Você está na página 1de 19

Transp Porous Med (2008) 74:239257 DOI 10.

1007/s11242-007-9193-5

Visualisation of Residual Oil Recovery by Near-miscible Gas and SWAG Injection Using High-pressure Micromodels
M. Sohrabi A. Danesh M. Jamiolahmady

Received: 2 July 2007 / Accepted: 1 December 2007 / Published online: 8 January 2008 Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Abstract We present results of high-pressure micromodel visualizations of pore-scale uid distribution and displacement mechanisms during the recovery of residual oil by nearmiscible hydrocarbon gas and SWAG (simultaneous water and gas) injection under conditions of very low gasoil IFT (interfacial tension), negligible gravity forces and water-wet porous medium. We demonstrate that a significant amount of residual oil left behind after waterooding can be recovered by both near-miscible gas and SWAG injection. In particular, we show that in both processes, the recovery of the contacted residual oil continues behind the main gas front and ultimately all of the oil that can be contacted by the gas will be recovered. This oil is recovered by a microscopic mechanism, which is strongly linked to the low IFT between the oil and gas and to the perfect spreading of the oil over water, both of which occur as the critical point of the gasoil system is approached. Ultimate oil recovery by near-miscible SWAG injection was as high as near-miscible gas injection with SWAG injection using much less gas compared to gas injection. Comparison of the results of SWAG experiments with two different gas fractional ow values (SWAG ratio) of 0.5 and 0.2 shows that fractional ow of the near-miscible gas injected simultaneously with water is not a crucial factor for ultimate oil recovery. This makes SWAG injection an attractive IOR (improved oil recovery) process especially for reservoirs, where continuous and high-rate gas injection is not possible (e.g. due to supply constraint). Keywords SWAG injection Gas injection Near-miscible Micromodel Pore-scale mechanisms

1 Introduction Many reservoirs are approaching the end of their water-ooding lives with a significant amount of the original oil-in-place still left behind as residual oil. Alternative processes

M. Sohrabi (B A. Danesh M. Jamiolahmady ) Institute of Petroleum Engineering, Heriot-Watt University, Riccarton, Edinburgh EH14 4AS, UK e-mail: mehran.sohrabi@pet.hw.ac.uk

123

240

M. Sohrabi et al.

are therefore needed to maximise oil recovery from these reservoirs and to meet the everincreasing global energy demand. Gas injection, either on its own or simultaneous (SWAG) or alternating (WAG) with water, could be applied as a viable means to recover some of this residual oil. Conventionally, these processes are operated, so as to maintain the pressures above the minimum miscibility pressure (MMP), which is determined for each crude and gas combination, to achieve a miscible ood process. Near-miscible gasood refers to injection of gases that do not quite develop a complete miscibility with the oil, but come close. The 2D simulation studies (Burger et al. 1994; Thomas et al. 1994) have demonstrated that injectant with less enrichment than that required for rst-contact miscible (FCM) with the oil often yields optimum oil recoveries owing to better sweep efciencies in heterogeneous reservoir models. Field-scale simulations show that near-miscible solvents are attractive because of improved sweep over miscible solvents (Pande 1992). Burger et al. (1994) showed that economically optimum enrichment in high-viscosity-ratio secondary gasoods could be operated at pressures below the MMP. Thomas et al. (1994) reported that gasoil IFT can be reduced adequately under near-miscible conditions and that zero IFT is unnecessary for effective displacement processes in realistic porous media. Shyeh-Yung (1991) demonstrated that tertiary gasood recoveries below MMP do not decrease as severely as predicted by slim-tube tests for CO2 . Previous works including our own experimental and theoretical work (e.g. Bardon and Longeron 1980; Asar and Handy 1988; Henderson et al. 1996, 2001; Jamiolahmady et al. 2000, 2003) have shown that the ow behaviour at near-miscible conditions is fundamentally different from conventional (high-IFT immiscible) gasoil ow. Jamiolahmady et al. (2000, 2003) studied the ow of low IFT gasoil systems mechanistically. Capturing the competition of viscous and capillary forces at the pore level, they have captured the simultaneous ow of both gas and oil within the same pore. They have demonstrated that as IFT approaches zero, the coupled ow of the two phases inside each single pore diminishes, but the effect of multiple pore interaction promotes this ow behaviour. However, when IFT is above a certain value, the ow behaviour changes to that of conventional (high-IFT immiscible) gasoil ow described by Darcy type ow mechanism used in the channel ow concept. In another publication, Jamiolahmady et al. (2006) have correlated relative permeability data measured at different IFT values and have identied the gasoil IFT of around 0.85 mNm1 , as the threshold under which the conventional Darcy-type ow do not prevail. It has been reported that poor sweep efciency, due to high gas mobility, has been a problem in gas-oods of many oil reservoirs. Therefore, continuous gas injection might not result in economically significant amount of additional oil recovery. In order to mitigate this problem, injection strategies like WAG and SWAG have been devised. In WAG (water alternating gas) injection, water and gas are injected as separate slugs, whereas in SWAG (simultaneous water and gas) injection, water and gas are injected together simultaneously in the reservoir. Both WAG and SWAG are believed to reduce the gas mobility and hence increase the sweep efciency. WAG process has been extensively studied before (Zekri and Natuh 1992; Skauge and Aarra 1993; Minssieux and Duquerroix 1994; Larsen and Skauge 1999; Christensen et al. 1998; Larsen et al. 2000; Sohrabi et al. 2000, 2001). However, less experience has been gained on SWAG compared to WAG and hence the process is less known. SWAG appears to provide better control of gas mobility than WAG, resulting in improved sweep efciency in addition to more steady gas production and GOR response (Stephenson et al. 1993). In some oil reservoirs (especially offshore) a relatively small amount of produced gas and/or a rapidly falling gas rate makes it uneconomical to develop a gas export solution. It is also not economically viable to supply gas to these reservoirs for a continuous gas injection

123

High-pressure Micromodel Visualizations

241

scenario, e.g. remoteness from source of gas. Re-injection of the produced associated gas together with water to provide reservoir pressure support, better sweep and hence increased recovery, appears to be the best overall solution. In these cases, SWAG offers a solution whereby a changing mixture of injection uids could be used and a total void replacement could be achieved by combining produced gas and water supplemented by sea water to the required injection volume (Berg et al. 2002). The improved gas handling and oil recovery have been reported for SWAG injection at Siri eld (Berg et al. 2002 and Quale et al. 2000), the Joffre Viking (Stephenson et al. 1993) CO2 miscible ood and SWAG emulation at the Rangely CO2 miscible ood (Attanucci et al. 1993). Pilot tests performed on Kuparuk River Field in Alaska (Ma et al. 1995; Stoisits et al. 1995) have also demonstrated the feasibility of SWAG injection. However, to the best of the authors knowledge, no visualisation study of the SWAG injection has been carried out before directly observing the physical processes and the pore-scale mechanisms taking place in porous media during SWAG injection process. The scarce experimental evidence available in the literature of near-miscible gas and SWAG injection is based on coreoods. It should be realised that the macroscopic observations reect the collective outcome of the microscopic displacement mechanisms that take place in a network of pores. Porescale information is therefore essential for describing the displacement processes at a larger scale. Etched-glass micromodels are useful for viewing pore level events because of their visual clarity. Micromodels were used as early as 1960 for uid displacement studies (Mattax and Kyte 1961). The ability to see the movement of uid interfaces makes it possible to distinguish among varieties of mechanisms that may take place in a porous medium, when more than one phase is present. Chatzis and Dullien (1983) presented an excellent example of the use of micromodel to evaluate existing theories of two-phase ow in a simple geometry. Lenormand and Zarcone (1984) have taken advantage of the well-dened shapes of capillary tubes in their moulded resin models to compare the results of calculations of two-phase ow in both drainage and imbibition processes with observation results. Micromodel observations have also played a significant role in development of network models for application to multiphase ow (Lenormand et al. 1983; ren and Pinczewski 1991; ren et al. 1992; Li and Yortsos 1995; Bakke and ren 1997; ren et al. 1998; Sohrabi et al. 2000, 2001; ren and Bakke 2002). Pore scale mechanisms of displacements during high-IFT (immiscible) gas injections have been extensively studied (Kantzas et al. 1988a,b; Chatzis et al. 1988; ren et al. 1992; Dong et al. 1995; Sohrabi et al. 2000, 2001). However, knowledge of the pore scale mechanisms during low-IFT (near-miscible) gas injections is considerably less developed than for immiscible gas injection. This is partly because performing visual observation of the pore scale events during gas injection under high-pressure conditions (low IFT) is by far more complicated and requires a more advanced technology than under low pressure (high IFT). We were the rst to directly visualise the pore scale events during near-miscible secondary and tertiary gas injection in high-pressure transparent porous media (Sohrabi et al. 2007). In this study, multiphase ow visualisations at high-pressure conditions were performed to explore pore scale events during residual oil recovery with near-miscible hydrocarbon gases in gas-only and SWAG injection modes. We present visualisation of uid distribution and pore-scale mechanisms for recovery of residual oil by near-miscible gas and SWAG injection under conditions of water-wet and negligible gravity forces in high-pressure glass micromodels.

123

242

M. Sohrabi et al.

2 Experimental Facilities For the visualization experiments, a high-pressure glass micromodel rig has been used. The rig has been designed to operate at pressures of up to 41.37 MPa (6,000 psia) with high- quality images of uids distributions and pore-scale mechanisms operating during displacement experiments being recorded. The experiments reported here were carried out at 35.16 MPa (5,100 psia) pressure and 37.8 C (100 F) temperature and the uid system represented a near-miscible uid system. 2.1 Micromodel A 2D pore structure is etched onto the surface of a glass plate, which is otherwise completely at. A second, optically at, glass plate is then placed over the rst, covering the etched pattern and thus creating an enclosed pore space. This second plate, the cover plate, has an inlet hole and an outlet hole drilled at either end, allowing uids to be displaced through the network of pores. Since the structure is only one pore deep, and the containing solid walls are all glass, it is possible to observe the uids as they ow along the pore channels and interact with each other. It is also possible to observe how the geometry of the pore network affects the patterns of ow and trapping of the uids. Various pore patterns including rock-look-alike and geometric can be designed and etched. The choice of pore pattern is normally made based on the objective of the study. If the objective of micromodel experiments is to generate data for mathematical modelling, geometric patterns are preferable as they have pores with definite shapes and sizes. Rock-look-alike pore patterns are normally derived from rock thin sections and resemble the real pore shapes in a real rock but are much more difcult to model. Figure 1 shows a schematic of the micromodel and Fig. 2a shows a magnied picture of the pore pattern of the glass micromodel used for this study. This pattern has been repeated a few times to make the full length of the micromodel, which is shown in Fig. 2b. The porous pattern has a width of 6 mm and a length of 38 mm was etched on the glass surface using acid etching technique. The depth of the pores was between 35 and 45m with their width being between 35 and 300m. Details of the experimental set up have been described by the authors elsewhere (Sohrabi et al. 2000, 2001, 2004).

Inlet

Outlet

Cover plate

Two-dimensional etched pore structure

Fig. 1 Schematic of the 2D glass micromodel used in this study

123

High-pressure Micromodel Visualizations

243

38 mm

6 mm

Fig. 2 (a) Micromodel pore pattern which has been repeated a few times to make the full length of the micromodel (b) The picture shows the micromodel when fully saturated with blue-dyed water. Pores are shown in blue and unetched glass in white

2.2 Fluid System For the experiments reported here, an equilibrium mixture of a three-component and a threephase uid system that exhibited a near-miscible (near-critical point) gasoil (equilibrium mixture of C1 /n-C10 ) system at 37.8 C (100 F) and 35.16 MPa (5,100 psia) was used. The aqueous phase was prepared by adding 0.1% (wt/wt) blue dye to distilled water. The hydrocarbon components were n-decane (n-C10 ) and methane (C1 ). In order to avoid mass transfer during the experiments, the uids (C1 , n-C10 and water) were pre-equilibrated at the conditions of the experiments, 37.8 C (100 F) and 35.16 MPa (5,100 psia). At 37.8 C (100 F), the presence of water does not significantly affect the hydrocarbon phase behaviour. Figures 3 and 4 show the weight fraction (solubility) data and density values of n-decane (n-C10 ) and methane (C1 ) mixture at 37.8 C (100 F), respectively (Reamer et al. 1942). As it can be seen, at 37.8 C (100 F), the critical pressure of the C1 -nC10 system is around 36.54 MPa (5,300 psia) as at 35.16 MPa (5,100 psia), which is the pressure of the experiments, the gasoil system is close to its critical point and hence, nearly miscible. The measured equilibrium values of interfacial tensions (IFT) of the uid system and also the estimated viscosity of the hydrocarbon vapour (gas) and that of hydrocarbon liquid (oil), at the prevailing conditions of the experiments, are given in Table 1. IFT values are equilibrium values and have been measured at the pressure and temperature of the experiments. The effect of dissolved water on the viscosity and density of hydrocarbon phases has been ignored. The effect of dye on density and viscosity of the liquids at micromodel conditions of 37.8 C (100 F) and 35.16 MPa (5,100 psia). The effect of dissolved gas in water on its viscosity is believed to be a small reduction, but it has not been calculated.

123

244 Fig. 3 Weight fraction of methane in methane/n-decane (C1/n-C10) mixture at 37.8 C (100 F) and different pressures. Shown on the graph is also the critical point pressure (5,300 psia) of C1/n-C10 mixture at 37.8 C (100 F) and the pressure of our near-miscible gas injection (5,100 psia)
1

M. Sohrabi et al.

Critical

Methane / Weight Frac.

0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2

Bubble Point Curve Dew Point Curve

Test Pressure

0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 Pressure /psia 5000 6000

800
Critical

700 600 Density /kgm-3 500 400 300 200 100 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 Pressure /psia 5000 6000
Test Pressure Gas Density Liquid Density

Fig. 4 Density of methane in methane/n-decane (C1/n-C10) mixture at 37.8 C (100 F) and different pressures Table 1 The equilibrium properties of the n-decane, methane system at 37.8 C (100 F) and 35.16 MPa (5,100 psia)

Viscosity (MPa s) Gas Oil Water Interfacial tension (mNm1 ) Gasoil Gaswater Oilwater 0.08 0.01 41 2 41 2 0.0378 0.1085 0.67

3 Experimental Results Using the above uid system and micromodel a number of tertiary gas-only and simultaneouswater-and-gas (SWAG) injection tests were carried out. All of the displacements were performed at 35.16 MPa (5,100 psia) and 37.8 C (100 F) with the micromodel mounted horizontally to minimize the gravity effects.

123

High-pressure Micromodel Visualizations

245

unetched glass

oil

water

Fig. 5 A magnied section of the water-wet micromodel at the end of primary drainage of water demonstrating shapes of water (blue)/oil (white) interfaces

In the experiments the micromodel was fully saturated with water rst. Then it was subjected to an oil (equilibrated n-C10 ) injection followed by a waterood. Finally, a nearmiscible gasood or SWAG injection was carried out to recover some of the residual oil, which had been left behind after the waterood. A number of experiments were carried out. Details of the experimental procedure and discussion of the results for a typical near-miscible gas injection and two near-miscible SWAG injection tests are given in the following sections. 3.1 Residual Oil Recovery by Near-miscible Gas Floods Initially the micromodel was fully saturated with clear distilled water and pressurised to 35.16 MPa (5,100 psia) and subsequently displaced with blue live water, equilibrated with gas and oil at 35.16 MPa (5,100 psia) and 37.8 C (100 F). In order to simulate primary drainage of water (initial migration of oil into the water bearing porous media), the equilibrated oil was injected from one end of the horizontal micromodel. The injection of the oil was carried out at a very low velocity corresponding to a capillary number of 1E-7 (Nc 1E 7) and continued until oil reached the other end of the micromodel. Figure 5 is a magnied image of a section of the micromodel at the end of primary drainage of water (oil injection through water saturated micromodel). It shows the relative positions of the wetting phase (blue water) and non-wetting phase (white oil), in a water-wet micromodel. The shape of the curvature of the wateroil interfaces is a good indication of water-wet conditions. As well as occupying some of the smaller and dead-end pores water is also present as a wetting layer over the pore surface, even in oil-lled pores, as expected. After this initial oil injection stage (establishment of irreducible water), water ooding began. Water was injected into the micromodel at a low rate of injection corresponding to Nc 1E 7. Due to a very low rate of water injection, high wateroil IFT (41 mN/m) and the micromodel being strongly water-wet, water was observed to enter the model by layer ow (as opposed to piston-wise displacement) with no distinct waterfront. The water layers, surrounding the oil, were seen to thicken progressively. Also oil was displaced mostly from the sides and corners of the pores, with residual oil remaining in the middle of the pores in the shape of narrow oil laments. Figure 6 compares a section of the micromodel before and after waterooding. Comparison of Fig. 6a and Fig. 6b highlights the fact that during waterooding the dominant mechanism has been layer ow as opposed to piston-type. The slow thickening of water lms at the

123

246

M. Sohrabi et al.

(a)

flow direction

(b)

Fig. 6 A magnied picture of the micromodel before (a) and after (b) water ood

sides and corners of the oil lled pores was a direct consequence of a capillary dominated ow regime. Video recording of the process was carried out, and that shows the ow process vividly. Waterooding continued until no more oil production or changes in uids distribution was observed. At the end of this waterood, near-miscible gas injection commenced with the same slow rate as the previous stages of the experiment. Gas was injected from the same end as water was. During gas injection, as soon as the invading gas came in contact with the residual oil, the gas front was covered with a small amount of oil. As the gas advanced further, an oil bank was formed and moved ahead of the gas front. The oil bank, moving ahead of the gas front, supplied oil to pores where residual oil was present. This resulted in thickening of those oil laments, which came in contact with the invading gas or the oil front ahead of it. Figure 7 shows a part of the model during gas injection. As it can be noticed, the oil shown in this picture can be divided in two types. The rst type is oil in the form of some laments surrounded with thick water layers. This is the oil that has not been contacted by the incoming gas. The second type is thick oil ganglia in contact with the gas channel. These have been formed by uid redistribution or by local oil transfer brought about by the gas injection. Figure 8 depicts the uid distribution of near miscible gas injection in a part of the micromodel immediately after the main gas front has passed. As it can be seen, despite a very low gasoil IFT, the gas has made only a single channel through the network of pores. There are two main reasons for this. First, in water ooded porous media the water saturation is high, which tend to restrict the movement of the gas and shields the residual oil from being contacted by the gas. The second reason is the topology of the porous medium, which causes some of the oil that has been contacted by gas or its associated oil bank, to become trapped in dead-end or semi dead-end pores. Dead-end pores are those that are physically closed by glass surfaces and semi dead-end refers to those pores, which are not physically closed, but the ow of oil is restricted by water at one or more ends (wateroil IFT is by far larger than gasoil IFT in near-miscible gas injections). Figure 9 shows the distribution of the uids within the same part of the micromodel as was shown in Fig. 8 after 1 h of near-miscible gas injection. Comparison of Figs. 8 and 9 and also video clips recorded during this gas injection reveals that the saturation of the by-passed oil, behind the main gas front, kept reducing and eventually led to a complete recovery of all the contacted oil.

123

High-pressure Micromodel Visualizations

247

oil

gas

oil

Fig. 7 Fluid distribution in the micromodel during gas injection. Thickening of oil laments during gas injection is evident. During gas injection a small bank of oil develops in front of the gas, feeding oil into narrow oil laments that were formed during the previous water ood Fig. 8 Fluid distribution within the micromodel during near-miscible gas injection at cm3 /h. the main gas front has just left the micromodel (breakthrough)

gas

oil

oil

flow direction

In order to visualise this pore-level event more closely Fig. 10 has been prepared. This shows magnied pictures of two successive snapshots taken from the same spot of the micromodel during a tertiary near-miscible gasood. The left snapshot was taken immediately after the main gas front left this spot and the right snapshot was taken 1 h after the rst one. By comparing the location of the gasoil interfaces in these two images, it can be seen that the area occupied by gas has widened and the volume of the oil ganglia have shrunk. As the injection of the gas-continued oil recovery continued too and all of the oil, which had been contacted by the gas, was produced. The results of this tertiary gas ood show that near-miscible gas injection has resulted in complete recovery of part of the residual oil, which was contacted by the gas. However, as the porous medium had been waterooded prior to gas injection, part of the residual oil has

123

248 Fig. 9 Fluid distribution within the micromodel 1 h after gas breakthrough. The gas channel has widened by pumping some of the contacted residual oil out of the porous medium

M. Sohrabi et al.

gas

oil

flow direction

(a)
glass

(b)
glass

oil

oil

gas

gas

Fig. 10 A section of the micromodel during tertiary gas injection. (a) main gas front has just passed (b) after 1 h of gas injection. Note that the gas channels have widened and oil ganglia have shrunk

remained trapped. Our results of secondary near-miscible gas injection has shown that in the absent of water, complete oil recovery can be achieved (Sohrabi et al. 2007). 3.2 Residual Oil Recovery by Near-miscible SWAG Injection In SWAG experiments, exactly the same micromodel and uid system that had been used for the continuous gas injection experiments were used. A series of SWAG experiments were carried out. Here, we report the results of two near-miscible SWAG injection experiments. The rst one was carried out with a gas fractional ow (ratio of gas ow rate to total ow rate) of 0.5 and in the second one the gas fractional ow was reduced to 0.2. In either experiment, the horizontal micromdel was rst ooded with water to simulate a conventional waterooding of an oil reservoir. Then water and gas, which was nearly miscible with the oil, were injected in a SWAG mode to recover some of the residual oil. Details of the experimental procedure and discussion for these two experiments are given in the following sections.

123

High-pressure Micromodel Visualizations

249

3.2.1 SWAG Injection with a Gas Fractional Flow of 0.5 Having cleaned the micromodel with a succession of distilled water and solvents injection, it was fully saturated with clear distilled water and pressurised to 35.16 MPa (5,100 psia) and subsequently displaced with blue live water, equilibrated with gas and oil at 35.16 MPa (5,100 psia) and 37.8 C (100 F). Then, similarly to the gas injection experiments, an oil ood was carried out to establish the initial oil and water saturation. This was followed by a waterooding period. In both uid injection periods, the injection rate was exactly the same as the corresponding stages of the preceding gas injection experiments. During the waterooding, the same mechanisms of oil recovery and trapping were observed as those explained above and demonstrated in Fig. 6. Waterooding continued until no more oil production or changes in uids distribution was observed. At the end of this waterood, simultaneous injection of the near-miscible gas and water (SWAG) commenced with the same total injection rate as gas injection in the gas-only injection tests but this time 50% of the total injection rate was gas and the remaining 50% was water. SWAG injection was carried out from the same end of the micromodel as the preceding waterooding. During SWAG injection, water and gas were injected by two separate pumps and were observed to enter the micromodel as two separate and continuous phases. Inside the porous pattern, no slug or bubble ow of water and gas was observed. Instead, water and gas were observed to ow separately with water creeping in the porous medium from the sides of the pores (layer ow) and gas moving in the middle of the pores (piston wise). The ow of the gas front and the uid redistribution and displacements brought about by its advancement through the micromodel were similar to what had been observed in the gas-only injection tests with the only difference being that the gas was anked by thick water layers during SWAG injection. The invading gas would contact the residual oil and redistribute the narrow oil laments remaining from the preceding waterood and form a bank of oil that while producing some of it would also reconnect the contacted residual oil through layers of oil spreading between the gas and water. As was the case with near-miscible gas injection experiments, in near-miscible SWAG injection again recovery of the oil by-passed by the gas front continued behind the gas front and eventually all of the contacted oil was recovered. Figure 11 depicts the uid distribution in a part of the micromodel during the SWAG injection after the gas front had just passed. As it can be seen, the gas has made a continuous path through the micromodel and is in contact with part of the residual oil. In fact, detailed analysis of the micromodel images reveals that the residual oil that was previously made up of oil blobs completely isolated and disconnected have been reconnected through the oil layers that spread along the continuous gas path between the gas and water. As SWAG injection continued, we observed that the saturation of that part of the residual oil, which was in contact with the gas path, kept reducing and led to a complete recovery of the contacted oil. Figure 12 shows the distribution of the uids within the same part of the micromodel after 1 h of near-miscible SWAG injection after the gas breakthrough. The gas saturations have significantly increased and the oil saturation has decreased. In fact, as it can be seen in Fig. 12, almost all of the residual oil that had been contacted by the initial gas channel has now been recovered. To demonstrate this point more closely Fig. 13 has been prepared. This shows two magnied pictures of a section of the micromodel at the beginning of the SWAG injection and 1 h after the injection has started. By comparing the location of the gasoil and wateroil interfaces in these two images, it can be seen that, as the SWAG injection continued, the gasoil and wateroil interfaces approached each other thereby invading the oil-occupied pores, however, the advancement of gasoil interface has been much faster

123

250

M. Sohrabi et al.

gas

water

oil

flow direction
Fig. 11 Fluid distribution within the micromodel during near-miscible SWAG injection with an injection gas fractional ow of 0.5

gas

water

oil

flow direction
Fig. 12 Fluid distribution within the micromodel after 1 h near-miscible SWAG injection with an injection gas fractional ow of 0.5. Almost all of the residual oil that had come in contact with the gas has been recovered

than the advancement of the wateroil interface. As SWAG injection continued more of the contacted by-passed oil was recovered and eventually all of the oil, which had been contacted by gas was produced.

123

High-pressure Micromodel Visualizations

251

oil gas water

flow direction gas

water

oil

Fig. 13 A section of the micromodel during gas injection. (a) at the beginning of SWAG injection (b) 1 h after the SWAG injection started. Note that the gas channels have widened and oil ganglia have shrunk as a result of the gasoil and wateroil interfaces approaching each other

3.2.2 SWAG Injection with a Gas Fractional Flow of 0.2 This test was carried out to investigate the effect of gaswater ratio on oil recovery by SWAG injection. The results of the test allows us to compare the performance of SWAG injection with gas fractional ow of 0.2 with SWAG with gas fractional ow of 0.5 and also with continuous gas injection (gas fractional ow of 1). In this experiment exactly the same procedure that was explained for the previous SWAG test was followed with the only difference being that a lower gas ratio of 0.2 was used during SWAG injection. Figures 14 and 15 present the results of the SWAG injection with a gas fractional ow of 0.2 when the injection had just begun and 1 h after the start of the injection respectively. Examination of these Figures and comparison with the results of the SWAG test with fractional ow of 0.5 reveals that in both cases, recovery of oil after the gas breakthrough continued and has been a significant part of the overall oil recovery. It is interesting to note that in the SWAG test where only 20% of the total injection rate (gas fractional ow of 0.2) was

123

252

M. Sohrabi et al.

water

gas oil flow direction

Fig. 14 Fluid distribution within the micromodel during near-miscible SWAG injection with an injection gas fractional ow of 0.2

oil

gas water flow direction

Fig. 15 Fluid distribution within the micromodel after 1 h near-miscible SWAG injection with an injection gas fractional ow of 0.2

gas, qualitatively, the same amount of oil was recovered as was in SWAG with 50% gas (gas fractional ow of 0.5). In both cases, as a result of continued injection of water and gas, almost all of the residual oil that had been contacted by gas had been produced. In other words, the injection of gas in SWAG mode, even in small quantities, can help improving the oil recovery.

