MA, USA

    Google Scholar 

  20. Szejtli J (2004) Past, present and future of cyclodextrin research. Pure Appl Chem 76:1825–1845

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Connors KA (1997) The stability of cyclodextrin complexes in solution. Chem Rev 5:1325–1358

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Lu R, Hao J, Wang H, Tong L (1997) Determination of association constants for cyclodextrin–surfactant inclusion complexes: a numerical method based on surface tension measurements. J Colloid Interface Sci 192:37–42

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Satake I, Yoshida S, Hayakawa K, Maeda T, Kusumoto Y (1986) Conductometric determination of the association constants of β-cyclodextrin with amphiphilic ions. Bull Chem Soc Jpn 59:3991–3993

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Palepu R, Reinsborough VC (1988) Surfactant-cyclodextrin interactions by conductance measurements. Can J Chem 66:325–328

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Stella VJ, Rajewski RA (1997) Cyclodextrins: their future in drug formulation and delivery. Pharm Res 14:556–567

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Szejtli J (1998) Introduction and general overview of cyclodextrin chemistry. Chem Rev 98:1743–1754

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Satake I, Ikenoue T, Takeshita T, Hayakawa K, Maeda T (1985) Conductometric and potentiometric studies of the association of α-cyclodextrin with ionic surfactants and their homologs. Bull Chem Soc Jpn 58:2746–2750

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Schneider HJ, Hacket F, Rüdiger V, Ikeda H (1998) NMR studies of cyclodextrins and cyclodextrin complexes. Chem Rev 98:1755–1786

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Okubo T, Kitano H, Ise N (1976) Conductometric studies on association of cyclodextrin with colloidal electrolytes. J Phys Chem 80:2661–2664

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Kittisrisawai S (2014) Novel surfactant delivery system: the solution to surfactant adsorption onto rock formations during enhanced oil recovery chemical flooding. PhD Dissertation, The University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, p 256

  31. Muherei MA, Junin R (2009) Equilibrium adsorption isotherms of anionic, nonionic surfactants and their mixtures to shale and sandstone. Mod Appl Sci 3:158–167

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Kilsdonk EP, Yancey PG, Stoudt GW, Bangerter FW, Johnson WJ, Phillips MC, Rothblat GH (1995) Cellular cholesterol efflux mediated by cyclodextrins. J Biol Chem 270:17250–17256

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Georges J, Desmettre S (1987) An electrochemical study of mixed solutions of β-cyclodextrin and sodium dodecyl sulfate. J Colloid Interface Sci 118:192–200

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Schneider HJ (2009) Binding mechanisms in supramolecular complexes. Angew Chem Int Ed 48:3924–3977

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Chen M, Diao G, Zhang E (2006) Study of inclusion complex of β-cyclodextrin and nitrobenzene. Chemosphere 63:522–529

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Yallapu MM, Jaggi M, Chauhan SC (2010) β-Cyclodextrin-curcumin self-assembly enhances curcumin delivery in prostate cancer cells. Colloids Surf B 79:113–125

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Pîrnau A, Bogdan M, Floare CG (2009) NMR spectroscopic characterization of β-cyclodextrin inclusion complex with vanillin. J Phys Conf Ser 182:012013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Dharmawardana UR, Christian SD, Tucker EE, Taylor RW, Scamehorn JF (1993) A surface tension method for determining binding constants for cyclodextrin inclusion complexes of ionic surfactants. Langmuir 9:2258–2263

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge Dr. Larry Calhoun, Chemistry Department, University of New Brunswick for his contributions with the NMR analysis. The financial support provided to this research by the Chemical Engineering Department at the University of New Brunswick, the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC), and the Canadian Foundation for Innovation (CFI) is also gratefully acknowledged.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Chemical Engineering, University of New Brunswick, Head Hall, 15 Dineen Drive, Fredericton, E3B 5A3, Canada

    Sirinthip Kittisrisawai & Laura Beatriz Romero-Zerón

Authors
  1. Sirinthip Kittisrisawai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Laura Beatriz Romero-Zerón
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Laura Beatriz Romero-Zerón.

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kittisrisawai, S., Romero-Zerón, L.B. Complexation of Surfactant/β-Cyclodextrin to Inhibit Surfactant Adsorption onto Sand, Kaolin, and Shale for Applications in Enhanced Oil Recovery Processes. Part I: Static Adsorption Analysis. J Surfact Deterg 18, 603–613 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11743-015-1688-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11743-015-1688-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation