Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

Particle gradation of sand.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Fig 2.

Raw materials for friction reducing agents.

(a) Sodium Bentonite. (b) SM. (c) PAM. (d) Na2CO3.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

Raw materials of anti-seepage agent.

(a) Polyols. (b) Na2O·3.1SiO2. (c) Polyisocyanates. (d) TEA. (e) DBTDL.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Fig 4.

Schematic diagram of the structure of the joint part of the pipe section.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Table 1.

Main performance requirements of composite anti-seepage and friction-reducing agent.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

Factor levels table for orthogonal test of friction reduction performance.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Factor levels table for orthogonal test of anti-permeability performance.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Fig 5.

Test methods of friction-reducing performance.

(a) Marsh Funnel Viscosity Test. (b) Filtration Loss Test. (c) Water Separation Rate Test. (d) Friction Coefficient Test.

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Fig 6.

Test methods of anti-seepage performance.

(a) Density Test. (b) Viscosity Test. (c) Gel Time Test. (d) Permeability coefficient Test.

More »

Fig 6 Expand

Fig 7.

Relationship between performance and concentration of bentonite-based friction reducing agent.

(a) Funnel Viscosity. (b) Filtration Loss. (c) Water Separation Rate. (d) Friction Coefficient.

More »

Fig 7 Expand

Fig 8.

Influence of raw material ratio on the performance of friction reduction.

(a) Funnel Viscosity. (b) Filtration Loss. (c) Water Separation Rate. (d) Friction Coefficient.

More »

Fig 8 Expand

Fig 9.

Influence of raw material ratio on anti-seepage performance.

(a) Density. (b) Viscosity. (c) Gel Time. (d) Permeability Coefficient.

More »

Fig 9 Expand

Fig 10.

SEM analysis of sodium bentonite of friction reducing agent.

More »

Fig 10 Expand

Fig 11.

SEM analysis of SM – PAM - Na2CO3.

(a) 5μm. (b) 10μm. (c) 50μm.

More »

Fig 11 Expand

Fig 12.

SEM analysis of polyurethane- Na2O·3.1SiO2.

(a) 5μm. (b) 10μm. (c) 50μm.

More »

Fig 12 Expand

Fig 13.

Radar chart of funnel viscosity, filtration loss and water separation rate.

More »

Fig 13 Expand

Fig 14.

3D fitting of graphite, polyacrylamide and funnel viscosity, water loss and water separation rate.

More »

Fig 14 Expand

Fig 15.

3D fitting of funnel viscosity, water loss and water separation rate.

More »

Fig 15 Expand

Fig 16.

Radar chart of density, viscosity and gel time.

More »

Fig 16 Expand

Fig 17.

3D fitting of TEA, DBTDL with density, viscosity and gel time.

More »

Fig 17 Expand

Fig 18.

3D fitting of density, viscosity and gel time.

More »

Fig 18 Expand