You are currently viewing a new version of our website. To view the old version click .
MDPIMDPI
Search all articles
by
  • Panyang Guo1,2,3,
  • Yongle Ma4 and
  • Houshun Jiang1,2,3,*
  • et al.

Reviewer 1: Anonymous Reviewer 2: Anonymous

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This paper introduces the optimal preparation of an experimental system, including the operational conditions for the various plugging systems in gas reservoirs under different environmental conditions. This paper suggests the optimal constituents based on systematic studies with three mass fractions (AM-AMPS, crosslinking agent, and oxygen scavenger) and temperature. The overall organization is acceptable. However, revising the current draft would be necessary. I would like to suggest a couple of issues as follows:

 

 

 

  1. Typo and grammar: Although I am not a native speaker, I found many typos, missed articles, wrong prepositions and punctuation, wrong capitalization, and wrong grammar (ex. Line 14, 22, 23, 25, 36, 42, 50, 56, 62, 65, 68, 72, 77, 78, 84, 97, 98, 103, 108, 111, 122, 136, …..). Please check them. 
  2. Check the salinity value in line 99
  3. Put the reference to captions in Table 2 (line 115) and Fig. 1(line 118).
  4. A paragraph in lines 124-130 is hard to read. Is it possible to use a table to describe experimental setups? 
  5. A paragraph in lines 132-144 is also not easy to understand, although Fig.2 is given in line 145. Is it possible to use a flow chart with detailed interpretation? In addition, Fig. 2 just shows the order of the procedure without detailed explanations. A caption in line 148 is also not clear.
  6. Subsubsections 2.2.4 and 2.2.5 also have the same issues given in 5. 
  7. Be consistent with figure qualities in Figs 2 and 3. (extra: Is it possible to show the real picture of your systems for Figs 2 and 3?)
  8. The first part of subsection 3.1 (lines 191-208) is about the characteristics of materials. Could you re-organize it to subsection 2.1?
  9. Could you tell us the quantitative/qualitative reason why 1.0% of AM-AMPS mass fraction in lines 217-218 is better than 1.2% of one? 
  10. A paragraph in lines 229-235 is not easy to read. Could you paraphrase it?
  11. Fig. 5-8 are too complicated to read correctly. At least, could you match the color of the histogram bar to the corresponding y-axis? Current figures use turquoise for histogram bars, and the corresponding axis is red.
  12. No error bars in figures and no comment about the errors in your writing! Please put them in. 
  13. Please describe the information of the axis and legends in figures, either in relevant paragraphs or captions. In addition, please leave a short guideline to read figures (ex- left y-axis values are for the histogram, and the other axis is for the profiles, etc.) 
  14. A paragraph in lines 274-283 is not clear. Please paraphrase it. Add a quantitative reason why 0.5PV is more suitable than 0.6PV (see lines 281-283)
  15. Could you show me how to calculate the residual resistance coefficient and breakthrough pressure gradient in line 286 shortly?
  16. Please keep consistent with the figures in Fig 11 (same grids and range in the x and y-axis). Figs 12-15 are suitable.
  17. A paragraph in lines 333-336 is not clear. Please paraphrase it.
  18. Is there any backup data to support the statement about the breakage of the frozen gel network in lines 360-362?

Author Response

请参阅附件。

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

In general, the paper proposed by Authors is worth considering for publication. The main concept of presented research is interesting. Nonetheless, some revisions are strongly suggested, i.e.:

Point 1:  line 206: Explained in detail the gel’s reaction mechanism. Fig.4 (a) is the molecular structure of AM-AMPS copolymer, Fig.4 (b) is the microstructure of AM-AMPS polymer gel. Show the molecular structure of the polymer gel.   

Point 2:  Line 337: Experiment of Plugging and Dredging Integration (also known as water plugging but not gas plugging selective plugging experiment). Most polymer gels have different plugging degrees to water and gas. It has strong plugging ability for water and poor plugging ability for gas.The most important innovation of this manuscript is selective plugging. However, in this manuscript, it is not comprehensive to evaluate the selectivity only by the change of the plugging pressure difference with the injection rate. Suggest to add some experiments to further illustrate the selectivity of polymer gel.

Point 3:  In fig.9-15 , The expression of “injection rate / PV” is not standardized.

Point 4:  Discussion over the results of performed studies should be supported to a more extent and compared to the results of other similar works.

Point 5: Language of the paper should be significantly improved.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx