Search
Filters
Close

Products tagged with 'corrosion inhibitor'

View as
Sort by
Display per page
Picture for Shortcomings regarding the Testing of Oil and Gas Corrosion Inhibitors
Available for download

Shortcomings regarding the Testing of Oil and Gas Corrosion Inhibitors

Product Number: 51324-20823-SG
Author: Alyn Jenkins; Khoa Ky; David Orta
Publication Date: 2024
$40.00
Laboratory selection of oilfield corrosion inhibitors used to mitigate carbon dioxide (CO2) and hydrogen sulfide (H2S) corrosion is an essential aspect of every asset integrity program implemented in oil and gas fields. However, many factors increase the complexity of designing a corrosion inhibitor laboratory test program that will deliver reliable results. Several of these factors relate to the challenges of accurately replicating field conditions in the laboratory, including using inhibitor-free crude oil, reproducing pipeline flow regimes and wall shear stress, duplicating the specific form of corrosion that occurs in the field, and simulating inhibitor deliverability and transport in multiphase pipelines. Other elements that increase the difficulty relate to requirements for environmentally acceptable chemistries in certain geographies and the variety of corrosion performance tests and methodologies mandated by different oil companies. After the laboratory testing is complete and a corrosion inhibitor has been selected for field application, optimization of the product in the field should be performed but this is frequently overlooked. If corrosion inhibitor treat rate is not optimized in the field, it can result in overdosing (causing stabilization of emulsions and foaming) or underdosing (which can result in high corrosion rates). This paper discusses the challenges and inconsistencies associated with selecting corrosion inhibitors for use in oil and gas fields. Importantly, this paper discusses how these challenges can be resolved to ensure that the selection of oil and gas corrosion inhibitors follows a reliable process.
Picture for Surfactant Corrosion Inhibitor Adsorption and Desorption Kinetics in Aqueous CO2-Containing Environments
Available for download

Surfactant Corrosion Inhibitor Adsorption and Desorption Kinetics in Aqueous CO2-Containing Environments

Product Number: 51324-20915-SG
Author: Ryan Abou-Shakra; Joshua Owen; Richard C. Woollam; Richard Barker; William H. Durnie
Publication Date: 2024
$40.00
Corrosion inhibitors are commonly employed to internally protect carbon steel pipelines in aqueous carbon dioxide (CO2)-saturated environments, such as those encountered in oil and gas production and geothermal operation. However, unexpected events can occur that lead to periods where corrosion inhibitor addition ceases completely, or the quantity of inhibitor added falls short of the typical concentration required for the desired level of corrosion mitigation. In these instances of interruption, there is a limited understanding of the inhibitor surface residence time, or ‘persistency’, and the associated effects on the corrosion rate of carbon steel. This study examines the influence of the substrate surface condition and inhibitor concentration on the persistency of benzyldimethyltetradecylammonium chloride (BAC-C14) corrosion inhibitor in a CO2-saturated 1 wt.% NaCl brine at 30°C. An electrochemical rotating cylinder electrode (operating at 1000 rpm) coupled with a dilution process was used to simulate persistency. Experimental results using carbon steel at 0.75x and 1x of the surfactant critical micelle concentration (CMC) showed that inhibitor efficiency and persistency improved markedly at the higher concentration. Supplementary experiments using pure iron illustrated an even stronger interaction between inhibitor and substrate, resulting in BAC-C14 failing to desorb after three days of exposure to uninhibited brine. A first-order kinetic model was assessed in its ability to predict the desorption response after dilution, based on fitting to the inhibitor adsorption response. Whilst a strong agreement was obtained between the theoretical desorption profile and experimental desorption data at 0.75xCMC on carbon steel, the model failed to predict the responses at CMC, as well as those on the pure iron substrate, necessitating consideration of other models.