Application of microfluidic pore models for flow, transport, and reaction in geological porous media: from a single test bed to multifunction real-time analysis tool

  • Shuang Cindy CaoEmail author
  • Jongwon Jung
  • Mileva Radonjic
Review Paper


Recent advances in microfluidics technology can significantly benefit engineering and science research. Through integration with current optical tools like the optical/confocal microscope, the 3D printing, the soft lithography, and the lithography–etching, microfluidic pore model offers a direct and visual way to study the process of geological related pore-scale transport phenomena. In this paper, recent progress of microfluidic pore model mimicking the geological porous media are discussed, which can apply on many disciplines such as environmental, petroleum engineering and geosciences. The purpose of this review is to highlight the significant features of microfluidic pore model application in geological porous medium pertaining research, as well as to provide engineer/scientist an overview of materials and fabrication methods to manufacture micromodels. Furthermore, the outlook of intensively using micromodel as a multifunction real-time analysis tool is proposed to help the reader to enhance their understanding of pore-scale transport phenomena related to geological porous medium. Also, potential critical issues of micromodels in both research and teaching are discussed. The overall role of this review for microfluidic application is intended to provide benefits to professors, students, and other scientists not only in research but also in teaching fields.



The work reported in this publication was supported by the Gulf Research Program of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine under the Grant Agreement Number [200008863]. Authors acknowledge the support from National Academies-Gulf Research Program and Chemical Engineering Department in Oklahoma State University.


  1. Aker E, Jorgen Maloy K, Hansen A (2000) Viscous stabilization of 2D drainage displacements with trapping. Phys Rev Lett 84:4589–4592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ally J, Molla S, Mostowfi F (2016) Condensation in nanoporous packed beds. Langmuir 32:4494–4499. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Amani H (2015) Study of enhanced oil recovery by rhamnolipids in a homogeneous 2D micromodel. J Petrol Sci Eng 128:212–219. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Amott E (1959) Observations relating to the wettability of porous rockGoogle Scholar
  5. Anbari A, Chien HT, Datta SS, Deng W, Weitz DA, Fan J (2018) Microfluidic model porous media: fabrication and applications. Small 14:e1703575. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Aursjø O, Løvoll G, Knudsen HA, Flekkøy EG, Måløy KJ (2011) A direct comparison between a slow pore scale drainage experiment and a 2D lattice Boltzmann simulation. Transp Porous Media 86:125–134. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bao B, Riordon J, Mostowfi F, Sinton D (2017) Microfluidic and nanofluidic phase behaviour characterization for industrial CO2, oil and gas. Lab Chip 17:2740–2759. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bartels W-B, Mahani H, Berg S, Menezes R, van der Hoeven JA, Fadili A (2017) Oil configuration under high-salinity and low-salinity conditions at pore scale: a parametric investigation by use of a single-channel micromodel. SPE J 22:1362–1373. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Baumann T, Niessner R (2006) Micromodel study on repartitioning phenomena of a strongly hydrophobic fluorophore at a colloid/1-octanol interface. Water Resour Res. Google Scholar
  10. Blunt MJ et al (2013) Pore-scale imaging and modelling. Adv Water Resour 51:197–216. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bonnet J, Lenormand R (1977a) Constructing micromodels for the study of multiphase flow in porous media. Rev Inst Francais Pet 42:477–480Google Scholar
  12. Bonnet J, Lenormand R (1977b) Realisation de micromodeles pour l’etude des ecoluments polyphasiques en milieu poreux. Revue de l’ Insitut francais du petrole 42Google Scholar
  13. Bou-Mikael S (2012) Design and optimization of 2.5 dimension porous media micromodel for nanosensor flow experiments. LSU Master’s Theses 511Google Scholar
  14. Buchgraber M, Kovscek AR, Castanier LM (2012) A study of microscale gas trapping using etched silicon micromodels. Transp Porous Media 95:647–668. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bultreys T, De Boever W, Cnudde V (2016) Imaging and image-based fluid transport modeling at the pore scale in geological materials: a practical introduction to the current state-of-the-art. Earth Sci Rev 155:93–128. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cao S, Bate B, Hu J, Jung J (2016a) Engineering behavior and characteristics of water-soluble polymers: implication on soil remediation and enhanced oil recovery. Sustainability 8:205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cao SC, Dai S, Jung J (2016b) Supercritical CO2 and brine displacement in geological carbon sequestration: Micromodel and pore network simulation studies. Int J Greenh Gas Control 44:104–114. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cao SC, Jang J, Jung J, Waite WF, Collett TS, Kumar P (2018) 2D micromodel study of clogging behavior of fine-grained particles associated with gas hydrate production in NGHP-02 gas hydrate reservoir sediments. Mar Pet Geol. Google Scholar
  19. Chaouachi M, Falenty A, Sell K, Enzmann F, Kersten M, Haberthür D, Kuhs WF (2015) Microstructural evolution of gas hydrates in sedimentary matrices observed with synchrotron X-ray computed tomographic microscopy. Geochem Geophys Geosyst 16:1711–1722. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Chen JD (1987) Radial viscous fingering patterns in Hele–Shaw cells. Exp Fluids 5:363–371. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Chen J-D, Koplik J (1985) Immiscible fluid displacement in small networks. J Colloid Interface Sci 108:304–330. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Cheng J-T, Pyrak-Nolte LJ, Nolte DD, Giordano NJ (2004) Linking pressure and saturation through interfacial areas in porous media. Geophys Res Lett. Google Scholar
  23. Conn CA, Ma K, Hirasaki GJ, Biswal SL (2014) Visualizing oil displacement with foam in a microfluidic device with permeability contrast. Lab Chip 14:3968–3977. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Conrad SH, Wilson JL, Mason WR, Peplinski WJ (1992) Visualization of residual organic liquid trapped in aquifers. Water Resour Res 28:467–478. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Cotta R, Knupp D, Naveira-Cotta C (2016) Analytical heat and fluid flow in microchannels and microsystems. Springer, New YorkCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. Crandall D, Ahmadi G, Leonard D, Ferer M, Smith DH (2008) A new stereolithography experimental porous flow device. Rev Sci Instrum 79:044501. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Datta SS, Chiang H, Ramakrishnan TS, Weitz DA (2013) Spatial fluctuations of fluid velocities in flow through a three-dimensional porous medium. Phys Rev Lett 111:064501. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Datta SS, Ramakrishnan TS, Weitz DA (2014) Mobilization of a trapped non-wetting fluid from a three-dimensional porous medium. Phys Fluids 26:022002. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ehrlich R, Hasiba HH, Raimondi P (1974) Alkaline waterflooding for wettability alteration-evaluating a potential field application. J Petrol Technol 26:1335–1343. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ellila G (2012) Capillary forces and osmotic gradients in salt water–oil systems. Norwegian University of Science and TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  31. Emadi A, Sohrabi M (2013) Visual investigation of oil recovery by low salinity water injection: formation of water micro-dispersions and wettability alteration. In: Paper presented at the SPE annual technical conference and exhibition, New OrleansGoogle Scholar
  32. Emami Meybodi H, Kharrat R, Nasehi Araghi M (2011) Experimental studying of pore morphology and wettability effects on microscopic and macroscopic displacement efficiency of polymer flooding. J Petrol Sci Eng 78:347–363. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ferrari A, Jimenez-Martinez J, Borgne TL, Méheust Y, Lunati I (2015) Challenges in modeling unstable two-phase flow experiments in porous micromodels. Water Resour Res 51:1381–1400. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Fredriksen SB, Rognmo AU, Sandengen K, Fernø MA (2017) Wettability effects on osmosis as an oil-mobilization mechanism during low-salinity waterflooding. Petrophysics 58:28–35Google Scholar
