Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng.

Aspects 225 (2003) 1
/24

www.elsevier.com/locate/colsurfa

A critical review of Roof snap-off as a mechanism of steady-

state foam generation in homogeneous porous media
William R. Rossen *
Department of Petroleum and Geosystems Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712-1061, USA

Received 25 February 2002; accepted 25 April 2003

Abstract

Foams are used worldwide to divert acid in well-stimulation treatments and on a pilot basis to divert gas or liquid
flow in improved-oil-recovery projects and environmental remediation. Optimizing foam performance requires
predictive foam modeling for use in design of field applications. Central to many mechanistic foam models is the
concept of repeated snap-off creating foam lamellae at ‘germination sites,’ pore throats upstream of wide pore bodies.
This mechanism is based on the classic study of Roof on the breakup of oil droplets passing through pore throats into
water-filled pores. This paper calls into question whether this mechanism applies to foam generation at steady-state in
homogeneous porous media.
# 2003 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Foam; Porous media; Foam generation; Snap-off; Choke-off

1. Introduction are created by snap-off in pore throats and then

Foams divert acid in well-stimulation treatments
[1,2], gas flow in improved-oil-recovery processes
[3,4], and liquid flow in environmental-remedia-
tion projects [5]. A major goal of foam research is
development of a fully mechanistic and predictive
foam simulator.
Many mechanistic foam models are based on
the concept that the liquid films, or lamellae, that
separate gas bubbles are created at pore throats by
a process of repeated snap-off. ‘Break and reform’
and similar foam models postulate that lamellae
* Tel.: /1-512-471-3246; fax: /1-512-471-9605.
E-mail address: wrossen@mail.utexas.edu (W.R. Rossen).
break as the lamellae are displaced from the throat
[6
/12]. Snap-off also plays an important role in
most ‘population balance’ and related models [13
/
23], which allow that lamellae may travel signifi-
cant distances before rupture.
Snap-off occurs when gas invades a pore throat
and then liquid accumulates in the throat, even-
tually bridging and blocking the throat, as illu-
strated in Fig. 1. A liquid lens is first formed,
which later may drain to a lamella if capillary
pressure rises again at the throat.
Initial gas invasion of the throat requires that
capillary pressure exceed the capillary entry pres-
sure of the throat Pec; for pore throats with circular
cross-section Pec /(2s /Rt) [24], where s is gas
/

0927-7757/03/$ - see front matter # 2003 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/S0927-7757(03)00309-1
2 W.R. Rossen / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 225 (2003) 1
/24

Table 1
Values of Psn e
c /Pc

Throat Psn e
c /Pc Reference
geometry

Gently constricted tubes with various cross-sectional shapes

Circular 0.5 [25]
Fig. 1. Schematic of snap-off in a pore throat. Rock is black, Rectangular w /h / 1 /0.5 [26]
water gray and gas white. Water in the vicinity has hydro- 2 0.67 [26]
dynamic continuity with water in the throat through crevices 4 0.80 [26]
and roughness in the pore wall not shown here. 10 0.91 [26]

1 [26]
liquid surface tension, Rt is the radius of the
throat, and gas
/liquid contact angle is assumed Elliptical R1/R2 / 1 0.50*
2 0.65 [27]
(as throughout this study) to be zero. Presumably 3 0.71 [27]
the surrounding porous medium is at this same
capillary pressure. Snap-off requires that capillary Toroidal throat
pressure in the throat then fall to a lower value, Rg/Rt /
0.50*
10 0.44 [28]
Psn sn
c . The value of Pc depends on pore-throat
4 0.34 [28]
geometry, as illustrated in Table 1. For straight 2 0.18 [28]
cylindrical throats, Psn e
c /(Pc/2), and it is near this
for gently constricted throats of circular cross- Biconical throat with sharp angle u at throat
section. As the cross-section of a gently constricted u (8) / 0 0.50*
10 0.37 [29]
throat of rectangular cross-section narrows into a
20 0.25 [29]
slit ((w /h )0/
), (Psn e
c /Pc) approaches 1*/in other 30 0.15 [29]
words, a slight fluctuation in Pc can cause snap-off 90 0 [29]
in such a throat. On the other hand, as the
curvature of the throat along its axis increases Beadpacks
Theoretical results, [13,30]
from zero for a straight cylindrical throat to close packing:
infinity for a very sudden constriction, Psn c falls (a) Cubic packing 0.15
to zero. Direct measurements in beadpacks [13] (b) Hexagonal packing
find Psn e
c :/(Pc/2), which is a reasonable estimate
(i) Tetrahedral pore 0.32
(ii) Octahedral pore 0.57
for other porous media as well.
There are seven documented ways that capillary Experimental /0.5 [13]
pressure can fall by a factor of 2 from Pec to Psn
c to
allow snap-off [4]. Distinguishing between them is * Same as cylindrical throat.
essential to understand the roles snap-off can play
2. Pressure differences between bubbles are dic-
in foam in porous media:
(1) Imbibition on a macroscopic scale [13,27]. In tated by lamella curvature. In Fig. 2, pressure
a foam process where gas and liquid are injected in relationships and capillary pressures along the
alternating slugs, for instance, snap-off can occur train of bubbles are abruptly changed as one
as water saturation Sw rises and Pc falls during lamella passes through a pore throat and reverses
liquid injection. curvature. This fluctuation can be treated as a
(2) The pressures in individual bubbles in a bounded random walk, where snap-off occurs
flowing foam fluctuate from bubble to bubble and each time the walk crosses the boundary at Pc /
in a single bubble over time, as lamellae squeeze Psn
c [31]. Snap-off events happen more frequently
through pore throats and expand into pore bodies the lower the average Pc of the foam is to Psn
c .
[13,31]. Therefore Pc for individual bubbles fluc- (3) Most of the pressure drop in the gas phase
tuates as well. The mechanism is illustrated in Fig. occurs at the lamellae; the gas itself is virtually
 W.R. Rossen / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 225 (2003) 1
/24
Fig. 2. Schematic of fluctuations in capillary pressure brought
about by bubble movement during foam flow in porous media.
Pressure jumps between bubbles according to the curvature of
the lamellae between bubbles. For instance, the positively
curved lamella between bubbles a and b means that the gas in
bubble a is at higher pressure than that in bubble b. In this case
shown, the lamella between bubbles d and e has reversed from
large negative curvature (dotted lines) to large positive curva-
ture (solid lines) upon a slight advance of the bubble train,
which does not affect other lamellae greatly. This causes a
drastic rearrangement of gas-bubble pressures and therefore of
capillary pressures within the train. For simplicity, water is
assumed here to flow with a uniform pressure gradient.
inviscid. Therefore, Pc is lower at the rear of a long
bubble than at the front, because liquid pressure is
higher there and gas pressure is uniform along the
bubble. As a result, snap-off may occur toward the
rear of long bubbles, as observed in an etched-
glass micromodel [32].
(4) In steady liquid
/gas flow across a sharp
transition in permeability, there is a narrow region
of low capillary pressure [33,34]. Thus, lamellae
are created at permeability transitions in bead-
packs where flow is from a low-permeability
region in to one of higher permeability
[13,30,35
/37]; the extreme case is foam generation
at the outlet face of a porous medium.
(5) When gas invades a liquid-filled pore body
during drainage, there is an instant at which liquid
can sweep back into the throat, snap-off and form
a lens behind the gas bubble [25,27,30,38
/41].
Snap-off happens most readily if the pore body is
3
much wider than the pore throat, and it can occur
by this mechanism only during drainage. If the
throat is much narrower than the body, then
repeated snap-off can occur by this mechanism
until the pore body is filled with small bubbles
[4,27,42]. In addition, snap-off can occur as gas
invades a nearby pore throat [29,43].
Snap-off occurs in this case because, as gas
invades the wide pore body downstream of the
pore throat, the curvature of the gas
/liquid inter-
face declines from (2/Rt) in the throat to (2/Rb) in
the pore body, as illustrated in Fig. 3. If Rb /
(2Rt), then the local capillary pressure at the
pore throat may temporarily be low enough for
snap-off, even if the surrounding porous medium
is at higher capillary pressure (see also refinements
in Refs. [44,45]). For convenience here we call this
geometric criterion the ‘Roof criterion,’ after
Roof’s classic study [25], and this type of snap-
off, ‘Roof snap-off.’ Chambers and Radke [27] call
it ‘neck constriction snap-off.’
(6) If gas stops just short of penetrating a throat,
liquid may accumulate and snap-off a small gas
bubble just upstream of the throat [27,38]. If the
newly formed bubble is narrower than the throat,
it may then jump through the throat.
(7) Just as pressure is nearly uniform in long
bubbles (mechanism #3), it is nearly uniform in
fingers of gas migrating upward under gravity.
Under gravity, liquid pressure is higher toward the
bottom of the finger. Thus while the top of the
finger is near the capillary entry pressure of the
medium, capillary pressure is lower near the
bottom of the finger, and snap-off may occur
there [13].
There are other ways of creating lamellae: by
‘leave behind’ during initial drainage and, if
Fig. 3. Schematic of Roof snap-off in a pore in a porous
medium. Capillary pressure drops briefly in the pore (though
not in the porous medium as a whole) due to the large radius of
curvature of the gas
/liquid interface invading the pore body.
4 W.R. Rossen / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 225 (2003) 1
/24
lamellae survive mobilization, by ‘lamella division’
in pore bodies [13,30].
Of all these mechanisms, however, snap-off
mechanism #5 (Roof snap-off) in particular is
the foundation of a wide variety of foam models
[6
/12,16
/23]. These models assume that snap-off
continues to create lamellae during steady-state
foam flow in homogeneous porous media. (Homo-
geneous here does not mean that all pores are
identical, but merely that permeability is roughly
uniform, in contrast to the case of foam generation
at a sharp permeability boundary.) An impressive
array of evidence is cited in support of this
mechanism, ranging from microscopic mechanistic
studies to macroscopic trends in behavior.
This paper examines this body of evidence and
shows that in each case observations or calcula-
tions either reflect conditions atypical of porous
media where foam is applied or they subjected to
alternate, more convincing interpretations. Where
extended mathematical analysis is needed, it is
given in Appendices A, B and C. Our conclusion is
that foam modeling based on repeated Roof snap-
off as a steady-state foam-generation mechanism
in homogeneous porous media is called into
question.
There are mathematical models of foam genera-
tion in homogenous media that do not depend on
Roof snap-off, but instead on lamella mobilization
and division [14,46
/48]. These alternate models
reproduce many of the observations cited as
evidence for Roof snap-off; some of these obser-
vations are described below. In calling into ques-
tion Roof snap-off as a mechanism of steady-state
foam generation in homogeneous media, one is
not left without any explanation for foam genera-
tion.
2. Evidence cited for repeated Roof snap-off
Evidence for the mechanism of repeated snap-
off falls into several categories: experimental and
theoretical studies of snap-off in constricted tubes;
experimental studies in two-dimensional (2D)
etched-glass micromodels and in sandpacks or
beadpacks; foam behavior in consolidated porous
media; and success of foam simulators based on
this mechanism. This section examines each type
of the evidence in turn.
A key failing of several of these lines of evidence
is that the theory or experiment fails to account for
the high capillary pressure of the surrounding
porous medium. A porous medium with gas
flowing through some pore throats must exist at
a capillary pressure at least equal to the capillary
entry pressure of all the throats through which gas
flows [24]. Gas flows through the wider pore
throats in the medium, and capillary pressure for
the porous medium is set by the narrowest pore
throat through which gas flows [24]. In foam,
bubbles fluctuate in pressure and capillary pres-
sure (mechanism #2), but they fluctuate in the
vicinity of the capillary entry pressure of the
narrowest throat through which gas flows.
The Plateau borders where foam lamellae touch
the pore walls are likewise near to the capillary
pressure of the surrounding medium. This assump-
tion is merely consistent with widely held under-
standing of mechanisms of foam coalescence. A
large body of evidence [49
/52] shows that moving
lamellae in porous media rupture when the porous
medium’s capillary pressure approaches the criti-
cal or limiting capillary pressure for lamella
stability. Nearly all recent foam models
[1,2,10,13,16
/23,47,53] incorporate this mechan-
ism. The lamella itself does not contact the
surrounding porous medium except through its
Plateau border [50,54]. If lamellae collapse as the
surrounding porous medium reaches the limiting
capillary pressure, it can only occurred because the
Plateau borders are at roughly the same high
capillary pressure as the surrounding medium
and impose this capillary pressure on the lamellae.
It is reasonable therefore to assume that the
Plateau border is at roughly the capillary pressure
of the surrounding porous medium, i.e. near to, or
greater than, Pec for pore throats. This issue is
central to evaluating several of the lines of
evidence for Roof snap-off.
2.1. Experimental studies in constricted tubes
Chambers and Radke [27] review a series of
elegant and detailed studies of snap-off in singly-
constricted tubes (see also Refs. [38
/41]). These
 W.R. Rossen / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 225 (2003) 1
/24
studies show that Roof snap-off occurs in such
tubes again and again as gas continues to flow
through a narrow pore throat upstream of a wide
pore body, as illustrated in Fig. 4.
There are two reasons why these experiments do
not represent flow through porous media: the
experiments involve tubes with a single constric-
tion, and each experiment involves a only one
constricted tube at a time.
First, in tubes with only one constriction, the
system returns to its initial state after each snap-off
event; in effect, the downstream pore has infinite
volume. If the downstream pore has finite volume,
however, snap-off would be expected to cease
when the pore body is filled with one or more
bubbles, as observed in doubly-constricted tubes
[42] and etched-glass micromodels [27]. (The only
experimental test in a doubly constricted tube [42]
is less than conclusive. The tube lacked pore
corners to conduct liquid flow and results were
partly influenced by gravity as well as capillarity;
see Refs. [42,45] for discussion.) Fig. 5 illustrates
the reason Roof snap-off ceases: the next time gas
invades the pore throat, it must displace one or
more of the bubbles in the pore body into the next
pore throat. Capillary pressure is then set by the
downstream pore throat, not the pore-body ra-
Fig. 4. Schematic of snap-off in a singly-constricted tube.
Liquid may be injected as well as gas, and flow along corners
in the pore cross-section not shown here.
5
Fig. 5. Schematic of snap-off in a doubly-constricted tube.
dius. This capillary pressure is too high (Table 1)
to sustain snap-off for long. Closer to the up-
stream throat, capillary pressure reflects the cur-
vature of the Plateau border, not the curvature of
the lamella.
As the bubbles first touch and the Plateau
border drains in Fig. 5, most liquid would drain
downstream, because the pressure of the upstream
bubble is higher, as indicated by interface curva-
ture and constrained by pore geometry. If the
Plateau border drains rapidly, some liquid might
flow back toward the upstream throat, triggering
one more snap-off event, as illustrated in Fig. 5.
After this event, there is even less liquid in the
newly formed Plateau border than after the pre-
vious snap-off event, and snap-off becomes still
less likely. Eventually, Roof snap-off ceases.
This conclusion is not altered by the existence of
crevices and corners in the pore cross-section,
through which liquid can flow [38,39], except as
noted below. This flow accelerates the accumula-
tion of liquid in the throat and snap-off in singly
constricted tubes. In doubly constricted tubes,
however, with higher capillary pressure fixed by
the downstream throats, these channels would
drain liquid away from the upstream throat, not
to the throat for snap-off. Moreover, continued
snap-off depends on the throat radii downstream
(or, more generally, on the capillary pressure of
6 W.R. Rossen / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 225 (2003) 1
/24
the surrounding medium, which reflects pore
throats), not on pore-body radius or pore aspect
ratio (the ratio of Rb to Rt). Thus, studies of Roof
snap-off in singly-constricted tubes applies to the
initial drainage of liquid-filled pores but not to
steady-state foam generation.
The second reason these experiments do not
accurately represent flow through porous media is
that in a single tube there is only one pathway for
both liquid and gas: both liquid and gas are forced
through the same throat.
In porous media, liquid and gas distribute
themselves among a variety of pores of different
sizes and flow at different rates through different
pore pathways. Capillary pressure regulates occu-
pancy and flow rates among the pores [24]. In a
single constricted tube, it is possible to set flow
rates that guarantee snap-off by, in effect, impos-
ing a low capillary pressure at the throat that
would not be observed in that same throat in a
porous medium.
Appendix A shows that virtually any measur-
able liquid
/gas flow ratio imposed in a con-
stricted-tube experiment guarantees snap-off. To
do so, we assume that the gas and liquid could
flow together through such a constricted tube at
steady-state without snap-off, and then demon-
strate that snap-off must result instead. Then we
consider a throat roughly at the capillary entry
pressure of the porous medium, and show that
liquid flow rate through the throat is vanishingly
small, and that snap-off would not result. In other
words, in a porous medium with fluid distributions
regulated by capillary pressure, liquid would not
flow at any significant volumetric rate through a
gas-occupied throat with this geometry, and,
specifically, not at a rate sufficient for snap-off.
Instead, in a porous medium, liquid flows primar-
ily through its own network of liquid-occupied
pores.
To summarize, constricted-tube experiments are
unrepresentative of flow through porous media, in
a way that strong favors snap-off.
In addition to Roof snap-off, studies in singly
constricted tubes also document snap-off by
mechanisms #1, 2 and 6; see Ref. [27] for a
summary of these studies.
2.2. Theoretical calculations for snap-off in tubes
Several theoretical studies of repeated snap-off
simply assume that liquid flows back into the
throat for another snap-off event after the lamella
just created is displaced [7
/9]. Such studies
compute a rate of lamella creation which is
inversely proportional to the sum of the times
required for snap-off and displacement of the
lamella from the throat. Kovscek and Radke
[44,45] also compute times for snap-off and
displacement, provide a model for the process
and derive a rate of foam generation for use in
population-balance foam simulation [16
/19,21
/
23].
Kovscek and Radke [44,45] assume an initial
distribution of water in the pore that corresponds
to that for gas invasion of a liquid-filled pore.
They then assert [45] that this distribution is also
approximately valid for liquid deposited by a
moving Plateau border in foam flow. Some of
their examples include a capillary-pressure bound-
ary condition lower than the capillary entry
pressure of the pore throat. We assert that these
initial and boundary conditions do not represent
steady foam flow in porous media but do promote
snap-off. Our argument on this point is lengthy
and is given in Appendices B and C. As shown
there, initial and boundary conditions that corre-
spond to steady foam flow in porous media would
not lead to Roof snap-off.
2.3. Studies in 2D micromodels
Among studies of foam in 2D etched-glass
micromodels [27,32,55
/59], many report snap-off
events. Refs. [4,27] review the limitations of
micromodel studies. Specifically, the shallow
depth of etching, often giving a slit-shaped pore
geometry (Table 1), and the capillary end effect
both favor snap-off.
The careful study of foam in micromodels by
Chambers and Radke [27] supports the analysis
presented here, though it has been cited [44,45] as
support for foam generation by Roof snap-off.
Therefore it is worth quoting Chambers and
Radke in some detail. They observed and dis-
cussed three types of snap-off: ‘pre-neck’ snap-off
 W.R. Rossen / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 225 (2003) 1
/24
(mechanism #6 above) and ‘rectilinear’ snap-off
(mechanisms # 1 or 2 above), which they state
occur under conditions of local or global imbibi-
tion, and ‘neck constriction’ snap-off, i.e. Roof
snap-off. Chambers and Radke observed Roof
snap-off only during drainage, and only until the
downstream pore bodies fill with bubbles, and not
at steady-state:
Later on, when the amount of gas in the pore
body accumulates, snap-off quits at this
location. . . .The Roof criterion Rb/Rt /2
assumes that gas expands freely into a
water-filled pore body. As the local gas
saturation and capillary pressure increase
during the drainage displacement, this rela-
tionship is no longer sufficient to guarantee
snap-off. . . [symbols changed to be consis-
tent with those here]
. . .we assert that neck constriction [i.e., Roof]
snap-off is primarily important during tran-
sient drainage displacement, as gas enters
Roof generation sites that are almost com-
pletely liquid filled. During steady foam
flow, neck constriction snap-off will require
repeated massive intermittent invasion of
wetting liquid into Roof-site pore bodies.
Thus, at steady-state, and especially at low
liquid saturations, neck constriction breakup
is not expected to be the dominant category
of snap-off. The remaining two types of
snap-off contribute more strongly.
In steady foam flow, rectilinear snap-off
[mechanism #2 above] appears to us to be
a dominant bubble generation mechanism.
. . .Apparently, due to pressure fluctuations
[mechanism #2], the local capillary pressure
falls below the critical value. . . and wetting
liquid invades to snap-off a lens.
Kovscek and Radke [45] assert that Chambers
and Radke [27] support snap-off when liquid flows
back from the wake of each moving lamella to the
pore throat behind it. The phrase ‘massive inva-
sion of wetting liquid into Roof-site pore bodies’
makes clear that Chambers and Radke are instead
7
discussing imbibition on a much larger scale.
Instead, they report that snap-off in response to
local fluctuations in capillary pressure (mechanism
#1 or 2) appeared to be dominant in steady foam
flow. Roof snap-off played a relatively minor role
at steady-state in their observations.
In other words, to the extent that micromodel
experiments are relevant to foam generation in 3D
porous media, these results argue against Roof
snap-off as an important steady-state foam-gen-
eration mechanism.
2.4. Studies in sandpacks and beadpacks
Holm [6] proposed the ‘break and reform’ model
for foam after observing lamellae form and break
in a sand-filled glass tube 0.25 mm in diameter,
with some sand grains nearly as wide as the tube.
Given the narrow diameter of this apparatus, it is
difficult to know whether this system was truly at
steady-state or experiencing repeated cycles of
local imbibition and drainage. A small porous
medium like this, with only a few pore pathways
through the glass tube, is especially likely to
produce local cycles of plugging, drainage and
foam collapse rather than steady-state flow.
From observations in beadpacks, Ransohoff
and Radke [30] present a model based on repeated
Roof snap-off that is intended to explain the
minimum gas velocity or pressure gradient re-
quired for generation of strong foam observed in
some coreflood studies [4,35,46,48,60,61]. In their
model, the pore throats along the walls of a
beadpack have a too wide diameter, relative to
pore-body size, for Roof snap-off. Some pore
throats in the main body of the pack (those
upstream of octahedral pore bodies; see Table 1)
have the right geometry for snap-off, however,
because these throats are narrower compared to
the downstream pore body. Injection of gas at low
velocity or pressure gradient drains only the wider
pores along the walls of the pack (Fig. 6(a)).
Injection at higher velocity forces gas into pores in
the interior of the pack, triggering snap-off and
foam generation. Once foam was created, Ransoh-
off and Radke observed snap-off inside the pack,
which they ascribe [30] both to Roof snap-off and
local fluctuations in capillary pressure (mechanism
8 W.R. Rossen / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 225 (2003) 1
/24

Fig. 6. Schematic of the possible roles of snap-off, mobilization and lamella division in the beadpack experiments of Ransohoff and
Radke [30]. Beads and pack wall are black, water gray and gas white. Gas invasion and snap-off in new pore in the interior of the pack
(a) leaves gas mobility unchanged, but mobilization and division of lenses or lamellae between beads against the wall of the pack (b)
blocks continuous gas flow along the wall, reducing mobility greatly.

#2). Actually, the critical velocity or pressure
gradient derived in the model of Ransohoff and
Radke is more directly a critical capillary pressure
required to invade pore throats in the interior of
the pack (‘germination sites’). The model sets the
capillary pressure required to penetrate germina-
tion sites at the inlet of the pack, and the capillary
end effect relates the capillary pressure at the pack
inlet to gas pressure drop across the pack. In field
application, where the capillary end effect does not
apply, snap-off would depend directly on capillary
pressure, not on velocity or pressure gradient.
The experimental observations of Ransohoff
and Radke [30] are better explained without
reference to Roof snap-off, however, for two
reasons. First, it is unclear why Roof snap-off
would explain their experimental result, i.e. why
snap-off in individual pore throats should trigger
the sudden drop in gas mobility as observed in
these experiments. According to the model of
Ransohoff and Radke, gas is flowing through the
pores along the side and top walls of the packing
when a slight increase in capillary pressure forces
gas into an interior pore throat. Snap-off then
blocks this pore throat as illustrated in Fig. 6(a).
There was no gas flow through this pore before gas
invaded, and now the pore is again blocked. If the
key process were Roof snap-off of this bubble, as
claimed, it is not clear what could cause the
sudden, dramatic decrease in mobility or increase
 W.R. Rossen / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 225 (2003) 1
/24
in pressure gradient as observed in the experi-
ments.
Second, the experimental results can be better
explained as foam generation by mobilization and
lamella division rather than Roof snap-off. Mobi-
lity could decline sharply as observed only if lenses
or lamellae were displaced into and blocked the
continuous gas flow paths along the side or top
surfaces of the beadpack, as illustrated in Fig. 6(b).
The original lens or lamella to be mobilized could
be the result of leave-behind or snap-off, but
mobilization of this lens or lamella, not snap-off,
is the key to the sudden drop in gas mobility
reported in the experiments. There are mathema-
tical models for foam generation by mobilization
and lamella division [46
/48] when a critical
pressure gradient is exceeded, models that do not
depend on Roof snap-off. In these models, a small
population of liquid lenses or lamellae initially
present is displaced out of pore throats at a critical
pressure gradient or pressure drop; once lamellae
are mobilized, a strong foam is created as the
lamellae divide as they pass through pore bodies
(one step in this process is illustrated schematically
in Fig. 6(b)). These models based on mobilization
fit a range of experimental data described in Refs.
[46
/48]. Ransohoff and Radke [30] lump the
processes of snap-off and mobilization together,
noting that ‘generation of fine foam, which occurs
almost certainly by a combination of the snap-off
and lamella-division mechanisms, is referred to
[here] simply as snap-off.’ But the two processes
depend on different factors: lamella mobilization
depends primarily on gas-phase pressure gradient
or pressure drop [46,48,61], while snap-off depends
on capillary pressure. Therefore these two pro-
cesses do not always go together. For instance,
Falls et al. [13] describe a beadpack experiment
where rapidly invading gas mobilizes lamellae and
plugs a beadpack, while slowly invading gas does
not.
Ransohoff and Radke [30] continued to observe
snap-off after initial foam generation, but this was
not necessarily Roof snap-off. Once foam is
mobilized and flowing, fluctuations in capillary
pressure [27,31] can lead to local conditions
favoring snap-off (mechanism #2 above). This
9
continuing process would not depend on pore
aspect ratio as does Roof snap-off.
Other beadpack and sandpack studies report
snap-off triggered by mechanisms other than Roof
snap-off. In heterogeneous beadpacks or sand-
packs, various studies [13,30,35,37,39] report re-
peated snap-off at sharp transitions in
permeability, according to mechanism #4 above.
In a separate beadpack experiment designed to
measure Psn c , Falls et al. [13] demonstrate foam
plugging in a homogeneous beadpack upon
macroscopic imbibition (mechanism #1).
2.5. Steady-state foam behavior in consolidated
porous media
Based on experiments and theory for snap-off in
constricted tubes [38
/41,44,45], population-bal-
ance foam models based on Roof snap-off [16
/
19,21,22] include a lamella-creation rate that scales
with gas superficial velocity Ug to the (1/3) power
and liquid superficial velocity Uw to the first
power. It is claimed that this generation function
explains trends in steady-state gas mobility and
bubble size observed in foam in porous media in
the laboratory. Specifically, several studies have
found that in steady-state flow through porous
media, increasing gas injection rate at fixed liquid
rate leads to increasing gas mobility and increasing
bubble size [49,62
/64]. Other studies show that
increasing liquid injection rate at fixed gas injec-
tion rate leads to lower gas mobility and, pre-
sumably, smaller bubble size [62]; as a result, gas
pressure gradient is nearly independent of gas
injection rate in these experiments. This behavior
is consistent with lamella generation that scales
with (U1/3g Uw) [16
/19,21,22], but the data are
better explained by mechanisms of foam coales-
cence rather than generation, for two reasons.
First, the same trends of bubble size and gas
mobility with injection rates are also predicted
from models that assume that foam texture is
controlled by coalescence, specifically by the
sudden collapse of foam at a ‘limiting capillary
pressure’ [47,49
/52], rather than generation.
Steady-state foam mobility and bubble size depend
on a balance between bubble coalescence and
foam generation. In the vicinity of the limiting
10 W.R. Rossen / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 225 (2003) 1
/24
capillary pressure, the abrupt collapse of foam
changes foam properties so drastically that the
dependence of properties on other factors is
secondary. An entirely different population-bal-
ance model, one incorporating the limiting capil-
lary pressure and foam-generation based on
lamella mobilization and division rather than
snap-off [47], predicts the same steady-state trends
of bubble size with gas and liquid injection rates.
Thus this behavior does not depend on generation
by snap-off.
Second, the cited trends of bubble size and gas
mobility are not observed universally, but only at
relatively high foam qualities, where capillary
pressure dominates behavior: i.e., in the so-called
‘high-quality’ or ‘coalescence’ foam regime [64
/
67]. Fig. 7 shows the two steady-state regimes.
At high foam qualities (upper left portion of
figure), pressure gradient is nearly independent of
gas superficial velocity, in agreement with both
models based on foam generation scaling as
(U1/3
g Uw) and those based on coalescence at the
limiting capillary pressure [52]. At lower foam
qualities (lower-right portion of figure), trends of
mobility with injection rates are drastically differ-
ent, and bubble size is roughly independent of gas
injection rate [64,66]. The behavior of the low-
quality regime contradicts the assertion that foam
generation controls bubble size and scales with
(U1/3
g Uw). The low-quality steady-state foam-flow
regime has been observed widely: with N2 gas and
Fig. 7. Steady-state pressure gradient (psi/ft) as function of gas
(vertical axis) and liquid (horizontal axis) superficial velocities
for one surfactant formulation with N2 gas in Berea sandstone,
from Ref. [64]. Upper-left region is high-quality regime; lower-
right is low-quality regime.
Fig. 8. Model prediction of steady-state pressure gradient (psi/
ft) as function of gas (vertical axis) and liquid (horizontal axis)
interstitial velocities (Ug/f , Uw/f ) based on fit to data for one
surfactant formulation with N2 gas in a sandpack, from Ref.
[47]. Pressure gradients are lower than in Fig. 7 in part because
beadpack permeability is much higher than in the Berea core in
Fig. 7. The model used here [47] includes a limiting capillary
pressure, minimum bubble size, and foam generation by
mobilization as a function of pressure gradient. Circles
represent calculated values, not data.
dense CO2, at low and high pressures, with various
surfactants, at room temperature and elevated
temperature, and in porous media ranging from
beadpacks to consolidated core [64
/67]. Fig. 8
shows both flow regimes as modeled assuming
coalescence at the limiting capillary pressure Pc , a
minimum bubble size [64,66] for Pc /Pc , and
foam generation by mobilization, not snap-off
[47]. This model predicts the range of behavior
better than assuming that foam generation con-
trols bubble size and scales as (U1/3
g Uw).
2.6. Success in foam simulation
Algorithms for lamella creation scaling with
(U1/3
g Uw) are employed in population-balance
foam simulators [16
/19,21,22] that have success-
fully fit laboratory data. The simulators require
many parameters to model lamella creation and
destruction as well as foam mobility at a given
foam texture, though in practice only a few of
these need to be history-matched to coreflood
data. Still, a satisfactory fit to data does not imply
accuracy of all mathematical formulae and para-
 W.R. Rossen / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 225 (2003) 1
/24
meters used in a simulation. In particular, there is
an inherent ambiguity between lamella-creation
and lamella-destruction equations in population-
balance foam simulation, since an error in one
formula can be accommodated unwittingly by
adjusting the other.
To fit the coreflood data, in the past decade
most population-balance simulators [16
/19,21,22]
operate near the ‘limiting capillary pressure’ Pc  at
which foam collapses [49
/52]. In terms of the
population-balance equations, there is a singular-
ity, where lamella-destruction rates approach in-
finity, as Pc approaches Pc . This mathematical
singularity is physically justified, but it does mean
that a small change in Pc, giving a large change in
lamella-destruction rate, can accommodate large
errors in other algorithms such as lamella-genera-
tion rate.
Many of these same coreflood data can be fit
nearly as well by fractional-flow methods using
only a single foam parameter that reflects foam
coalescence at Pc  [53]. The two approaches also
agree well when applied to radial flow over large
distances, though the fractional-flow model re-
quires an adjustment in the value of its sole
parameter to fit the population-balance result in
this case. Fractional-flow modeling has well-docu-
mented limitations. However, if a fractional-flow
model with only one mechanism can fit data nearly
as well as a population-balance simulator with
many mechanisms, including Roof snap-off, it
cannot be maintained that the algorithm for
Roof snap-off was essential to the success of the
simulator.
3. Discussion
Although we assert that Roof snap-off does not
occur in homogeneous porous media in steady-
state form flow, snap-off may still occur through
the other mechanisms, and lamella creation may
continue by mechanisms other than snap-off
[4,27,30,37,46
/48]. In particular, Ransohoff and
Radke [30] and Chambers and Radke [27] report
observing snap-off resulting from fluctuations in
capillary pressure (mechanism #2; cf. Fig. 2) in
beadpacks and 2D micromodels. It is important to
11
distinguish this mechanism from Roof snap-off.
The importance of this form of snap-off would
depend on the frequency and magnitude of fluc-
tuations in capillary pressure caused by changes in
lamella curvature during bubble movement [31]
(Fig. 2). It would not depend on the geometric
factor (Rb/Rt) or on gas and liquid flow rates in the
same way as in models of Roof snap-off.
4. Conclusions
None of the evidence reviewed strongly supports
repeated Roof snap-off as the basis of steady-state
foam generation in homogeneous porous media.
Experimental studies in constricted tubes do not
well represent conditions in porous media. The
theoretical model cited in support of Roof snap-
off in constricted tubes incorporates initial and
boundary conditions that do not apply to foam
flow in porous media. If etched-glass-micromodel
studies are relevant, they argue against Roof snap-
off as a steady-state foam-generation mechanism.
The abrupt drop in mobility observed upon
generation of strong foam in beadpacks and
sandpacks most directly reflects lamella mobiliza-
tion and division, not snap-off. Trends of steady-
state foam mobility with injection rates, and the
success of simulators with foam-generation algo-
rithms based on Roof snap-off, are both better
explained by the effects of capillary pressure on
foam coalescence.
Thus there is no compelling evidence for foam
generation by Roof snap-off in steady-state foam
flow in homogeneous porous media.
5. Nomenclature
Cam capillary number in model of Ref. [44]
(Eq. (C2))
L length of pore (Fig. B1)
Pc capillary pressure
Pc(z , t) capillary pressure as function of position
and time within pore in model of Ref.
[44]
12 W.R. Rossen / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 225 (2003) 1
/24
P0c (z ) capillary pressure at initial condition in
model of Ref. [44] (Eq. (B4))
Pc  limiting capillary pressure for foam
collapse in porous medium
Pcb capillary pressure imposed as boundary
condition at pore body (Fig. B4)
Pec capillary entry pressure of pore throat
Psn
c capillary pressure for snap-off in pore
throat
(/@pw/ externally imposed uniform pressure
@z ) gradient on liquid phase (Eqs. (A1), (A2)
and (C2))
R (z) radius of circle inscribed in square pore
cross-section at position z (Fig. B1)
Rb radius of pore body
Rw(z , t) radius of cylindrical water
/gas interface
within pore
R0w(z ) initial radius of cylindrical water
/gas
interface within pore (Figs. B1 and B2)
Rwf radius of cylindrical water
/gas interface
in pore body after water redistributes to
attain uniform capillary pressure (Eq.
(B9))
Rg/Rt ratio of radius of solid to radius of ‘hole’
in toroidal pore throat (Table 1)
Rt radius of pore throat
R1/R2 ratio of long to short axis in elliptical
cross-section of gently constricted pore
throat (Table 1)
t time
Ug gas superficial velocity
Uw water superficial velocity
Vz(z , t) volume of water per unit length along
pore (Eq. (B5)), i.e. cross-sectional area
of region occupied by water in pore
corners
V0z (z ) initial volume of water per unit length
along pore (Eq. (B5))
VzD(z, dimensionless volume of water per unit
t) length along pore (Eq. (B7))
V0zD(z) initial dimensionless volume of water per
unit length along pore
w /h ratio of wide to narrow dimension in
rectangular cross-section of gently con-
stricted pore throat (Table 1)
z axial position along pore (Fig. B1)
s gas
/liquid surface tension
u angle conical pore throat makes with
horizontal (Table 1); u /0 corresponds
to cylindrical tube; u /908 corresponds
to circular hole in thin solid plate
t dimensionless time in model of Ref. [44]
(Eq. (C1))
t? modified dimensionless time (Eq. (C3))
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by U.S. Department
of Energy contracts DE-AC26-99BC15208 and
DE-FC26-01BC15318, the Advanced Technology
Program of the Texas Higher Education Coordi-
nating Board, consortia on Reservoir Engineering
Research and Improved Well Performance at The
University of Texas at Austin, and the Petroleum
Research Fund, administered by the American
Chemical Society. We thank Larry W. Lake,
Kenneth R. Kibodeaux and George J. Hirasaki
for helpful discussions.
Appendix A: Simultaneous liquid and gas flow
through a constricted tube
Here, we show that virtually any measurable
liquid flow rate imposed in experiments in con-
stricted tubes guarantees snap-off. We proceed by
assuming that gas and liquid could flow together
through such a constricted tube at steady-state
without snap-off, and then demonstrate that snap-
off must result. Then we compute the liquid flow
rate through the throat that would correspond to
flow in a porous media and show that snap-off
would not result at this flow rate of liquid.
Consider a constricted tube with square cross-
section, as in the constricted-tube experiments
[38
/41], with liquid occupying and flowing along
the corners, as illustrated in Fig. A1. Initially we
consider a case just on the verge of snap-off. The
curvature of the liquid
/gas interface is uniform
along the tube, as required to maintain a uniform
capillary pressure. On the verge of snap-off, the
liquid
/gas interface has a radius of curvature of Rt
 W.R. Rossen / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 225 (2003) 1
/24
Fig. A1. Schematic of constricted tube and distribution of
liquid in pore throat. (a) Side view of constricted tube. (b)
Cross-section view of throat of tube with square cross-section,
with liquid in throat on verge of snap-off. Radius of curvature
of liquid
/gas interface is Rt. (c) Throat of tube with rounded
corners, with liquid on verge of snap-off in throat. (d) Throat of
square-cross-section tube, with liquid in throat at capillary
entry pressure of the throat. Radius of curvature of liquid
/gas
interface is (Rt/2). (e) Rounded tube with liquid in throat at
capillary entry pressure of throat. There is only a slight amount
of liquid in the rounded corners. If the corners were much more
rounded, there would be no liquid in the corners and no liquid
flow through the throat at this capillary pressure.
along the entire tube, as illustrated in Fig. A1(b).
The volumetric water flow rate Qw along the tube
is given by [39]
 
2 R2t (4  p) dp
Qw hvz i[Rt (4p)]   (A1)
mw b dz
where vz is volumetric average water velocity in
the corner, mw is water viscosity, (/dp /dz) is
pressure gradient, assumed here to be uniform
along the pore, and b is a parameter that reflects
pore shape and surface viscosity [39].
Resistance to gas flow is greatest at the pore
throat, where the cross-section occupied by gas is
most restricted by liquid in the tube corner.
13
Therefore actual gas volumetric flow rate Qg is
greater than that which would apply to a cylind-
rical tube of uniform radius Rt, assuming zero
velocity at the liquid
/gas interface [68]:
 
pR4 dp
Qg  t  (A2)
8mg dz
where mg is gas viscosity.
Combining Eqs. (A1) and (A2) gives
 
Qw 8(4  p) mg
B : (A3)
Qg pb mw
For a square-cross-section tube, b /93.9 for zero
surface viscosity and about 250 for high surface
viscosity [39]. Ransohoff and Radke [39] fit their
experimental data by noting that unavoidable
rounding of the pore corners that occurs during
creation of the constriction represented about 5%
of the original cross-sectional area of the throat, as
illustrated in Fig. A1(b). Rounding of the pore
corners significantly increases the value of b in Eq.
(A1). We estimate a ‘degree of roundedness,’ as
defined by Ransohoff and Radke, to be about 0.48
for this case, illustrated in Fig. A1(b). This gives
values of b of about 160 for zero surface viscosity
and 400 for large surface viscosity [39]. Ransohoff
and Radke fit their snap-off data using two
sulfonate surfactants with b corresponding to
large surface viscosity in a somewhat rounded
tube, so the largest value of b is probably more
representative of their experiments. The viscosity
of nitrogen at room temperature is about (1/50) of
that of water [4]. Using Eq. (A3), then, for a
system on the verge of snap-off at the throat,
Qw
B0:00047 (square throat; zero surface
Qg
viscosity)
B0:00017 (square throat; large surface
viscosity)
B0:00027 (rounded throat; zero surface
viscosity)
B0:00011 (rounded throat; large surface
viscosity): (A4)
Allowing for a mobile interface it would further
increase the gas flow rate beyond that in Eq. (A2)
14 W.R. Rossen / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 225 (2003) 1
/24

and reduce the value of (Qw/Qg) below that given A constricted-tube experiment that mimics a gas-
above for zero surface viscosity. occupied throat in capillary equilibrium with the
The system in Fig. A1(b) and (c) is on the verge surrounding porous medium would have a vanish-
of snap-off (i.e. capillary pressure in the throat is ingly small liquid flow rate through that particular
(s/Rt)/Psnc ). A liquid flow rate greater than that throat. Instead, most water flows through other
in Eq. (A4) can be accommodated only by swelling (especially liquid-filled) throats in the medium. If
the liquid-filled corners, causing snap-off at the liquid flowing fraction is significant, the fraction
throat. In other words, almost any measurable of gas-filled throats in the porous medium is small.
liquid flowing fraction imposed in such an experi- To summarize, in an experiment with a single
ment makes flow through the throat impossible constricted tube, virtually any measurable liquid
without snap-off. flow rate exceeds the liquid flow rate that would
Consider now liquid flow through a throat apply to that gas-filled throat in a porous medium.
roughly at the capillary pressure of the surround- Even small liquid flowing fractions impose a
ing porous medium. Since gas occupies this throat, condition that guarantees snap-off, but does not
capillary pressure in the medium must be at least reflect flow in a porous medium.
roughly the capillary entry pressure of the throat,
Pec /(2s/Rt). Fig. A1(d) and (e) illustrate the case
where the liquid
/gas interface everywhere reflects
a prevailing capillary pressure of (2s/Rt), with a Appendix B: Model of Refs. [44,45]
radius of curvature of (Rt/2). Now,
  The main thrust of Ref. [44] by Kovscek and
(R =2)4 (4  p) dp Radke is to determine a frequency for snap-off and
Qw  t  (A5)
mw b dz subsequent displacement events. Here we focus on
  why snap-off occurs at all in the context of that
Qw (4  p) mg
B (A6) model. We find that snap-off results from either an
Qg 2pb mw
initial condition that places a large amount of
and gas volumetric flow rate would be somewhat water at low capillary pressure in pore bodies, or a
larger than in Eq. (A2). The definition of ‘degree boundary condition of low capillary pressure in
of roundedness’ for rounded throats in Ref. [39] the surrounding porous medium. Neither condi-
depends on the radius of curvature of the liquid
/ tion is expected to represent steady-state foam
gas interface; it is 1 for perfectly square throats in flow in porous media.
all cases. Using Ref. [39], we estimate a degree of
roundedness of 0.83 for the rounded throat (Fig.
A1(d)), and b :/2000 for zero surface viscosity
and 8000 for large surface viscosity in the rounded
throat. This gives
Qw
B0:000029 (square tube; zero surface
Qg
viscosity)
B0:000011 (square tube; large surface
viscosity)
6
B1:3710 (rounded throat; zero surface
viscosity)
B3:41107 (rounded throat; large surface Fig. B1. Schematic of pore geometry and assumption of Refs.
[44,45] regarding water initially present in pore corners. Water
viscosity): (A7) is gray and gas white.
 W.R. Rossen / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 225 (2003) 1
/24 15

Initial condition
The model of Kovscek and Radke [44,45]
assumes a gently-constricted (sinusoidal) pore
geometry with square pore cross-section, as illu-
strated in Fig. B1. Let R (z) be the radius of a circle
inscribed in the square pore cross-section at each
position z . (Some symbols here differ from those
in Refs. [44,45].) R (z ) varies sinusoidally from Rb
at the pore body (z /L /0 and z/L /1) to Rt at the
throat (z/L /0.5). Fig. B2 illustrates pore cross-
section at the pore body and throat for the case Rt/
Rb /0.4, and Fig. B3(a) shows how R (z) varies
along the pore.
Wetting liquid occupies the pore corners, which
in the model represent the pore crevices and
roughness of the pore walls in real porous media.
The initial condition assumed along the pore is
that water occupies pore corners with a roughly
cylindrical gas
/water interface of radius R0w(z),
with R0w given at each position z by

R0w (z)0:53R(z): (B1)

Kovscek and Radke note that the factor 0.53

corresponds to the curvature of a bubble advancing
into a large slug of liquid inside a capillary of
uniform square cross-section [44]. Below we dis-
cuss whether this is an appropriate initial condi-
tion for water left in the wake of a moving Plateau
border. Figs. B2 and B3(a) illustrate the initial
distribution of water in a pore with Rt/Rb /0.4.
R0w(z ) varies along the pore because, by assump-
tion, R0w is proportional to R (z ) at each location.
Fig. B3. Illustration of initial condition assumed in model of
Refs. [44,45]. In this figure, Rt/Rb /0.4. (a) Radius of circle
inscribed in square pore cross-section, R (z ), and initial radius
of curvature R0w(z ) of water
/gas interface in pore corners along
length of pore. (b) Initial capillary pressure along pore P0c (z )
corresponding to initial distribution of water. If Pc(z )/Psn
c /1 at
pore throat (z /L /0.5), snap-off occurs at the throat. Because
gas pressure is assumed to be uniform, liquid pressure varies
inversely with capillary pressure. Thus, when flow begins the
gradient in capillary pressure tends to drive water from the pore
body into the throat. Any additional imposed pressure gradient
also helps sweep water from the upstream pore body into the
throat. (c) Initial distribution of water, represented as dimen-
sionless volume per unit length, V0zD(z ). If during flow VzD(z ) /
1 at throat (z /L/0.5), snap-off occurs at the throat. Large
values of VzD(z ) near z /L/0 represent excess water in pore
body that would cause snap-off if transported directly to the
throat.

Starting at time t/0, water redistributes in the

Fig. B2. Illustration of initial distribution of water in pore body
and pore throat assumed in Ref. [44] for Rt/Rb /0.4. Water is
gray and gas white. Note that at pore body R0w /0.53 Rb, and
at throat R0w /0.53 Rt.
pore, and R0w(z) evolves as Rw(z , t), the radius of
curvature of the water
/gas interface at each
position at each time.
16 W.R. Rossen / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 225 (2003) 1
/24
Impact of initial condition
Snap-off occurs anywhere that
Rw (z)]R(z)
(B2)
(condition for snap-off anywhere);
when this condition is satisfied the water in the
respective pore corners meets along the flat pore
wall. Snap-off is most likely to occur at or near the
throat, if
Rw (z=L 0:5)]Rt
(B3)
(condition for snap-off at throat):
Initially, the condition for snap-off is not satisfied
at any location in the pore, as shown in Fig. B3(a).
The initial capillary pressure P0c (z ) of the gas
/
water interface at each location z is (s /R0w)/(s/
(0.53R (z )). Fig. B3(b) illustrates how P0c (z) varies
initially along the pore. Here P0c is made dimen-
sionless by dividing by the capillary pressure for
snap-off, Psnc /s/Rt
P0c (z)=Psn
c [s=(0:53R(z))]=(s=Rt )
Rt =(0:53R(z)): (B4)
Starting at t/0, water redistributes in the pore,
and P0c (z ) evolves as Pc(z, t), the local capillary
pressure at each position at each time. With the
definition in Eq. (B4), if Pc/Psn c ever falls below 1
(dotted line in Fig. B3(b) at the throat (z /L /0.5),
snap-off occurs there. This condition is equivalent
to Eq. (B3). Initially, P0c is too high at the throat
for snap-off.
Refs. [44,45] assume that gas pressure is uniform
everywhere. Therefore liquid pressure varies as (/
Pc(z, t )). Initially, liquid pressure is highest in the
pore bodies and lowest in the throat, in inverse
relationship to P0c (z ) in Fig. B3(b).
Not only does water exist at low capillary
pressure in the pore bodies, but there is a relatively
large volume of water there. The region occupied
by water at each location z has cross-sectional area
given by the difference between a square and a
circle (Fig. B1). Initially,
Vz0 (z)(2R0w (z))2 p(R0w (z))2
(4p)(R0w (z))2 (B5)
where cross-sectional area is represented as volume
per unit length V0z . The integral of V0z (z)dz gives
total volume of water initially in the pore. Starting
at t/0, water redistributes in the pore, and V0z (z )
evolves as Vz(z , t), the local volume per unit length
at each position at each time. Eq. (B5) continues to
describe the relationship between Vz(z , t) and
Rw(z, t) during this process.
The condition for snap-off at the throat can also
be represented in terms of Vz. Eqs. (B3) and (B5)
imply that snap-off occurs at the throat if
Vz (z=L 0:5)](4p)R2t
(B6)
(condition for snap-off at throat):
We make Vz dimensionless by dividing by this
value:
VzD (z)Vz (z)=[(4p)R2t ](Rw (z)=Rt )2 : (B7)
With this definition, if at any time VzD ]/1 (dotted
line in Fig. B3(c)) at the pore throat (z/L /0.5),
snap-off occurs at the throat. Initially, with
Rw(z) /0.53R (z), V0zD(z) /[(0.53)2(R (z )/Rt)2].
Figs. B2 and B3(c) illustrate the initial distribu-
tion of water in the pore body and throat and
along the pore for Rt/Rb /0.4. Initially, there is
insufficient water in the throat for snap-off, but
there is a large volume of water initially in the pore
body (Fig. B3(c)) at low capillary pressure (Fig.
B3(b)).
Boundary conditions
Two types of boundary conditions are consid-
ered by Kovscek and Radke [44,45]:
(1) Fixed capillary pressure Pcb at pore bodies
(z /L /0 and 1). Capillary pressure is fixed as a
multiple of the initial capillary pressure P0c (z/L /
0) in the pore body, which Ref. [44] calls the
capillary entry pressure . This can be confusing,
because in conventional usage [24] capillary entry
pressure Pec refers to the entry pressure of the pore
throat ; that convention is followed in this paper,
for instance. As discussed in the text, it is generally
assumed that the capillary pressure of a porous
medium with gas flowing is at or above the
capillary entry pressures of the pore throats
occupied by gas in the medium [24]. Ref. [45] calls
P0c (z/L /0) the ‘minimum capillary pressure’ in-
stead. Fig. B4 shows an example where the
imposed capillary pressure Pcb at the pore bodies
(large dots in figure) is fixed at 1.4 times the initial
 W.R. Rossen / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 225 (2003) 1
/24
Fig. B4. Illustration of boundary condition of fixed capillary
pressure Pcb imposed at pore boundary; cf. Fig. B3(b). In this
example, for illustration, Rt/Rb /0.4 and Pcb (represented by
large dots) is set at 1.4 times the initial capillary pressure in the
pore body. This capillary pressure is a little greater than Psn c ,
but it is still much lower than the capillary entry pressure of the
throat, Pec, shown by dashed line.
capillary pressure at the pore body, an example
cited by Kovscek and Radke [44,45]. This capillary
pressure is a little higher than that which would
cause snap-off at the pore throat (i.e. Pcb/Psn
c /1),
but it is well below the capillary entry pressure Pec
of the throat, i.e. the capillary pressure one would
expect to apply in the porous medium as a whole.
(2) Zero gradient of capillary pressure at the
pore boundaries: i.e.
@Rw (z; t)=@z 0@Pc (z; t)=@z;
(B8)
z=L 0; 1; all t:
If there is no externally imposed pressure gradient
(see below), this corresponds to zero flux at the
boundaries. If there is an imposed pressure gra-
dient, this corresponds to zero capillary-pressure-
driven flux at the boundaries; but convection does
continue through the boundaries driven by the
externally imposed pressure gradient.
Cases considered in Refs. [44,45]
A uniform pressure gradient may be imposed on
the liquid phase in addition to the capillary-
pressure gradient (see Appendix C). Starting at
t/0, water flows in response to the gradient of
capillary pressure (from lower Pc to higher Pc) in
addition to the externally imposed pressure gra-
dient. Rw, Pc and VzD evolve from their initial
distributions R0w, P0c and V0zD. If at any time the
condition (Eq. (B3)) (or equivalently, Pc/Psn
c ]/1 or
VzD ]/1) is satisfied at z /L /0.5, snap-off occurs
at the throat. Snap-off could in principle happen
17
anywhere if condition (Eq. (B2)) is satisfied, but
here we focus on snap-off at the throat (z/L /0.5).
Kovscek and Radke [44,45] consider variations
in the following factors:
. Rt/Rb
. magnitude of pressure gradient imposed on
liquid phase
. nature of boundary condition
. magnitude of Pcb, if fixed as boundary condi-
tion.
In all cases in Refs. [44,45], however, the initial
distribution of water in the pore follows Eq. (B1).
For illustration, we focus here on the case Rt/Rb /
0.4.
Flow of water in pore: geometrical analysis of
initial condition
Starting at t /0, water flows in response to the
capillary-pressure gradient. Some water flows back
to the upstream pore body if Pcb there (represented
by the large dots in Fig. B3(b)) is set at a higher
value than initially in the pore body. Also, any
imposed pressure gradient tends to sweep water
from the upstream pore body downstream toward
the throat.
Simple geometric calculations lead immediately
to two conclusions for this example (Rt/Rb /0.4):
(1) If upstream and downstream boundaries of
the pore were sealed and the water present initially
were to redistribute itself to attain uniform capil-
lary pressure (i.e. uniform Rw), there is almost, but
not quite, enough water in the pore for snap-off in
the throat, as illustrated in Fig. B5. Mathemati-
cally, the condition for a uniform final capillary
pressure i.e. a uniform final interface radius Rwf, is
given by a volume balance on water present
initially and at the end (cf. Eq. (B5)):
L
g (4p)(R (z)) dz(4p)(R
0
0
w
2 2
wf ) L; (B9)
and the condition for snap-off after redistribution
of water is, from Eqs. (B2) and (B9)
L
g (R (z)) dz (R ) L:
0
0
w
2
t
2
(B10)
For Rt/Rb slightly less than 0.4, snap-off would
occur if water initially distributed according to Eq.
18 W.R. Rossen / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 225 (2003) 1
/24
Fig. B5. Final distribution of water resulting from initial
distribution in Figs. B2 and B3 if water redistributes at uniform
capillary pressure (uniform Rwf) */Eq. (B9), with upstream and
downstream pore boundaries sealed and without any imposed
pressure gradient. Note radius of curvature of water
/gas
interfaces is same in pore body and pore throat. In this example
there is almost, but not quite, enough water for snap-off in
throat; water in respective pore corners almost touches along
flat pore wall.
(B1) were redistributed at uniform capillary pres-
sure in the pore.
(2) If the large volume of water initially in the
pore body (Fig. B3(c)), where VzD /1, were
translated directly to the throat, snap-off would
occur. Fig. B6 illustrates the distribution of water
in the throat for the same value of VzD initially in
the pore body (i.e. V0zD /1.75 at z/L /0.5, Fig.
B3(c)). Because the liquid in the pore corners
meets along the flat pore walls, snap-off would
occur. The actual process of water transport in
response to capillary pressure and imposed pres-
Fig. B6. Illustration of case with initial state in Figs. B2 and B3
where the large volume of water initially in the pore body is
translated directly to throat, e.g. by a large pressure gradient.
Sketch for throat shows volume of water in throat if snap-off
did not occur; before the condition shown was reached, snap-
off would occur.
sure gradient, as discussed in Refs. [44,45], is of
course more complex than the simple volumetric
calculations in Eqs. (B9) and (B10), illustrated in
Fig. B5. It is instructive to note, however, the
effect the volume of water assumed to be initially
present in the pore body would have in the pore
throat. The limiting case of large imposed pressure
gradient is addressed in Appendix C.
Flow of water in pore: numerical results
The numerical results in Refs. [44,45] are in
substantial agreement with the geometrical analy-
sis above. The numerical results can be summar-
ized as follows:
(1) If the pore is sealed upstream and down-
stream, with no imposed pressure gradient, snap-
off occurs for (Rt/Rb) less than about 0.4. This is
close to the criterion in Eq. (B10), i.e. that the
initial volume of water, mostly in the pore bodies,
if redistributed at uniform capillary pressure,
would be sufficient for snap-off in the throat.
(2) If there is no capillary-pressure gradient at
the boundaries, but a sufficiently large imposed
pressure gradient, snap-off occurs for (Rt/Rb) B/
0.53; i.e. snap-off occurs if VzD /1 (Eq. (B7))
initially in the pore body. A sufficiently large
pressure gradient rapidly sweeps the large volume
of water initially in the pore body into the throat
where it causes snap-off. This case is described
quantitatively in the limit of large imposed pres-
sure gradient in Appendix C.
(3) If boundary condition Pcb is set at the same
low capillary pressure as is initially set in the pore
bodies (Pcb /P0c (z /0)), then snap-off occurs in
any pore for which (Rt/Rb)B/0.53. This corre-
sponds to a capillary pressure imposed by the
surrounding porous medium that is only about
half the capillary entry pressure of the throat. A
pressure gradient imposed on the liquid accelerates
the process of snap-off but does not affect whether
it occurs.
(4) Kovscek and Radke [44,45] refer to cases
with a fixed boundary capillary pressure Pcb
higher than the initial capillary pressure at the
pore body, which they call the capillary entry
pressure ; in Ref. [45] they call it the minimum
capillary pressure . In all cases reported in Refs.
[44,45], with open boundaries but no imposed
pressure gradient, the condition for snap-off is that
 W.R. Rossen / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 225 (2003) 1
/24
the capillary pressure imposed at the pore bound-
ary, Pcb, be about half the capillary entry pressure
of the pore throat Pec. In other words, the
surrounding porous medium must be at or below
about half the capillary entry pressure for the
throats in the medium.
(5) With a higher capillary pressure Pcb imposed
at the pore boundaries and a sufficiently large
imposed pressure gradient, water initially in the
pore body is swept into the throat and causes
snap-off before the boundary condition is felt, as
long as VD /1 initially at the pore body (i.e. as
long as Rt/Rb B/0.53). This case is presented
quantitatively in Appendix C for the case of large
imposed pressure gradient.
In all cases, snap-off results from one of two
conditions: a capillary pressure in the surrounding
porous medium about half the capillary entry
pressure of the throat, or a relatively large volume
of water initially present at low capillary pressure
in the upstream pore body (Fig. B3).
Validity of initial and boundary conditions
Initial condition: The initial condition illustrated
in Eq. (B1) and Figs. B1, B2 and B3 corresponds
to water invading a liquid-filled pore of square
cross-section [44], and most of the studies
[38,69,70] cited in Refs. [44,45] for its support
concern gas advancing into large slugs of liquid.
Kovscek and Radke [44,45] assert that it also
approximates water deposited by a moving Pla-
teau border in steady foam flow. In other words, in
the context of a porous medium rather than a
tube, they assert that the moving Plateau border
continually deposits in its wake water at capillary
pressure substantially lower than in the surround-
ing porous medium.
Recently, Kovscek and Radke [45] assert that
their initial condition is supported by the model of
Hirasaki and Lawson [71]. Hirasaki and Lawson
analyze the motion of bubbles in cylindrical tubes.
According to this analysis, if the liquid slug
between bubbles shrinks to zero width and the
bubbles touch, there is a difference between the
curvatures of the surfaces on either side of the
Plateau border. Specifically, the curvature of the
front surface of the Plateau border is less than, and
the curvature on the back surface greater than, the
curvature of the same Plateau border at rest. The
19
difference in curvatures increases as velocity in-
creases. Kovscek and Radke assert [45] that this
difference in curvatures across a moving Plateau
border supports their initial condition (Eq. (B1)).
There are two problems with this assertion.
(1) The main problem with this assertion is that
the difference in curvatures is in the wrong
direction to explain a low capillary pressure in
the wake of a moving Plateau border. The wake of
a moving Plateau border in Hirasaki and Lawson’s
analysis corresponds rear surface of the Plateau
border, and it has increasing curvature (increasing
capillary pressure) as its velocity increases.
In flow of bubbles through tubes, there is no
surrounding porous medium to impose a capillary
pressure on the flow. In the model of Hirasaki and
Lawson, the curvature of the Plateau border at
rest is set by the volume fraction of gas in the
isolated foam-filled tube, the tube radius, and the
bubble size. In the context of a porous medium,
the curvature of the Plateau border at rest would
be set by the capillary pressure of the surrounding
medium, which is at least equal to the capillary
entry pressure of the pore throat. Thus a Plateau
border at rest would have capillary pressure at
least equal to the capillary entry pressure of the
throats, and a moving Plateau border would
deposit water at increasing capillary pressure as
its velocity increases.
(2) There is no indication from Hirasaki and
Lawson that a moving Plateau border would
deposit water with the spatial distribution given
by Eq. (B1) i.e. with radius proportional to the
local radius of the pore. An extension of Hirasaki
and Lawson’s analysis from tubes to porous media
would suggest that the curvature of the interfaces
of the Plateau border would be set by the capillary
pressure of the surrounding medium, not the local
radius of the pore.
We assert that a more reasonable assumption
than Eq. (B1) is that water is deposited at a
capillary pressure in the vicinity of the capillary
pressure of the surrounding medium i.e. in the
vicinity of the capillary entry pressure of pore
throats.
Boundary condition: For homogeneous porous
media, a boundary condition of capillary pressure
Pcb in the surrounding medium substantially lower
20 W.R. Rossen / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 225 (2003) 1
/24
than the capillary entry pressure of pore throats is
likewise unphysical, as discussed in the text. If
foam is flowing at steady-state, the surrounding
medium is expected to be at or near the capillary
entry pressures of the gas-occupied pore throats in
the medium.
In short, there is no theoretical justification for
the initial or boundary conditions assumed in the
model of Kovscek and Radke.
Impact of more-realistic boundary conditions
Figs. B7 and B8 illustrate the initial and
boundary conditions that would apply if water
Fig. B7. Initial and boundary conditions in pore if one assumes
liquid is deposited in pore corners by a Plateau border roughly
in equilibrium with surroundings at capillary entry pressure of
the throat, Pec. Case shown is for Rt/Rb /0.4. Note that there is
no excess water or low capillary pressure in the pore body to
drive transport of water to the throat, and externally imposed
capillary pressure Pcb (represented by large dots in plot (b)) is
also too high to cause snap-off.
Fig. B8. Illustration of initial distribution of water in pore body
and pore throat for Rt/Rb /0.4 if one assumes liquid is
deposited in pore corners by a Plateau border roughly in
equilibrium with surroundings, i.e. at the capillary entry
pressure of the throat. Note that radii of curvature of water
/
gas interfaces are the same in pore body and pore throat.
were initially deposited by a moving Plateau
border roughly at equilibrium with the surround-
ing porous medium at the capillary entry pressure
of the throat Pec. There is no excess liquid in the
pore body, and snap-off would not result from any
imposed pressure gradient. The limiting case of
high imposed pressure gradient is treated in
Appendix C.
To summarize, in the model of Kovscek and
Radke [44,45] snap-off results from either an
initial condition of a moving Plateau border
depositing relatively large amounts of water at
low capillary pressure in the pore body, or a
capillary pressure in the surrounding porous
medium about half the capillary entry pressure of
the medium. Neither condition is likely to apply to
steady foam flow in porous media.
Appendix C: Limiting behavior of model of Refs.
[44,45] at large imposed pressure gradient
The purpose of this section is to justify the
statement in Appendix B that a sufficiently large
pressure gradient sweeps the large volume of water
assumed to be initially present in the pore body
into the throat and causes snap-off (Fig. B6).
Strictly, it is not the water in the pore body that
flows to the throat; it is a wave initiated by the
water deposited in the pore body.
For sufficiently large pressure gradient imposed
on the liquid phase (i.e. large enough that it
 W.R. Rossen / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 225 (2003) 1
/24 21

dominates over the effects of capillary-pressure line with a fixed value of (Rw/Rb), with slope
gradient), the equation for Rw(z , t) given in Refs. (d(z /L )/dt?)/(Rw/Rb)2. If the boundary condition
[44,45] becomes at z/L /0 imposes a different value of (Rw/Rb)
 2 than the initial condition at z /L /0, then a
@(Rw =Rb ) Rw @(Rw =Rb )
Cam 0 (C1) spreading wave of characteristics with values of
@t Rb @(z=L) (Rw/Rb) intermediate between these two values
where capillary number Cam is given by arises from the origin (z/L /0, t ?/0). Because in
   the initial condition (Rw/Rb) decreases with in-
4Rb L @p creasing (z /L ) in the first half of the pore (Fig.
Cam   w : (C2)
s @z B3(a)), characteristic velocities also decrease with
increasing (z /L ) there. This leads to self-sharpen-
(/@pw/@z ) is the uniform externally imposed
ing behavior and eventually a shock. For any
pressure gradient on the liquid phase, and dimen-
given value of t ?, the position of the shock can be
sionless time t is proportional to physical time t
resolved by a volume balance on water at the
and incorporates fluid properties and geometric
shock [24].
factors. (Some symbols here differ from those in
If imposed pressure gradient dominates flow
Refs. [44,45].) Here we are not interested in the
(Eq. (C3)), with an initial condition given by Eq.
time to snap-off, but only whether and why snap-
off occurs. For that purpose it is convenient to (B1), solutions can differ only in the ratio of (Rt/
define a new dimensionless time t ?/(t /Cam), Rb) and the boundary condition at z /L /0. Fig.
which gives C1 shows the evolution of Rw((z /L ),t?) with
 2 dimensionless time t? for the case Rt/Rb /0.4
@(Rw =Rb ) Rw @(Rw =Rb ) and infinite Pcb; i.e. a boundary condition of
 0: (C3)
@t? Rb @(z=L) (Rw/Rb)/0 at z /L /0. Also shown is (R (z /L )/
Rb); at any position and time where Rw/Rb ]/R /
According to Eq. (C3), the redistribution of water Rb, snap-off occurs (Eq. (B2)). We continue the
in this dimensionless time is independent of solution past this time, without allowing snap-off,
imposed pressure gradient (as long as imposed to illustrate our contention that a sufficient
pressure gradient is large enough to dominate
capillary-pressure gradient): i.e. the magnitude of
imposed pressure gradient affects the physical time
to snap-off, but not whether it occurs.
The initial condition is described in Eq. (B1).
For the first-order partial differential equation
(C3), the only relevant boundary condition is at
the upstream boundary, z /L /0. A boundary
condition of fixed Pcb (Fig. B4) corresponds to a
fixed value of Rw /(sPcb) at z /L /0. It is
clear from Eq. (C1) or Eq. (C3) that a condition
of zero capillary-pressure-driven flux, i.e.
@(Rw/Rb)/@(z /L ) /0 at z /L /0, corresponds to a
Fig. C1. Water redistribution in pore in limit of high imposed
condition that @Rw/@t? /0 at z/L /0. In other pressure gradient for Rt/Rb /0.4 and boundary condition
words, Rw at the boundary is fixed for all time at Pcb 0/
(Rw /0 at z /L/0, represented by large dot in figure).
its initial value R0w(z /L /0) as set by the initial Shown are plots of Rw/Rb for four values of dimensionless time
condition. t ?. As asserted in Appendix B, a sufficiently large pressure
gradient would transport the large volume of water initially in
Eq. (C3) can be solved by the method of
the pore body to the pore throat. The maximum value of Rw/Rb
characteristics. In principle, the solution is similar occurs for t ?:/1.7, just after shock front reaches throat. In
to Buckley
/Leverett problems in flow through reality, snap-off would occur just after t ?/1, upstream of the
porous media [24]. Each characteristic is a straight throat, when Rw reaches the local value of R .
22 W.R. Rossen / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 225 (2003) 1
/24
pressure gradient would sweep the large volume of
water from the pore body toward the throat. The
maximum value of Rw/Rb reaches the throat (z/
L /0.5) at t?:/1.7, just after the shock front
reaches the throat. This maximum value of Rw/Rb
is equal to that initially in the pore body. In reality,
snap-off would occur earlier, upstream of the
throat, for t ? slightly larger than 1.
Smaller values of (Rt/Rb) lead to lower values of
(Rw/Rb) reaching the throat, but also correspond
to lower values of R (z/L ) and therefore a lower
threshold for snap-off (Eq. (B2)). Fig. C2 shows
the evolution of water distribution for the limiting
case (Rt/Rb)0/0. Even in this limiting case, the
value of (Rw/Rb) reaching the throat is nearly that
initially present in the pore body.
Reducing Pcb below that in Fig. C1 affects only
the spreading wave behind the shock, and not the
value of the maximum (Rw/Rb) that reaches the
throat. For Rt 0/0 (Fig. C2), altering the boundary
condition at z/L /0 can affect the maximum value
of Rw/Rb to arrive at the throat and the timing of
the shock, because the spreading wave interacts
with the shock before the shock reaches the throat.
Fig. C3 shows the case of Rt 0/0 and Pcb /P0c (z/
Fig. C2. Water redistribution in pore in limit of high imposed
pressure gradient for Rt /0 and boundary condition Pcb 0/

(Rw /0 at z /L /0, represented by large dot in figure). Shown
are plots of Rw/Rb for four values of dimensionless time t ?. In
comparison to Fig. C1, the volume of water reaching the throat
is a little less than that initially at the pore body, because the
spreading wave has begun to interact with the shock front.
Snap-off actually happens more easily in this case, because of
the smaller value of R near the throat. Snap-off would happen
for t ? somewhere between 0.5 and 0.85.
Fig. C3. Water redistribution in pore as in Fig. C2 except that
capillary pressure Pcb imposed at pore body (large dot) equals
the initial capillary pressure in pore body. This boundary
condition corresponds either to the given value of Pcb imposed
at the boundary or a condition of no capillary-pressure gradient
at pore body. Behavior is similar to Fig. C2, except that there is
no spreading wave originating at z /L/0. The shock front
reaches pore body a little earlier than in Fig. C2, but again in
reality snap-off would happen upstream of throat for t ?
between 0.5 and 0.85. A similar calculation for Rt/Rb /0.4
shows no difference in the magnitude or time of arrival of the
shock to the pore body.
L /0) (boundary condition represented as large
dot in figure). This boundary condition corre-
sponds either to a surrounding capillary pressure
equal to that initially in the pore body, or, as
shown above, to zero capillary-driven flux (@(Rw/
Rb)/@(z/L )/0) at the boundary. There is only a
small difference with Fig. C2 in the timing and
magnitude of the shock at the pore throat.
Thus, the assertion in Appendix B, that suffi-
cient pressure gradient transports the large volume
of water initially assumed to be present in the pore
body more or less directly to the pore throat, is
confirmed. Strictly speaking, of course, it is not the
water initially in the pore body that arrives at the
throat, but a wave with the same values of Rw and
VzD as initially in the pore body.
For comparison, Fig. C4 shows the distribution
of water with the more realistic initial and
boundary conditions shown in Fig. B7 for (Rt/
Rb)/0.4. In this case all characteristics, corre-
sponding to the initial and boundary conditions,
carry the same low value of (Rw/Rb), and there is
no snap-off. With realistic initial and boundary
 W.R. Rossen / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 225 (2003) 1
/24
Fig. C4. Water distribution in pore for case where Plateau
border deposits water at capillary equilibrium with surround-
ings at capillary entry pressure of throat, Pec. There is no change
in Rw/Rb with time, regardless of the pressure gradient, and
snap-off does not occur.
conditions, no increase in imposed pressure gra-
dient would lead to snap-off in the throat.
References
[1] Z.H. Zhou, W.R. Rossen, SPE Prod. Fac. 9 (1994) 29.
[2] J.A. Robert, M.G. Mack, Proceedings of the SPE Western
Regional Meeting, Bakersfield, CA, March 8
/10, 1995,
Paper SPE 29676.
[3] L.L. Schramm (Ed.), Foams: Fundamentals and Applica-
tions in the Petroleum Industry (ACS Advances in
Chemistry Series, No. 242), vol. 3, American Chemical
Society, Washington, DC, 1994.
[4] W.R. Rossen, in: R.K. Prud’homme, S. Khan (Eds.),
Foams: Theory, Measurements and Applications, Marcel
Dekker, New York, 1996.
[5] R. Szafranski, J.B. Lawson, G.J. Hirasaki, C.A. Miller, N.
Akiya, S. King, R.E. Jackson, H. Meinardus, J. Long-
ergan, Prog. Colloid Polym. Sci. 111 (1998) 162.
[6] L.W. Holm, SPE J. 8 (1968) 359.
[7] S.H. Yang, R.L. Reed, Proceedings of the SPE Annual
Technical Conference, San Antonio, TX, October 8
/11,
1989, Paper SPE 19689.
[8] J.M. Sanchez, R.L. Schechter, J. Petr. Sci. Eng. 3 (1989)
185.
[9] S.I. Chou, Proceedings of the SPE/DOE Symposium on
Enhanced Oil Recovery, Tulsa, OK, April 22
/25 1990,
Paper SPE 20239.
[10] D. Veeningen, P.L.J. Zitha, C.P.J.W. van Kruijsdijk,
Proceedings of the SPE European Formation Damage
Symposium, The Hague, June 2
/3, 1997, Paper SPE
38197.
[11] H. Kharabaf, Y.C. Yortsos, SPE J. 50 (1998) 42.
[12] R.D. Hazlett, M.J. Furr, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 39 (2000)
2709.
23
[13] A.H. Falls, G.J. Hirasaki, T.W. Patzek, P.A. Gauglitz,
D.D. Miller, J. Ratulowski, SPE Reservoir Eng. 3 (1988)
884.
[14] F. Friedmann, W.H. Chen, P.A. Gauglitz, SPE Reservoir
Eng. 6 (1991) 37.
[15] S.-H. Chang, L.A. Owusu, S.B. French, F.S. Kovarik,
Proceedings of the SPE/DOE Symposium on Enhanced Oil
Recovery, Tulsa, OK, April 22
/25, 1990, Paper SPE
20191.
[16] A.R. Kovscek, C.J. Radke, in: L.L. Schramm (Ed.),
Foams: Fundamentals and Applications in the Petroleum
Industry (ACS Advances in Chemistry Series, No. 242),
American Chemical Society, Washington, DC, 1994.
[17] A.R. Kovscek, T.W. Patzek, C.J. Radke, Chem. Eng. Sci.
50 (1995) 3783.
[18] A.R. Kovscek, T.W. Patzek, C.J. Radke, SPE J. 6 (1997)
511.
[19] H.J. Bertin, M.Y. Quintard, L.M. Castanier, Proceedings
of the SPE Annual Technical Conference, New Orleans,
LA, September 27
/30, 1998, Paper SPE 49020.
[20] A.V. Alexandrov, P.K. Currie, Q.P. Nguyen, P.L. Zitha,
Proceedings of the SPE/DOE Improved Oil Recovery
Symposium, Tulsa, OK, April 3
/5, 2000, Paper SPE
59288.
[21] H.J. Bertin, Proceedings of the SPE/DOE Improved Oil
Recovery Symposium, Tulsa, OK, April 3
/5, 2000, Paper
SPE 59366.
[22] T.J. Myers, C.J. Radke, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 39 (2000)
2725.
[23] A.R. Kovscek, H. Bertin, Transport Porous Media 52
(2003) 17.
[24] L.W. Lake, Enhanced Oil Recovery, Prentice Hall, Engle-
wood Cliffs, NJ, 1989.
[25] J.G. Roof, SPE J. 10 (1970) 85.
[26] R. Lenormand, C. Zarcone, A. Sarr, J. Fluid Mech. 135
(1983) 337.
[27] K.T. Chambers, C.J. Radke, in: N.R. Morrow (Ed.),
Interfacial Phenomena in Oil Recovery, Marcel Dekker,
New York, 1990.
[28] K.K. Mohanty, Fluids in Porous Media: Two-Phase
Distribution and Flow, Ph.D. dissertation, University of
Minnesota, 1981.
[29] P.G. Toledo, L.E. Scriven, H.T. Davis, SPE Formation
Eval. 9 (1994) 46.
[30] T.C. Ransohoff, C.J. Radke, SPE Reservoir Eng. 3 (1988)
573.
[31] W.R. Rossen, J. Colloid Interface Sci. 136 (1990) 1.
[32] D.G. Huh, T.D. Cochrane, F.S. Kovarik, J. Petr. Technol.
41 (1989) 872.
[33] Y.C. Yortsos, J. Chang, Transport Porous Media 5 (1990)
399.
[34] C.J. van Duijn, J. Molenaar, M.J. de Neef, Transport
Porous Media 21 (1995) 71.
[35] J.-X. Shi, Simulation and Experimental Studies of Foam
for Enhanced Oil Recovery, Ph.D. dissertation, University
of Texas, 1996.
[36] W.R. Rossen, SPE J. 4 (1999) 409.
24 W.R. Rossen / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 225 (2003) 1
/24
[37] D. Tanzil, G.J. Hirasaki, C.A. Miller, SPE J. 7 (2002) 203.
[38] T.C. Ransohoff, P.A. Gauglitz, C.J. Radke, AIChE J. 33
(1987) 753.
[39] T.C. Ransohoff, C.J. Radke, J. Colloid Interface Sci. 121
(1988) 392.
[40] P.A. Gauglitz, C.M. St. Laurent, C.J. Radke, Ind. Eng.
Chem. Res. 27 (1988) 1282.
[41] P.A. Gauglitz, C.J. Radke, J. Colloid Interface Sci. 134
(1990) 14.
[42] W.R. Rossen, Coll. Surf. A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects
166 (2000) 101.
[43] K.K. Mohanty, H.T. Davis, L.E. Scriven, SPE Reservoir
Eng. 2 (1987) 113.
[44] A.R. Kovscek, C.J. Radke, Coll. Surf. A: Physicochem.
Eng. Aspects 117 (1996) 55.
[45] A.R. Kovscek, C.J. Radke, Coll. Surf. A: Physicochem.
Eng. Aspects 212 (2003) 99.
[46] W.R. Rossen, P.A. Gauglitz, AIChE J. 36 (1990) 1176.
[47] S.I. Kam, W.R. Rossen, Proceedings of the SPE Annual
Technical Conference, San Antonio, TX, September 29
/
October 2, 2002, Paper SPE 77698; SPE J., in press.
[48] D. Tanzil, G.J. Hirasaki, C.A. Miller, Proceedings of the
SPE/DOE Improved Oil Recovery Symposium, Tulsa,
OK, April 13
/17, 2002, Paper SPE 75176.
[49] Z.I. Khatib, G.J. Hirasaki, A.H. Falls, SPE Reservoir Eng.
3 (1988) 919.
[50] A.I. Jimenez, C.J. Radke, in: J.K. Borchardt, T.F. Yen
(Eds.), Oil-Field Chemistry: Enhanced Recovery and
Production Stimulation (ACS Symposium Series, No.
396), American Chemical Society, Washington, DC, 1989.
[51] A.S. Aronson, V. Bergeron, M.E. Fagan, C.J. Radke, Coll.
Surf. A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 83 (1994) 109.
[52] W.R. Rossen, Z.H. Zhou, SPE Adv. Technol. 3 (1995) 146.
[53] W.R. Rossen, S.C. Zeilinger, J.-X. Shi, M.T. Lim, SPE J. 4
(1999) 279.
[54] G. Singh, G.J. Hirasaki, C.A. Miller, AIChE J. 43 (1997)
3241.
[55] R.F. Mast, Proceedings of the SPE Annual Technical
Conference, San Antonio, TX, October 8
/11, 1972, Paper
SPE 3997.
[56] O.S. Owete, W.E. Brigham, SPE Reservoir Eng. 2 (1987)
315.
[57] A.I. Shirley, in: D.H. Smith (Ed.), Surfactant-Based
Mobility Control: Progress in Miscible-Flood Enhanced
Oil Recovery (ACS Symposium Series, No. 373), American
Chemical Society, Washington, DC, 1988.
[58] P. Armitage, R.A. Dawe, Proceedings of the SPE Oilfield
Chemistry Symposium, Houston, TX, February 8
/10,
1989, Paper SPE 18495.
[59] P. Armitage, R.A. Dawe, Proceedings of the SPE/DOE
Enhanced Oil Recovery Symposium, Tulsa, OK, April 22
/
25, 1990, Paper SPE 20217.
[60] S. Baghdikian, L.L. Handy, Transient Behavior of Simul-
taneous Flow of Gas and Surfactant in Consolidated
Porous Media, DOE Report DOE/BC/14600-10
(DE91002249), 1991.
[61] P.A. Gauglitz, F. Friedmann, S.I. Kam, W.R. Rossen,
Chem. Eng. Sci. 57 (2002) 4037.
[62] P. Persoff, C.J. Radke, K. Pruess, S.M. Benson, P.A.
Witherspoon, SPE Reservoir Eng. 6 (1991) 185.
[63] R.A. Ettinger, C.J. Radke, SPE Reservoir Eng. 7 (1992)
83.
[64] J.M. Alvarez, H. Rivas, W.R. Rossen, SPE J. 6 (2001)
325
/333.
[65] W.T. Osterloh, M.J. Jante Jr., Proceedings of the SPE/
DOE Symposium on EOR, Tulsa, OK, April 22
/24, 1992,
Paper SPE 24179.
[66] W.R. Rossen, M.W. Wang, SPE J. 4 (1999) 92
/
100.
[67] J.G. Rong, Experimental Evaluation of Foam in Environ-
mental Remediation, Ph.D. dissertation, University of
Texas at Austin, 2002.
[68] R.B. Bird, W.E. Stewart, E.N. Lightfoot, Transport
Phenomena, Second ed., Wiley, NY, 2002.
[69] H. Wong, C.J. Radke, S. Morris, J. Fluid Mech. 292 (1995)
71.
[70] H. Wong, C.J. Radke, S. Morris, J. Fluid Mech. 292 (1995)
95.
[71] G.J. Hirasaki, J.B. Lawson, SPE J. 25 (1985) 176.