123

High-pressure Micromodel Visualizations

253

4 Discussion We have reported the results of a series of high-pressure micromodel visualisation experiments, which were carried out to investigate the performance of near-miscible gas and SWAG injection in recovery of waterood residual oil. In both near-miscible gas and SWAG injection, significant recovery of the oil, which had been by-passed (at pore level) by the gas front, was a feature that we had not observed during our previously reported results on high-IFT (immiscible) gas injection (Sohrabi et al. 2000, 2001, 2004). Image analysis of our micromodel experiments show that a typical tertiary (post waterood) immiscible gas injection (with a gasoil IFT around and greater than 1 mNm1 ) ultimately recovers less than 60% of the original oil in place. Whereas, our typical near-miscible gas injection or SWAG injection (with a gasoil IFT of 0.08 mNm1 ), has a much higher oil recovery and the ultimate oil recovery can be as high as 95% of the original oil in place. Careful examination of the micromodel images and videos recorded during these nearmiscible gas injection experiments reveal that this additional oil recovery is not caused by stripping of the oil by the gas (evaporation). Instead, it is a transport phenomenon. As it was mentioned in Sect. 2.2 (Fluid System), the uids used in the experiments were preequilibrated at the pressure and temperature of the experiments. Moreover, the differential pressure across the micromodel during these experiments was very small (a fraction of one psi) and as result mass transfer (including evaporation) between the oil and gas was minimal. When the gas front has passed a pore containing oil, an additional recovery mechanism takes place between the gas and the bypassed oil. As a result of this pore-scale mechanism, oil is transferred from the bypassed pore to the main gas ow stream where it can be subsequently recovered. A combination of a very low gasoil interfacial tension (IFT), perfect wetting (or spreading) conditions of the oil near the critical point (sometimes referred to as critical-point wetting), and also the ability of the low-IFT oil and gas to simultaneously ow in the main ow stream, facilitates this recovery mechanism. Close to the critical point any third, non-critical phase will be completely covered by a layer of one of the critical phases. This phenomenon is known as critical point wetting (Cahn 1977). Consequently, in near-miscible gas oods the oil perfectly wets the solid surface (wetting layer) or water substrate (spreading layer in water-wet systems) and therefore the bypassed oil remains connected to the oil in the pores already swept by the gas. A very low IFT between gas and oil (nearly miscible) also allows the two phases to ow alongside each other simultaneously in the same pore (Williams and Dawe 1988; Jamiolahmady et al. 2000). Figure 16 shows a magnied section of the micromodel during one of the tertiary gas ood experiments. It demonstrates a typical geometric conguration of a three-phase uid system and their interfaces (at the pore level) under spreading conditions in water-wet porous media. As it can be seen the bypassed oil (white area at the lower left) is connected to the pores swept by the gas (yellow) through thick layers of oil. The video clips, taken during this experiment, clearly show that the oil (supplied from the bypassed pores) ows simultaneously with the gas. The owing oil present as thick layers on the sides of the owing gas is seen to repeatedly swell and shrink which is indicative of the transport of the oil alongside the owing gas. The ow of the bypassed oil is accompanied by the widening of the initial gas path through advancement of the gasoil menisci into the bypassed oil-lled pores. In near-miscible gas injection, due to a very low gasoil IFT the capillary forces are no longer dominant, therefore the threshold capillary pressure resisting the entry of the gas into the pores occupied by bypassed oil is very small. Hence, the gas pressure can easily overcome the capillary barrier and moves the interface into the oil phase. This provides an effective

123

254

M. Sohrabi et al.

glass

gas

oil

flow direction

Fig. 16 A magnied section of the micromodel demonstrating uid distribution during near-miscible gas injection. The oil layers are visible between the gas and the water. They form during invasion of the pores by the gas front

driving force to transfer the bypassed oil into the main ow stream. Once the oil has been transferred into the main ow stream, its ow is further enhanced by coupling with the ow of the gas. The presence and simultaneous ow of gas and oil in the same pore has been shown (e.g., Williams and Dawe 1988; Jamiolahmady et al. 2000) to be very effective for very low IFT (nearly miscible) systems. As a result of this mechanism, oil recovery from the by-passed oil takes place behind the main gas front which results in almost complete recovery of the oil, which has been contacted by the near-miscible gas. The above mechanism of the bypassed oil recovery by near-miscible gas injection does not take place in immiscible (high-IFT) gas oods nor does it occur in miscible gas oods. In immiscible gas injection (with spreading oil layers), although the by-passed oil maintains its connectivity with the main ow stream through the oil lms however, oil recovery by this lm ow mechanism is negligible especially if an effective driving force is absent (e.g. horizontal ow). This is mainly due to a rather large capillary pressure at the gasoil interface, which resists the entry of the gas into the bypassed oil in the rst place. High capillary pressure also hampers simultaneous ow of gas and the oil in the main ow stream. In high IFT gas injections the main reason for ow of oil through the oil lms is the capillary imbibition for which (in the absence of compositional changes) the main driving force comes from variation of the mean curvature of the interface along the corners of the pores. Once equilibrium distribution of the mean curvature is attained (in the absence of other forces, e.g. gravity and compositional changes) no more ow will take place. In fully miscible gas oods, on the other hand, there would be no interface between gas and oil. The system would be basically single phase and no simultaneous ow of gas and oil could take place. By-passed oil recovery, in miscible gas injection, can happen due to

123

High-pressure Micromodel Visualizations

255

molecular diffusion and/or dispersion (neglecting the gravity-drive crossow) but not by the mechanism explained above for near-miscible gas injections. Ultimate oil recovery by near-miscible SWAG injection was as high as near-miscible gas injection with SWAG injection using much less gas compared to gas injection. A comparison of Fig. 13 with Fig. 10 shows that in near-miscible gas-only injection, for an isolated piece of the by-passed oil located between gas and oil interface(s) from one end and a wateroil interface(s) from another, only the gasoil interfaces advances and force the oil out through counter current layer ow. However, in SWAG injection in a similar circumstances both wateroil and gasoil interfaces advance into the by-passed oil and hence the oil is squeezed among several interfaces. The results of SWAG experiments with two different gas fractional ow (SWAG ratio) of 0.5 and 0.2 show that for the conditions of our micromodel experiments, the amount of the near-miscible gas simultaneously injected with water is not a crucial parameter and ultimate oil recovery due to SWAG is independent of SWAG ratio. The results show that as long as there is enough gas to connect up the previously isolated oil ganglia trapped after the initial waterood and also as long as enough gas is circulated to maintained a continuous gas path in the porous medium, the ultimate oil recovery is the same and almost all of the contacted oil will be recovered. This makes SWAG injection a very attractive process for reservoirs where only little gas is available or some gas is available seasonally or oil reservoirs that cannot export gas (e.g. due to remoteness from the market). It should, however, be remembered that these are the results of experiments carried out with a two-dimensional (2D) micromodel with a (geometric) pore-size distribution that has little resemblance to that of real rocks. Therefore, the results are not directly applicable to real eld conditions. However, the results of these experiments can be used to verify the validity of a 2D network model simulator with the same pore characteristics and wettability. Relative permeability functions applicable to real eld conditions can be obtained, using the veried network simulator in three-dimensional and three-phase mode with realistic rock and uid data. The micromodel used for the experiments reported here was a homogeneous porous medium mounted horizontally to minimise the gravity effect. Both heterogeneity and gravity are expected to affect the oil recovery. For the mechanism of oil recovery by near miscible gas injection that we discuss in this paper, contact between the owing gas and residual oil is essential. Reservoir heterogeneity will reduce the gas sweep efciency and the contact between the gas and oil and is, therefore, expected to adversely affect the amount of recovered oil. In a gravity stable gas injection (where gas is injected from top and oil is recovered from bottom), the density difference between gas and oil will facilitate the ow of the bypass oil alongside the gas and therefore oil recovery is expected to be more than what we have observed in our horizontal experiments.

5 Conclusions The experimental results presented in this paper demonstrated that: Both near-miscible gas and SWAG injection are effective methods for the recovery of significant amount of residual oil from waterooded porous media. Near-miscible gas injection in both gas-only and SWAG mode reconnects the previously isolated waterood residual oil through oil layers. These thick oil layers provide effective paths for the ow and production of the reconnected residual oil.

123

256

M. Sohrabi et al.

Even in a homogeneous porous medium, like the micromodel used in this study, there is always some bypassing (at the pore level) of the oil due to topological effects, watershielding and dead-end pores. In near-miscible gas and SWAG injection significant crossow of the bypassed oil into the main gas ow stream takes place behind the gas front. This can lead to total recovery of the contacted oil. In near-miscible SWAG injection, for SWAG ratio in the range of 0.20.5 and the conditions of our micromodel experiments, ultimate oil recovery is independent of SWAG ratio (injection gas fractional ow) and hence, increasing the ratio of the injection gas does not necessarily increase the amount of oil recovery.

Acknowledgements This work was carried out as a part of the ongoing WAG project at Heriot-Watt University which is equally sponsored by: Total E&P UK plc, The UK Department of Trade and Industry, BHP Billiton Ltd., BP Exploration Operating Company Ltd, Norsk Hydro a.s, Shell UK Exploration and Production and Statoil a.s which is gratefully acknowledged.

References
Asar, H., Handy, L.L.: Inuence of interfacial tension on gas/oil relative permeability in a gas-condensate system. SPE 11740, SPERE, 3(1), 264275 (1988) Attanucci, V., Asbsen, K.S., Hejl, K.A., Wright, C.A.: WAG process optimization in the rangely carbon dioxide miscible ood, paper SPE 2662, SPE 68th Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston, Texas, 36 October, 1993 Bakke, S., ren, P.E.: 3D pore-scale modeling of sandstones and ow simulations in the pore networks. SPE 35479, SPEJ 2(2), 136149 (1997) Bardon, C., Longeron, D.G.: Inuence of very low interfacial tension on relative permeability. SPE 7609, SPEJ, 20(5), 391401, (1980) Berg, L.I., Stensen, J.A., Crapez, B., Quale, A.: SWAG behavior based on Siri eld data, paper SPE 75126, SPE/DOE improved oil recovery symposium, Tulsa, Oklahoma, April 1317, 2002 Burger, J.E., Bhogeswara, R., Mohanty, K.K.: Effect of phase behaviour on bypassing in enriched gasoods. SPE 25254, SPERE, 9(2), 112118 (1994) Cahn, J.W.: Critical point wetting. J. Chem. Phys. 66, 3667 (1977) Chatzis, I., Dullien, F.A.L.: Dynamic immiscible displacement mechanisms in pore doublets: theory vs. experiment. Colloid Interface Sci. 91, 199 (1983) Chatzis, I., Kantzas, A., Dullien, F.A.L.: On the investigation of gravity-assisted inert gas injection using Micromodels, long berea sandstone cores, and computer-assisted tomography, paper SPE 18284, 63rd Annual technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston, TX, October, 25, 1988 Christensen, J.R., Stenby, E.H., Skauge, A.: Compositional and relative permeability hysteresis effects on near miscible WAG, SPE/DOE Improved oil recovery symposium, Tulsa, Oklahoma, 1922 April 1998 Dong, M., Dullien, F.A.L., Chatzis, I.: Imbibition of oil in lm form over water present in edges of capillaries with an angular cross section. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 172, 2136 (1995) Henderson, G.D., Danesh, A., Tehrani, D.H., Peden, J.M.: Measurement and correlation of gas condensate relative permeability by the steady-state method. SPEJ, 191201 (1996) Henderson, G.D., Danesh, A., Tehrani, D.H.: Effect of positive rate sensitivity and inertia on gas condensate relative permeability at high velocity. Petrol. Geosci. 7, 4550 (2001) Jamiolahmady, M., Danesh, A., Tehrani, D.H., Duncane, D.B.: A mechanistic model of gas-condensate ow in pores. Transp. Porous Media 41, 1746 (2000) Jamiolahmady, M., Danesh, A., Tehrani, D.H., Duncan, D.B.: Positive effect of ow velocity on gas-condensate relative permeability: Network modelling and comparison with experimental results. Transp. Porous Media 52(2), 159183 (2003) Jamiolahmady, M., Danesh, A, Tehrani, D.H., Sohrabi, M.: Variations of gas-condensate relative permeability with production rate at near wellbore conditions: A general correlation. SPE Reserv. Eng. Eval. J. 9(6), 688697 (2006) Kantzas, A., Chatzis, I., Dullien, F.A.L.: Enhanced oil recovery by inert gas injection, SPE 17379, SPE/DOE Symposium on enhanced oil recovery, Tulsa, OK, 1720 April 1988a

123

High-pressure Micromodel Visualizations

257

Kantzas, A., Chatzis, I., Dullien, F.A.L.: Mechanisms of capillary displacement of residual oil by gravityassisted inert gas injection, SPE 17506, Rocky Mountain Regional Meeting, Casper, WY, 1113 May 1988b Larsen, J.K., Skauge, A.: Simulation of the immiscible WAG process using cycle-dependent three-phase relative permeabilities, SPE 56745, SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston, Texas, 36 October, 1999 Larsen, J.K., Bech, N., Winter, A.: Three-phase immiscible WAG injection: Micromodel experiments and network models, SPE/DOE Improved oil recovery symposium, Tulsa, Oklahoma, 35 April 2000 Lenormand, R., Zarcone, C., Sarr, A.: Mechanisms of displacement of one uid by another in a network of capillary ducts. J. Fluid Mech. 135, 337 (1983) Lenormand, R., Zarcone, C.: Role of roughness and edges during imbibition in square capillaries. SPE 13264, Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston, 1619 September 1984 Li, X., Yortsos, Y.C.: Visualization and simulation of bubble. Growth in pore networks. AIChE J. 41, 214 222 (1995) Ma, T.D., Rugen, J.A., Youngren, G.K.: Simultaneuous water and gas injection pilot at the Kupamk River Field, Reservoir Impact, paper SPE 30726, SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, October 1995 Mattax, C.C., Kyte, J.R.: Ever see waterood?. Oil Gas J. 59, 115 (1961) Minssieux, L., Duquerroix, J.P.: Water-alternating-gas ow mechanisms in presence of residual oil, 69th Ann. SPE Tech. Conf., New Orleans, 2528 September 1994 ren, P.E., Pinczewski, W.V.: The effect of lm ow on the mobilisation of waterood residual oil by gas ooding, European IOR Symposium, Stavanger, May 2123, 1991 ren, P.E., Billiotte, J., Pinczewski, W.V.: Mobilisation of waterood residual oil by gas injection for water-wet conditions. SPE Form. Eval. 7(1), 7078 (1992) ren, P.E., Bakke, S., Arntzen, O.J.: Extending predictive capabilities to network models. SPEJ 324 (1998) ren, P.E., Bakke, S.: Process-based construction of sandstones and prediction of transport properties. Transp. Porous Media 46, 311 (2002) Pande, K.K.: Effects of gravity and viscous crossow on hydrocarbon miscible ood performance in heterogeneous reservoirs, SPE 24935, Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Washington D.C., 47 October 1992 Quale, E.A., Crapez, B., Stensen, J.A., Berge, L.I.: SWAG njection on the Siri Field An optimized injection system for less cost, paper SPE 65165, SPE European Petroleum Conference, October 2000 Reamer, H.H., Olds, R.H., Sage, B.H., Lacey, W.: Phase equilibria in hydrocarbon systems. Methane-Decane Syst, Indus Eng Chem 34(12), 15261531 (1942) Shyeh-Yung, J.J.: Mechanisms of miscible oil recovery: Effects of pressure on miscible and near-miscible displacements of oil by carbon dioxide, SPE 22651, Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, 69 October 1991 Skauge, A., Aarra, M.: Effect of wettability on oil recovery by WAG, 7th EAPG IOR Europe, 452458, Moscow, Russia, 2729 October 1993 Stephenson, D.J., Graham, A.G., Luhning R.W.: Mobility control experience in the Joffre Viking miscible carbon dioxide ood. SPE Reserv Eng, 183188 (1993) Sohrabi, M., Tehrani, D.H., Danesh, A., Henderson, G.D.: Visulisation of oil recovery by Water Alternating Gas (WAG) injection using high pressure micromodels Water-Wet System, SPE 63000, Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, 14 October 2000 Sohrabi, M., Tehrani, D.H., Danesh, A., Henderson, G.D.: Visualisation of oil recovery by Water Alternating Gas (WAG) injection using high pressure micromodels - Oil-Wet & Mixed-Wet Systems, SPE 71494, Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, Louisiana, 30 September3 October 2001 Sohrabi, M., Tehrani, D.H., Danesh, A., Henderson, G.D.: Visualisation of oil recovery by Water Alternating Gas (WAG) injection using high pressure micromodels. SPEJ 89000, 9, 290301 (2004) Sohrabi, M., Danesh, A., Tehrani, D.H., Jamiolahmady, M.: Microscopic mechanisms of oil recovery by near-miscible gas injection. Transp. Porous Media. doi: 10.1007/s11242-007-9154-z (2007) Stoisits, R.F., Krist G.J., Ma, T.D., Rugen, J.A., Kolpak M.M., Payne, R.L.: Simultaniuous water and gas injection pilot the Kuparuk River Field, Surface Line Impact, Paper SPE 30645, SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, October 1995 Thomas, F.B, Holowach, N., Zhou, X., Bennion, D.B., Benion, D.W.: Miscible or near-miscible gas injection, which is better?, SPE 27811, SPE/DOE Symposium on Improved Oil Recovery, Tulsa, 1720 April 1994 Williams, J.K., Dawe, R.A.: Photographic observations of unusual ow phenomena in porous media at interfacial tensions below 0.1 mNm-1. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 124(2), 691696 (1988) Zekri, A. Y., Natuh, A.A.: Laboratory study of the effects of miscible WAG process on tertiary oil recovery, 5th Abu Dhabi Nat. Oil Co./SPE Conf., Abu Dhabi, UAE, 1820 May 1992

123

Você também pode gostar