  35. Fritz JL, Owen MJ (1995) hydrophobic recovery of plasma-treated polydimethylsiloxane. J Adhes 54:33–45. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Gowers SAN et al (2015) 3D printed microfluidic device with integrated biosensors for online analysis of subcutaneous human microdialysate. Anal Chem 87:7763–7770. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Grate JW, Kelly RT, Suter J, Anheier NC (2012) Silicon-on-glass pore network micromodels with oxygen-sensing fluorophore films for chemical imaging and defined spatial structure. Lab Chip 12:4796–4801. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Gribanova EV (1992) Dynamic contact angles: temperature dependence and the influence of the state of the adsorption film. Adv Colloid Interface Sci 39:235–255. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Guo C, Xu J, Wu K, Wei M, Liu S (2015) Study on gas flow through nano pores of shale gas reservoirs. Fuel 143:107–117. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Hanada Y, Sugioka K, Takase H, Takai H, Miyamoto I, Midorikawa K (2005) Selective metallization of polyimide by laser-induced plasma-assisted ablation (LIPAA). Appl Phys A 80:111–115. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Hauge LP, Gauteplass J, Høyland MD, Ersland G, Kovscek A, Fernø MA (2016) Pore-level hydrate formation mechanisms using realistic rock structures in high-pressure silicon micromodels. Int J Greenh Gas Control 53:178–186. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Hornbrook JW, Castanier LM, Pettit PA (1991) Observation of foam/oil interactions in a new, high-resolution micromodel. In: Paper presented at the SPE annual technical conference and exhibition, DallasGoogle Scholar
  43. Hu R, Wan J, Kim Y, Tokunaga TK (2017) Wettability impact on supercritical CO2 capillary trapping: pore-scale visualization and quantification. Water Resour Res 53:6377–6394. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Jafari M, Jung J (2017) Direct measurement of static and dynamic contact angles using a random micromodel considering geological CO2 sequestration. Sustainability 9:2352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Jafari M, Jung J (2018) Variation of contact angles in brine/CO2/mica system considering short-term geological CO2 sequestration condition. J Geofluids 2018:15. Google Scholar
  46. Javadpour F, Fisher D (2008) Nanotechnology-based micromodels and new image analysis to study transport in porous media. J Can Petrol Technol 47:8. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Jeong S-W, Corapcioglu MY, Roosevelt SE (2000) Micromodel study of surfactant foam remediation of residual trichloroethylene. Environ Sci Technol 34:3456–3461. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Johnston ID, McCluskey DK, Tan CKL, Tracey MC (2014) Mechanical characterization of bulk Sylgard 184 for microfluidics and microengineering. J Micromech Microeng 24:035017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Jung J, Cao SC, Shin Y-H, Al-Raoush RI, Alshibli K, Choi J-W (2018) A microfluidic pore model to study the migration of fine particles in single-phase and multi-phase flows in porous media. Microsyst Technol 24:1071–1080. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Kalkandjiev K, Riegger L, Kosse D, Welsche M, Gutzweiler L, Zengerle R, Koltay P (2011) Microfluidics in silicon/polymer technology as a cost-efficient alternative to silicon/glass. J Micromech Microeng 21:025008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Kanagasabapathi TT, Backhouse CJ, Kaler KV (2004) Dielectrophoresis (DEP) of cells and microparticle in PDMS microfluidic channels. In: NSTI-Nanotech 1Google Scholar
  52. Kazemifar F, Blois G, Kyritsis DC, Christensen KT (2015) A methodology for velocity field measurement in multiphase high-pressure flow of CO2 and water in micromodels. Water Resour Res 51:3017–3029. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Khajepour H, Mahmoodi M, Biria D, Ayatollahi S (2014) Investigation of wettability alteration through relative permeability measurement during MEOR process: a micromodel study. J Petrol Sci Eng 120:10–17. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Khezrnejad A, James LA, Johansen TE (2014) Water enhancement using nanoparticles in water alternating gas (WAG) micromodel experiments. In: Paper presented at the SPE annual technical conference and exhibition, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  55. Kim Y, Wan J, Kneafsey TJ, Tokunaga TK (2012) Dewetting of silica surfaces upon reactions with supercritical CO2 and brine: pore-scale studies in micromodels. Environ Sci Technol 46:4228–4235. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Krummel AT, Datta SS, Münster S, Weitz DA (2013) Visualizing multiphase flow and trapped fluid configurations in a model three-dimensional porous medium. AIChE J 59:1022–1029. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Larsen JK, Bech N, Winter A (2000) Three-phase immiscible WAG injection: micromodel experiments and network models. In: Paper presented at the SPE/DOE improved oil recovery symposium, TulsaGoogle Scholar
  58. Laurindo JB, Prat M (1998) Numerical and experimental network study of evaporation in capillary porous media. Drying rates. Chem Eng Sci 53:2257–2269. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Leach RO, Wagner OR, Wood HW, Harpke CF (1962) A laboratory and field study of wettability adjustment in waterflooding. J Pet Technol 14:206–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Lee SY et al (2010) Low salinity oil recovery: increasing understanding of the underlying mechanisms. In: Paper presented at the SPE improved oil recovery symposium, TulsaGoogle Scholar
  61. Lee JN, Park C, Whitesides GM (2003) Solvent compatibility of poly(dimethylsiloxane)-based microfluidic devices. Anal Chem 75:6544–6554. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Lee SY, Webb KJ, Collins IR, Lager A, Clarke SM, O’Sullivan M, Routh AF, Wang X (2010) Low salinity oil recovery: increasing understanding of the underlying mechanisms. In: Paper presented at the SPE 129722 presented at the SPE improved oil recovery symposium, TulsaGoogle Scholar
  63. Lenormand R (1990) Liquids in porous media. J Phys Condens 2:79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Lenormand R, Touboul E (1988) Numerical models and experiments on immiscible displacements in porous media. J Fluid Mech 189:165–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Lenormand R, Zarcone C, Sarr A (1983) Mechanisms of the displacement of one fluid by another in a network of capillary ducts. J Fluid Mech 135:337–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Lin Y-J et al (2017) Characterizing asphaltene deposition in the presence of chemical dispersants in porous media micromodels. Energy Fuels 31:11660–11668. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Lu T, Li Z, Li J, Hou D, Zhang D (2017) Flow behavior of N2 huff and puff process for enhanced oil recovery in tight oil reservoirs. Sci Rep 7:15695. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Mahers EG, Wright RJ, Dawe RA (1981) Visualization of the behavior of EOR reagents in displacements in porous media. Exp Tech 13:511–525Google Scholar
  69. Manlowe DJ, Radke CJ (1990) A pore-level investigation of foam/oil interactions in porous media. Society of Petroleum Engineers, United States. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Marin CA, Grossi T, Bianchi E, Dubini G, Lacroix D (2017) 2D µ-particle image velocimetry and computational fluid dynamics study within a 3D porous scaffold. Ann Biomed Eng 45:1341–1351. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Mery E, Ricoul F, Sarrut N, Constantin O, Delapierre G, Garin J, Vinet F (2008) A silicon microfluidic chip integrating an ordered micropillar array separation column and a nano-electrospray emitter for LC/MS analysis of peptides. Sens Actuators B Chem 134:438–446. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Mosser L, Dubrule O, Blunt MJ (2017) Reconstruction of three-dimensional porous media using generative adversarial neural networks. Phys Rev E 96:043309. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Nguyen NT, Wereley ST (2002) Fundamentals and applications of microfluidics. Artech House, Norwood, MAzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  74. Osei-Bonsu K, Grassia P, Shokri N (2017) Investigation of foam flow in a 3D printed porous medium in the presence of oil. J Colloid Interface Sci 490:850–858. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Park DS, Bou-Mikael S, King S, Thompson KE, Willson CS, Nikitopoulos DE (2012) Design and fabrication of rock-based micromodel, pp 709–715.
  76. Patil VA, Liburdy JA (2015) Scale estimation for turbulent flows in porous media. Chem Eng Sci 123:231–235. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Plachy T, Tesarek P, Padevet P, Polak M (2009) Determination of Young’s modulus of gypsum blocks using two different experimental methods recent advances in applied and theoretical mechanicsGoogle Scholar
  78. Porter ML, Jiménez-Martínez J, Martinez R, McCulloch Q, Carey JW, Viswanathan HS (2015) Geo-material microfluidics at reservoir conditions for subsurface energy resource applications. Lab Chip 15:4044–4053. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Quake SR, Scherer A (2000) From micro- to nanofabrication with soft materials. Sci 290:1536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Ren K, Zhou J, Wu H (2013) Materials for microfluidic chip fabrication. Acc Chem Res 46:2396–2406. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Roy P et al (2015) Fabrication and transport of double emulsion microcapsules for applications in unconventional resources. In: Paper presented at the unconventional resources technology conference (URTeC), San AntonioGoogle Scholar
  82. Sayegh SG, Fisher DB (2009) Enhanced oil recovery by CO flooding in homogeneous and heterogeneous 2D micromodels. J Can Petrol Technol 48:30–36. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Schneider FN, Owens WW (1970) Sandstone and carbonate two- and three-phase relative permeability characteristics. Soc Petrol Eng J 10:75–84. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Schubert R (2013) Material properties for 3D printing. Sandia National LaboratoriesGoogle Scholar
  85. Segura LA, Fuentes MG, Urrutia CP, Badillo GM (2015) 3D PDMS transparent micromodels simulating a food matrix: micromodel fabrication protocol and preliminary drying experiments. Blucher Chem Eng Proc 1:2942–2949 (Anais do XX Congresso Brasileiro de Engenharia Química-COBEQ 2014) Google Scholar
  86. Shariatpanahi SF, Dastyari A, Bashukooh B, Haghighi M, Sahimi M, Farahani FJ, Ayatollahi SS (2005) Visualization experiments on immiscible gas and water injection by using 2D-fractured glass micromodels. In: Paper presented at the SPE Middle east oil and gas show and conferenceGoogle Scholar
  87. Shaw RW, Whitten WB, Barnes MD, Ramsey JM (1998) Time-domain observation of optical pulse propagation in whispering-gallery modes of glass spheres. Opt Lett 23:1301–1303. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Sheng JJ (2013) A comprehensive review of alkaline-surfactant-polymer (ASP) flooding. In: Paper presented at the SPE Western regional & AAPG pacific section meeting 2013 joint technical conference, MontereyGoogle Scholar
  89. Singh R, Yoon H, Sanford RA, Katz L, Fouke BW, Werth CJ (2015) Metabolism-induced CaCO3 biomineralization during reactive transport in a micromodel: implications for porosity alteration. Environ Sci Technol 49:12094–12104. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Soll WE, Celia MA, Wilson JL (1993) Micromodel studies of three-fluid porous media systems: pore-scale processes relating to capillary pressure-saturation relationships. Water Resour Res 29:2963–2974. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Song W, de Haas TW, Fadaei H, Sinton D (2014) Chip-off-the-old-rock: the study of reservoir-relevant geological processes with real-rock micromodels. Lab Chip 14:4382–4390. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Soudmand-asli A, Ayatollahi SS, Mohabatkar H, Zareie M, Shariatpanahi SF (2007) The in situ microbial enhanced oil recovery in fractured porous media. J Petrol Sci Eng 58:161–172. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Stevenson JTM, Gundlach AM (1986) The application of photolithography to the fabrication of microcircuits. J Phys E Sci Instrum 19:654CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Stroock AD, Pagay VV, Zwieniecki MA, Holbrook NM (2014) The physicochemical hydrodynamics of vascular plants. Annual Rev Fluid Mech 46:615–642. MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  95. Tetteh JT, Rankey E, Barati R (2017) Low salinity waterflooding effect: crude oil/brine interactions as a recovery mechanism in carbonate rocks. In: Paper presented at the OTC Brasil, Rio de JaneiroGoogle Scholar
  96. Vincent O, Sessoms DA, Huber EJ, Guioth J, Stroock AD (2014) Drying by cavitation and poroelastic relaxations in porous media with macroscopic pores connected by nanoscale throats. Phys Rev Lett 113:134501. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Vorhauer N, Tran QT, Metzger T, Tsotsas E, Prat M (2013) Experimental investigation of drying in a model porous medium: influence of thermal gradients. Dry Technol 31:920–929. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Vorhauer N, Tsotsas E, Prat M (2014) Isothermal drying in the presence of capillary liquid films: comparison of experiments with pore network simulations in a model system. In: Proceedings of the 19th international drying symposium IDS2014, pp 24–27Google Scholar
  99. Walsh SD, Du Frane WL, Vericella JJ, Aines RD (2014) Giving peeps to my props: using 3D printing to shed new light on particle transport in fractured rock. In: AGU fall meetingGoogle Scholar
  100. Wan J, Wilson JL (1994) Colloid transport in unsaturated porous media. Water Resour Res 30:857–864. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Wan J, Tokunaga TK, Tsang C-F, Bodvarsson GS (1996) Improved glass micromodel methods for studies of flow and transport in fractured porous media. Water Resour Res 32:1955–1964. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Wang W, Chang S, Gizzatov A (2017) Toward reservoir-on-a-chip: fabricating reservoir micromodels by in situ growing calcium carbonate nanocrystals in microfluidic channels. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 9:29380–29386. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Wang L et al (2018) An improved visual investigation on gas–water flow characteristics and trapped gas formation mechanism of fracture–cavity carbonate gas reservoir. J Nat Gas Sci Eng 49:213–226. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Watson F et al (2018) Comparison of flow and transport experiments on 3D printed micromodels with direct numerical simulations. Transp Porous Media. Google Scholar
  105. Wiederschain GY (2008) Handbook of capillary and microchip electrophoresis and associated microtechniques (3rd Edn.). Biochemistry (Moscow) 73:1350. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Wu B, Zhou X, Song Y, Jiang L, Liu Y, Yang M (2014) Recent research results of physical trapping mechanism in CO2-brine system. Energy Proc 61:286–289. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Xu K, Liang T, Zhu P, Qi P, Lu J, Huh C, Balhoff M (2017) A 2.5-D glass micromodel for investigation of multi-phase flow in porous media. Lab Chip 17:640–646. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Yu L, Wardlaw NC (1986) Mechanisms of nonwetting phase trapping during imbibition at slow rates. J Colloid Interface Sci 109:473–486. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Yun W (2017) Deep learning: automated surface characterization of porous media to understand geological fluid flowGoogle Scholar
  110. Zhang Q, Austin RH (2012) Applications of microfluidics in stem cell biology. BioNanoScience 2:277–286. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Zhang X, Cooper JM, Monaghan PB, Haswell SJ (2006) Continuous flow separation of particles within an asymmetric microfluidic device. Lab Chip 6:561–566. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. Zhang P, Tweheyo MT, Austad T (2007) Wettability alteration and improved oil recovery by spontaneous imbibition of seawater into chalk: impact of the potential determining ions Ca2+, Mg2+, and SO4 2−. Colloids Surf A Physicochem Eng Aspects 301:199–208. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. Zhou Y (2017) The recent development and applications of fluidic channels by 3D printing. J Biomed Sci 24:80. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Zuo L, Zhang C, Falta RW, Benson SM (2013) Micromodel investigations of CO2 exsolution from carbonated water in sedimentary rocks. Adv Water Resour 53:188–197. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shuang Cindy Cao
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jongwon Jung
    • 2
  • Mileva Radonjic
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Chemical EngineeringOklahoma State UniversityStillwaterUSA
  2. 2.School of Civil EngineeringChungbuk National UniversityCheongjuSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations