Eor Ior Course T Ahmed

12/1/2011
1
Dr. Tarek Ahmed
Tarek Ahmed & Associates Ltd
www.TarekAhmedAssociates.com
Tahmed@Mtech.edu
Principals of
Secondary & Enhanced Oil Recovery
Professor Emeritus of Petroleum Engineering
Montana Tech of the University of Montana
11/21/2011
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All
Rights Reserved
OUTLINE
1. Introduction and Review of Basic Reservoir Engineering
2. Stages of Oil Recovery
3. Factors to Consider When Planning an IOR
4. Introduction to Secondary Recovery Methods
5. Enhanced Oil Recovery Methods
6. Equations of State and Compositional Modeling
7. Simulation
8. Team project: Developing and the Nameless Field
11/21/2011 2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
2
Segmented Stages of Oil Recovery

Three Stages:

1. Primary Recovery
2. Secondary Recovery
3. Tertiary (Enhanced) Oil Recovery
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
11/21/2011
Primary Oil Recovery:
describes the production of hydrocarbons under the natural driving mechanisms
present in the reservoir without supplementary help from injected fluids such as
gas or water.

Secondary Oil Recovery:
1. Refers to the additional recovery that results from the conventional
methods of water injection and immiscible gas injection.
2. Usually, the selected secondary recovery process follows the primary
recovery but it can also be conducted concurrently with the primary
recovery.
3. Before undertaking a secondary recovery project, it should be clearly
proven that the natural recovery processes are insufficient; otherwise
there is a risk that the substantial capital investment required for a
secondary recovery project may be wasted.

Tertiary (Enhanced) Oil Recovery:
is that additional recovery over and above what could be recovered by primary
and secondary recovery methods. Various methods of enhanced oil recovery
(EOR) are essentially
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
3
Segmented Stages of Oil Recovery
Gas Injection
(Pressure Maintenance)
Micellar-Polymer
ASP
Polymer
Others
Artificial Lift
Primary Recovery
Natural Flow
Secondary Recovery
Water Flood
Tertiary Recovery
Thermal Miscible Flood Chemical
Steam
In-situ Combustion
Huff-and-Puff
Hot Water
SAGD
CO
2

Lean Gas
LPG
. N
2

Air
Enriched Gas
E
O
R

I
m
p
r
o
v
e
d

O
i
l

R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y

(
I
O
R
)

EOR Assessment & Approach
1. Screening & Field Selection
2. Cost estimates
3. Go or No-Go
4. Experimental program and qualitative simulation
5. Pilot Study, Tracer Survey, and monitoring program
6. economic evaluation
7. Go or No-Go
8. Matching pilot data and quantitative simulation
9. Decision making Go or No-Go
10. Full Field simulation and Implementation

12/1/2011
4
IOR/EOR questions
miscible
immiscible
chemical
polymer
1- What is the anticipated phase behavior between reservoir fluid and injectant ?
2- What is S
orm
?
3- what is the mobility of phases ?
4- will process be first contact or multi-contact?
1- What is the remaining oil saturation after H
2
O, i.e. S
orw
?
2- what is S
org
to immiscible gas?
3- Aquifer? Gas cap? Size? Strength?
1- What is the design of the chemical slug to reduce ? S
orm
?!!!
2- To what extend will chemical interact with clays in the formation through
adsorption?
3- what is the salinity of the reservoir water and how it will impact the
effectiveness of the slug ?
4- How will mobility control of the oil bank and chemical bank accomplished ?
1- What is the polymer concentration necessary to provide mobility the control?
2- What is % of the polymer slug that will be adsorbed on the reservoir rock ?
1- What are the anticipated thermal losses in the wellbore, to cap and base rock?
2- Can the thermal front be controlled in the reservoir?
Thermal
EOR Target
45% OOIP
EOR Target
90% OOIP
Primary
25% OOIP
Primary
5% OOIP
Secondary
30% OOIP
Heavy Oils
Light Oils
Target for different crude oil systems
12/1/2011
5
Residual Oil !!!!
What Does That Mean? and Why?

A. Wettability
B. Capillary Forces
C. Heterogeneity of the Reservoir
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
6
11/21/2011
Initial Reservoir Condition at Equilibrium
11/21/2011
Initial Reservoir Condition at Equilibrium
12/1/2011
7
11/21/2011
Wettability
Consider the Displacement in a Single Pore
11/21/2011
Displacement in Multiple Channels
Capillary forces cause water to
Move ahead faster in low permeability
channel
Gas displaces oil from
High permeability channels
12/1/2011
8
11/21/2011
Thread of the oil gets smaller at restricted points
A &B; where oil film subsequently breaks
Target Setting for Recovery Factors
1) Tertiary EOR can Contribute by 7-15% Increase in Ultimate Recovery, i.e.
P+S+T 45-65%. However, Vast Majority of Fields are below 40%.

2) How realistic is Setting a Target for RF > 70%? Can we do Better ?

3) The Key: a More Proactive Longer-Term minded Reservoir
Management Approach; that includes:
a) Understanding the HEALTH and Behavior of reservoir by analyzing
Early production data
b) Identify boundaries, un-drained and upswept areas
c) Improve fluid distribution mapping (avoid Average S
o
) throughout the
life of the Field
d) May Require New Techniques
e) Very Important that you Start Planning VERY EARLY

11/21/2011
12/1/2011
9
Oil Recovery
Flow Rate
Tertiary
Secondary
Primary
Time
Oil Recovery Categories
? ?
Timing to Start Injection!
For any IOR process, important issues to consider

A. Movable Oil or Residual Oil
B. Time to start project, secondary or Tertiary
C. Economics of the project
D. Given the reservoir rock and fluid properties; can the selected
process be used in the chosen reservoir, i.e. screening ?
Time
Rate
Primary
Secondary Tertiary
?
12/1/2011
10
First Step for
A Successful for IOR Flood
Performing a Screening Test
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
Process Crude Oil Reservoir
N
2
& Flue Gas

>35 API
<0.4 cp
High C
m
So: >40%
Formation: SS or carbonate with few fractures
h: Relatively thin unless formation is dipping
K: Not Critical
D: >6000 ft
T: Not Critical
High Pressure Gas
Injection
>23 API
<3 cp
High C
m

So: >30%
Formation: SS or carbonate with min fractures
h: Relatively thin unless formation is dipping
K: Not Critical
D: >4000 ft
T: Can have a significant effect on MMP
Miscible CO
2
>22 API
<10 cp
High C
5
-C
12
So: >20%
Formation: SS or carbonate
h: Relatively thin unless dipping
K: Not Critical
D: MMP=f(D,T)
Chemical (ASP;
micellar, etc)
>20 API
<10 cp
ASP: organic acid
groups in the oil are
need
So: >35%
Formation: SS preferred
h: Not Critical
K: >10md
D: <9000 ft
T: < 200 F
Polymer >15 API
<100 cp
So: >50%
Formation: SS but can be used in carbonates
h: Not Critical
K: >10 md
D: <9000 ft
T: <200 F
12/1/2011
11
Questions and Issues

1. How much oil remains at the end of primary and where is it?
Volumes remaining in selected patterns
S
or
in selected Flow patterns

2. What factors control or limit recovery?
Reservoir quality (k,, etc)
Field maturity (current pressure, free gas,etc)
Operational effectiveness (availability of H
2
O/gas, capacity of surface
facilities, handling water production,..etc)

3. How can we improve recovery?

4. Plans after Secondary? EOR? Timing?

5. S
orm
? (S
or
)
res
= f [ (S
or
)
core
, M, V ] ?

11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
Brief Review of
Reservoir Engineering
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
12
What is the Original-Oil-in-Place? What Tools are Used?
1. A geological/petrophysical study is the key in
understanding and answering the question
2. Supplemented by mathematical formulations; that
include:
- Material Balance Equation MBE
- Decline Curves Analysis
- Type Curves Analysis
OOIP from Volumetric & MBE calculations !!!!!!!
are they the same?
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
1- Material Balance Equation
Oil
Zone
Gas Cap
Zone Oil of Volume
Cap Gas of Volume
= m
P
P
P
N
G
R =
Unknowns:
N
m
R
P

12/1/2011
13
2- Decline Curves
b> 1 !!
When can be applied?
3- Type Curves
?
q
Dd

12/1/2011
14
Where is the current Oil-in-Place?

1. How the CURRENT oil saturation is distributed in the
reservoir; i.e. available oil for IOR Process?

2. Knowing the distribution is the Key for a successful IOR
3. Project.

4. The objective is to target remaining movable oil
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
Adjustments to the
Remaining Oil Saturation
To account for:
1. The water influx zone
2. The expansion of the gas cap
3. Combined effect of water influx & gas cap expansion
4. Shrinking of the gas cap
5. The gas migration to form a secondary gas cap
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
15
volume pore
volume oil remaining
=
o
S
( )
oi
o
p
wi o
B
B
N
N
S S
|
|
.
|
\
|
= 1 1
Pore Volume P.V = 7758 A h

N B
oi
= (P.V) (1 S
wi
)

However; how this oil saturation is distributed in the
reservoir?
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
wi
oi
S
B N
V P
1
) . (
( )
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
wi
oi
o p
o
S
B N
B N N
S
1
( )
orw wi
w p e
WIZ
S S
B W W
V P

=
1
.
( )
(
|
|
.
|
\
|

=
orw wi
w p e
wi
oi
orw
orw wi
w p e
o p
o
S S
B W W
S
B N
S
S S
B W W
B N N
S
1 1
1
1- Oil Saturation Adjustment to Water Influx
12/1/2011
16
2- Oil Saturation Adjustment Gas Cap Expansion
( )
org wi
gi
g
oi
GIZ
S S
B
B
B N m
V P

|
|
.
|
\
|
=
1
1
.
( )
|
|
.
|
\
|
(
(
|
|
.
|
\
|
(
(
(
(
(

|
|
.
|
\
|

=
1
1 1
1
1
gi
g
org wi
oi
wi
oi
org
org wi
gi
g
oi
o p
o
B
B
S S
B N m
S
B N
S
S S
B
B
B N m
B N N
S
3- Oil Saturation Adjustment to
Gas Cap Expansion & Water Influx
( )
( )
(
(
(
(
(

+

|
|
.
|
\
|
(
(
(
(
(
+

|
|
.
|
\
|

=
orw wi
w p e
org wi
gi
g
oi
wi
oi
orw wi
orw p e
org wi
org
gi
g
oi
o p
o
S S
B W W
S S
B
B
mNB
S
NB
S S
S W W
S S
S
B
B
mNB
B N N
S
1 1
1
1
1 1
1
12/1/2011
17
oa gr wi
org
gi
g
oi g pc
B S S
S
B
B
B N m B G
Lost Oil
) 1 (
] ) 1 ( [

=
Oil saturation adjustment for shrinking gas-cap:
The volume of oil lost as a result of oil migration to the
gas cap can also be calculated from:

Where:
G
pc
= Cumulative gas production from the gas cap, scf
B
g
= Gas FVF, bbl/scf

You Must Consider:
Migration of oil to the Gas Cap !!
Secondary gas cap
Lost Residual Oil
Oil saturation adjustment in
Gravity Drainage Reservoirs
12/1/2011
18
) 1 (
]
1
[ ] ) ( [
P.V) (
SGC
gc org wi
gc
wi
oi
g P P s P si
S S S
S
S
B N
B R N R N N R N

=
( )
SGC
SGC
P.V) (
1
P.V) (
|
|
.
|
\
|

=
wi
oi
org o p
o
S
B N
S B N N
S
S
o
Adjustment for Gravity Drainage
Secondary gas cap pore volume; gives:

Adjust the saturation equation to account for the migration of the evolved
gas to the secondary gas cap, to give:
Important Comment

In these types of reservoirs, the gravity effects result in
much lower producing gas-oil ratios than would be
expected from reservoirs producing without the benefit
of gravity drainage. This is due to the upstructure
migration of the gas and consequent higher oil
saturation in the vicinity of the completion intervals of the
production wells which should be used when calculating
the oil relative permeability k
ro
.

12/1/2011
19
FACTORS TO CONSIDER

The following reservoir characteristics must be considered
when determining the suitability of a candidate reservoir for
IOR flood:

1. Wettability
2. Fluid properties
3. Lithology and rock properties
4. Heterogeneity of the Reservoir
5. Reservoir depth
6. Fluid saturations
7. Reservoir Uniformity and Pay Continuity
8. Primary reservoir driving mechanisms
1- Wettability
Wettability is one of the most important rock properties that must be
considered and accounted for when planning an IOR project.
Wettability significantly effects and controls the success or the
failure of the injection fluid. Waterflooding option is generally not
considered appropriate in Oil Wet Reservoir Systems
2- Fluid Properties
The physical properties of the reservoir fluids have pronounced effects
on the suitability of a given reservoir for further development by
immiscible fluid injection. The viscosity of the crude oil is considered
the most important fluid property that affects the degree of success of
an IOR project.
The oil viscosity has the important effect of determining the mobility
ratio that, in turn, controls the sweep efficiency.
12/1/2011
20
3- Lithology and Rock Properties

Reservoir lithology and rock properties that affect flood ability and success are:

Porosity
Permeability (impact of thief zones)
Clay content
Net thickness

Tight reservoirs or reservoirs with thin net thickness possess water-injection problems
in terms of the desired water injection rate or injection pressure. The governing
relationship:
k h
i
p
w
inj

The above relationship suggests that to deliver a desired daily injection
rate of i
w
in a tight or thin reservoir, the required injection pressure
might exceed the formation fracture pressure.
To deliver a desired
injection rate

4- Heterogeneity of the Reservoir

The reservoir existing directional permeability and orientation of
natural/induced fractures can be effectively utilized when selecting the
flooding pattern to improved the EUR. Efforts (conducting traditional well
testing, pulse testing, tracer surveys,etc) should be placed to properly
characterize the heterogeneity of the reservoir as a first preliminary step in
design a waterflood project.
K
y
>>> K
x

K
y
K
y

K
x

K
x

12/1/2011
21
Injection-well Hydraulic Fracture Orientation
Improves sweep efficiency
5- Reservoir Depth

I. Maximum injection pressure will increase with depth. However, The
costs of lifting oil from very deep wells will limit the maximum economic
wateroil ratios that can be tolerated, thereby reducing the ultimate
recovery factor and increasing the total project operating costs.
II. a shallow reservoir imposes a restraint on the injection pressure that can
be used, because this must be less than fracture pressure. In waterflood
operations

There is a critical pressure (approximately 1 psi/ft of depth) that, if
exceeded, permits the injecting water to expand openings along fractures or
to create fractures. This results in the channeling of the injected water or the
bypassing of large portions of the reservoir matrix. Consequently, an
operational pressure gradient of 0.75 psi/ft of depth normally is allowed
to provide a sufficient margin of safety to prevent pressure parting.
12/1/2011
22
6- Fluid Saturations

In determining the suitability of a reservoir for waterflooding, a
high oil saturation that provides a sufficient supply of
recoverable oil is the primary criterion for successful flooding
operations. Note that higher oil saturation at the beginning of flood
operations increases the oil mobility (through K
ro
) that, in turn,
gives higher recovery efficiency.

7- Reservoir Uniformity and Pay Continuity

Substantial reservoir uniformity is one of the major physical
criterions for successful waterflooding. For example:

I. Thief zone will cause rapid channeling, high WOR, and
bypassing will develop. This zone must be located and
shut off

II. These thief zones will contain less oil than the other layers,
and their flooding will lead to relatively lower oil recoveries
than other layers.
12/1/2011
23
8- Primary Reservoir Driving Mechanisms

Six driving mechanisms basically provide the natural energy
necessary for oil recovery:

I. Rock and liquid expansion
II. Solution gas drive
III. Gas cap drive
IV. Water drive
V. Gravity drainage drive
VI. Combination drive
Driving Mechanism Oil Recovery Range
Rock & liquid expansion
3 7 %
Solution Gas drive
5 30 %
Gas Cap
20 40 %
Water drive
35 75%
Gravity drainage
<80%
Combination drive
30 60%
12/1/2011
24
I. SOLUTION GAS DRIVE
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
25
II. GAS-CAP DRIVE
11/21/2011
12/1/2011
26
Size of the Gas Cap
Oil recovery
Oil
Zone
Gas Cap
Zone Oil of Volume
Cap Gas of Volume
= m
Managing Gas Cap Drive reservoirs

12/1/2011
27
III. WATER DRIVE
IV. Gravity Drainage Drive
Factors that affect ultimate recovery from gravity drainage reservoirs
are:
1- permeability in the direction of dip
2- dip of the reservoir
3- reservoir producing rates
4- oil viscosity
5- relative permeability characteristics (lab does not consider it) 11/21/2011
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights
Reserved
12/1/2011
28
To maximize the oil recovery by gravity segregation; Q
o

should not exceed a Critical Maximum oil Rate to allow
gas migration
Secondary gas cap
Lost Residual Oil
What is the Maximum Oil Rate to Ensure
Counter Flow?
q
o

12/1/2011
29
This calculated value of q
o
represents the maximum oil rate that should not
be exceeded without causing the gas to flow downward.
Where:
q
o
= oil production rate, bbl/day

o
= oil density, lb/ft
3

g
= gas density, lb/ft
3

A = cross-sectional area open to flow, ft
2

k = absolute permeability, md
= dip angle.

o
g o ro
o
A k k x
q
o ) sin( ) ( 10 83 . 7
6
=

Production should not exceed a critical maximum rate of
gravity drainage .The maximum rate of gravity drainage is
defined as the rate at which complete counter-flow exists
and mathematically by the following expression:

Comment; can be unrealistic
Class Problem:
An oil reservoir is produced under gravity drainage driving
mechanism with the following fluid and reservoir
characteristics:
Oil density = 49 lb/ft
2
Gas density = 8 lb/ft
2

Oil viscosity = 2.3 cp
Cross sectional area = 24,000 ft
2

K= 120 md
K
ro
= 0.85
Dip angle = 60 degree

Calculate the maximum oil rate that should not be
exceeded for counter flow

12/1/2011
30
Reservoir Pressure and GOR Trends
11/21/2011
Understanding your Reservoir Driving
Mechanisms
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
31
( )
( )
( ) ( )
1
1
1
/
= + +
+
+
+
A
B G
A
B W
A
p p
S
c S c
m B N
A
B W W
A
B B B B Nm
A
B B N
ginj inj w inj
i
wi
f wi w
oi
w p e gi gi g ti
ti t
with:
A = N
p
[B
t
+ (R
p
R
si
) B
g
]
DDI + SDI + WDI + EDI + WII+ GII = 1.0
Most efficient
MBE is an Essential Tool; dont forget to use
( )
( )
1
/
=
A
B W W
A
B B B B Nm
A
B B N
w p e gi gi g ti
ti t
A = N
p
[B
t
+ (R
p
R
si
) B
g
]
A
B W W
w p e

A
B W W
w p e

12/1/2011
32
Parameters to Consider When Selecting
Optimum Time to Start an IOR Project
1. Reservoir oil viscosity
2. Cost of injection equipment.
3. Productivity of producing wells.
4. Effect of delaying investment
5. Oil saturation
6. Free gas

11/21/2011
1- Reservoir oil viscosity.
Fluid injection should be initiated when the reservoir pressure reaches its
bubble-point pressure since the oil viscosity reaches its minimum value at this
pressure. The mobility of the oil will increase with decreasing oil viscosity,
which in turns improves the sweeping efficiency.

p
b

0
R
s

B
o

o

12/1/2011
33
ob

o

p
b

oil

Effect of oil viscosity on mobility ratio
o s
s
rs
w
o
ro
o
k k

s
= =
: Best
&
11/21/2011
2- Cost of injection equipment.
at higher pressures, the cost of injection equipment increases. Therefore,
a low reservoir pressure at initiation of injection is desirable.

3- Productivity of producing wells.
A high reservoir pressure is desirable to increase the productivity of producing wells,
which prolongs the flowing period of the wells, decreases lifting costs, and may
shorten the overall life of the project.

4. Effect of delaying investment on the time value
of $$.

A delayed investment in injection facilities is desirable from this standpoint.

12/1/2011
34
11/21/2011
5- Oil Saturation

The principal requirement for a successful fluid injection
project is that sufficient oil must remain in the reservoir
after primary operations ; e.g. starting waterflood at a
higher pressure.

High residual oil saturation after primary recovery is essential not only
because there must be a sufficient volume of oil left in the reservoir, but also
because of relative permeability considerations. A high oil relative
permeability, i.e., high oil saturation, means more oil recovery with less
production of the displacing fluid.

I. High S
o
improved mobility; i.e. higher k
ro

II. High S
o
required to develop an oil bank
III. High S
o
required to improve sweep efficiencies

Questions:
A. Average Remaining Oil Saturation; What does it mean?
B. How you identify areas with high S
o
?
C. How you select areas for infill drilling?

Distribution of the remaining S
o
is a
MAJOR Problem
12/1/2011
35
volume pore
volume oil remaining
=
o
S
( )
oi
o
p
wi o
B
B
N
N
S S
|
|
.
|
\
|
= 1 1
Pore Volume P.V = 7758 A h

N B
oi
= (P.V) (1 S
wi
)

|
|
.
|
\
|
=
wi
oi
S
B N
V P
1
) . (
( )
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
wi
oi
o p
o
S
B N
B N N
S
1
How this oil saturation is distributed in the reservoir;
where is the Movable Oil?

MBE on a well-by-well basis !
However; Simulation is a key answer
6- Effect of Free gas saturation.

A. In water injection projects. It is desirable to have initial
gas saturation, possibly as much as 10%. This will
occur at a pressure that is below the bubble point
pressure (probably unrealistic)

B. In Miscible or Immiscible gas injection projects; zero
gas saturation in the oil zone is desired. This occurs
while reservoir pressure is at or above bubble-point
pressure.

11/21/2011
12/1/2011
36
Effect of trapped gas on waterflood recovery
Initial Oil S
oi

Free Gas S
gi

Initial Water Saturation S
wi

Free Gas S
gi

11/21/2011
No trapped gas
wi

Free Gas S
gi

Oil Bank
Initial Oil S
oi

S
orw

11/21/2011
12/1/2011
37
With Trapped Gas
wi

Free Gas S
gi

Oil Bank
Initial Oil S
oi

Trapped Gas S
gt

S
hrw

11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
S
hrw

S
orw

12/1/2011
38
12/1/2011
39
Coefficients Equation (14-1) Equation (14-2)
a
1
0.030517211 0.026936065
a
2
0.4764700 0.41062853
a
3
0.69469046 0.29560322
a
4
-1.8994762 -1.4478797
a
5
-4.1603083 x 10
-4
-3.0564771 x 10
-4

gi
gi gi gi gt
S
a
S a S a S a a S
5 3
4
2
3 2 1
+ + + + =
gt
gt gt gt or
S
a
S a S a S a a S
5 3
5
2
3 2 1
+ + + + = A
11/21/2011
Class problem

An oil reservoir is being considered for further
development by initiating a waterflooding project.
The oilwater relative permeability data indicate
that the residual oil saturation is 35%. It is
projected that the initial gas saturation at the start
of the flood is approximately 10%. Calculate the
anticipated reduction in residual oil, S
or
, due to
the presence of the initial gas at the start of the
flood.
11/21/2011
12/1/2011
40
The waterflood recovery can possibly be improved if a so-called
optimum gas saturation is present at the start of the flood.
This optimum gas saturation is given by:
( )
152 . 1
166 . 0 352 . 0
902 . 0 634 . 0
001867 . 0
|

|
|
.
|
\
|
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
w
wi
o
o
o
opt
g
S S
B k
S
(S
g
)
opt
= Optimum gas saturation, fraction
S
o

,
S
wi
= oil and initial water saturations, fraction
o
,

w
= oil and water viscosities, cp
k = Absolute permeability, md
B
o
= Oil formation volume factor, bbl/STB
| = Porosity, fraction
11/21/2011
The above correlation is not explicit and must be used in conjunction
with the material balance equation (MBE). The proposed methodology of
determining (S
g
)
opt
is based on calculating the gas saturation as a
function of reservoir pressure (or time) by using both the MBE and the
proposed expressions. When the gas saturation as calculated by the two
equations is identical, this gas saturation is identified as (S
g
)
opt
.
Pressure
Psi
B
o

BBL/STB

o

cp
MBE
S
o

S
g
= 1- S
o
- S
wi

(S
g
)
opt

1925 1.333 0.600 0.700 0.000 --
1760 1.287 0.625 0.628 0.072 0.119
1540 1.250 0.650 0.568 0.132 0.122
1342 1.221 0.700 0.527 0.173
( )
152 . 1
166 . 0 352 . 0
902 . 0 634 . 0
001867 . 0
|

|
|
.
|
\
|
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
w
wi
o
o
o
opt
g
S S
B k
S
11/21/2011
12/1/2011
41
But; there is a problem
Variable Bubblepoint Pressures !!!
11/21/2011
Oil
Gas
( ) ( )
( ) ( )
( ) ( )
o
o
g
gt
S
o
o
new
s
B
Volume Pore S
B
Volume Pore S
R
B
Volume Pore S
R
(
(
+
(
=
|
|
.
|
\
|
|
|
.
|
\
|
+ =
g
o
o
g
S
new
S
B
B
S
S
R R
( )
oi
o
p
wi o
B
B
N
N
S S
|
|
.
|
\
|
= 1 1
S
g

11/21/2011
12/1/2011
42
Again; Important Equations
11/21/2011
S
g
= 1 S
o
- S
wi

( )
oi
o P
wi o
wi
oi
o p
o
wi
oi
oi
wi
B
B
N
N
S S
S
B N
B N N
S
S
B N
B
S
N
|
.
|
\
|
=
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
1 ) 1 (
1
1
Volume Pore
) 1 ( volume) (pore
Class Problem:
The Big Butte Field is a solution gas-drive reservoir that is under consideration
for a waterflood project. The volumetric calculations of the field indicate that the
areal extent of the field is 1612.6 acres. The field is characterized by the
following properties:
oThickness h = 25 ft
oPorosity = 15%
oInitial water saturation S
wi
= 20%
oInitial pressure pi = 2377 psi
Results from the MBE in terms of cumulative oil production N
p
as a function of
reservoir pressure are given below:
Pressure
Psi
N
p

MMSTB
2377 0
2250 1.10
1950 1.76
1650 2.64
1350 3.3
12/1/2011
43
Pressure
psi
B
o

Bbl/STB
R
s

scf/STB
B
g

bbl/scf
2377 1.706 921 --
2250 1.678 872 0.00139
1950 1.555 761 0.00162
1650 1.501 657 0.00194
1350 1.448 561 0.00240
1050 1.395 467 0.00314
750 1.336 375 0.00448
450 1.279 274 0.00754
The PVT properties of the crude oil system are tabulated below:

Assume that the waterflood will commence when the reservoir
pressure declines to 1650 psi; find:
1- the pressure that is required to dissolve the evolved gas.
2- the pressure that is required to dissolve the trapped gas.

11/21/2011
Simulation is the key

I. Calculations should be performed for
several assumed times and the net
income for each case determined.

II. The scenario that maximizes the profit and
perhaps meets the operators desirable goal
is selected.
12/1/2011
44
Fundamentals of
Waterflooding
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
11/21/2011
Considerations & Requirements
When
Planning Onshore or Offshore IOR Project
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
45
Considerations When Planning an
IOR Flood
1. Purpose of the flood
2. Onshore or Offshore
3. Defining the Aquifer
4. Permeability Consideration, k
x
,k
y
, and k
z

5. Optimum Time to Start the Flood
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
Consideration #1: Purpose for Onshore or Offshore; same:

A. Maintaining the reservoir pressure
B. supplementing partial/strong natural water drive !!!
C. Displacing oil

Aquifer
Aquifer
Oil Oil
Offshore; What do you know about the reservoir?
12/1/2011
46
Consideration #2: Offshore vs. Onshore Field Development
Time
Oil Rate
Offshore:
Discovery well can
not produced at
continuous basis
since the offshore
production facilities
are not in existence
Onshore:
Discovery well is
tied back to the
nearest production
facilities and
produced at high
rate at continuous
basis
Aquifer
Aquifer
Oil Oil
Offshore Appraisal Stage
No Continuous Flow
Minimum information?
Major question deals with the aquifer
(strength, communication, etc)
12/1/2011
47
Onshore:

Discovery well is tied back to the nearest production facilities and
produced at high rate at continuous basis to provide a positive cash flow
from day one. The most important advantage; however, it permits to
observe and evaluate the reservoir under dynamic conditions.
Continuous production creates a pressure sink at the discovery well which
propagates radically and vertically throughout the formation. With
subsequent appraisal/development well is drilled, the conducting of DST
and RFT will provide with the degree of areal and vertical communications
that are ESSENTIAL in:

A. Planning a secondary recovery and scale of the process
B. Estimation of the strength of the natural driving
mechanism
Offshore:

Appraisal wells can not produced at continuous basis since the
offshore production facilities are not in existence. Perhaps
adequate data may be collected with each appraisal well;
however, it might be the lowest quality because they are
collected under purely STATIC conditions. No adequate data
are collected under DYNAMIC CONDITIONS (few thousands
bbl during DST) to allow:

A. Degree of the areal and vertical communications within
the formation
B. Strength and type of the natural driving mechanism

12/1/2011
48
Consideration #3: The Aquifer Problem (Basel or Edge):

A. Degree of communication; radial and vertical
B. Degree of communication with Aquifer!!!
C. Strength of the Aquifer
Aquifer Aquifer
Basel Waterflood
Aquifer
Oil

Edge Waterflood
Consideration #4: Permeability:

1. With high K, large oil accumulations can be developed with relatively
few wells; with more importantly fewer production platforms in offshore
reservoirs

2. Offshore Platforms usually have finite lifetime which leads to the fact that
maximizing oil recovery (function of k, tight or permeable) is required
before any significant mechanical deterioration occurs. Decision is
based on:

3. Value of remaining recoverable oil vs. cost of platform refurbishing
Selection of flood pattern and infill drilling locations are very strong
function of permeability distribution
12/1/2011
49
11/21/2011
Consideration #5: Time to Initiate the Flood

A. Start the flood above P
b
; at P
b
or below P
b
?
B. Effect of oil viscosity on mobility ratio
C. Effect of trapped gas on waterflood recovery

Mobility Ratio M:
11/21/2011
( )
( )
w
o
S
ro
S
rw
o
w
wi
wBT
k
k
M
M
=
= =
Fluid displaced
Fluid displacing
ob

o

p
b

oil

Effect of oil viscosity on mobility ratio
12/1/2011
50
The magnitude of the reduction and mobilization of residual oil saturation and
improving the sweep efficiency by any IOR process is controlled by the
following two major factors:

1) Capillary Number N
C
; Question is: how to increase?

2) Mobility Ratio M, Question is: how to reduce it?

Controlling Parameters for a
Successful IOR Process
|
.
|
\
| A
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
L
p
o
k
c
N
o |
(
|
|
.
|
\
|
= = =
w
o
ro
rw
o ro
w rw
displaced
displacing
k
k
k
k
M
) / (
) / (
Critical N
c

before or
after or
S
S
) (
) (
1.0
0
1) Effect of N
C
on residual oil saturation
|
.
|
\
| A
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
L
p
o
k
c
N
o |
Increase p/L
is the only practical way of increasing N
C

Range of
Waterflood
12/1/2011
51
2) Effect of Mobility Ratio on Sweep Efficiency
(
|
|
.
|
\
|
= = =
w
o
ro
rw
o ro
w rw
displaced
displacing
k
k
k
k
M
) / (
) / (
12/1/2011
52
I. Objective: provide the injection fluid with the
maximum possible contact with the crude oil system
II. Strategies: convert existing production wells to
injection wells, or drill infill injection wells
III. Factors that need to be considered:
Reservoir heterogeneity and directional permeability
Direction of formation fractures
Availability of the injection fluid (gas or water)
Desired and anticipated flood life
Maximum oil recovery
Well spacing, productivity, and injectivity
Flooding Patterns
Injection Wells Placement Requirements:

1. Take advantage of directional permeability,
fractures, dip,etc
2. Provide sufficient fluid injection rate to yield the
desired production rate
3. Maximize recovery with minimum production of
the injected fluid
4. In most cases, require a minimum of new wells
(usually; the target field has been developed)
12/1/2011
53
16 wells per section (1 sq-mile)
5280 ft
Well Spacing
40-acre for oil wells
160-320 ac for gas wells
Leases are divided into square miles and quarter square miles

Essentially four types of well arrangements are used in fluid
injection projects:

Irregular injection patterns
Peripheral injection patterns
Regular injection patterns
Crestal and basal injection patterns
106
12/1/2011
54
Could be caused by:
a) a planned, irregular pattern of vertical wells
b) irregular surface or subsurface topology
c) inclined wells
d) faulting
e) localized variations in porosity or
permeability
1- Irregular Injection Patterns
11/21/2011
2- Peripheral Injection Patterns

In peripheral flooding, the injection wells are located at the
external boundary of the reservoir and the oil is displaced
toward the interior of the reservoir, as shown below
108
injector
Producer
12/1/2011
55
Forms of Peripheral and Central Flooding Patterns
1. Relatively small number of injectors compared with producers.
Generally yield maximum oil recovery with minimum produced
water.
2. Significant water Production can be delayed until only the last row
of producers remains.
3. Results from peripheral flooding are more difficult to predict than
other patterns.
4. For a successful peripheral flood, k must be large enough to
permit the movement of the injected water at the desired rate
over the distance of several well spacing from injection wells to
the last line of producers.
5. Because of the unusually small number of injectors compared with
the number of producers, it takes a long time for the injected
water to fill up the reservoir gas space. The result is a delay in the
field response to the flood
6. Injection rates are generally a problem because the injection
wells continue to push the water greater distances.

Characteristics of the Peripheral Flood:
12/1/2011
56
3- Regular Injection Patterns

Due to the fact that oil leases are divided into square miles and quarter
square miles, fields are developed in a very regular pattern. A wide variety of
injection-production well arrangements have been used in injection projects.
The most common patterns are:
a) Direct line drive.
b) Staggered line drive.
c) Five spot.
d) Seven spot.
e) Nine spot.
111
3- Regular Injection Patterns
Seven-Spot
Direct Line
Drive
Staggered Line Drive
The patterns termed inverted have only one injection well per
pattern. This is the difference between normal and inverted well
arrangements.

12/1/2011
57
113
A. Direct line drive.
The lines of injection and production are directly opposed to each other.
The pattern is characterized by two parameters:
a = distance between wells of the same type
d = distance between lines of injectors and producers.
B. Staggered line drive.
The wells are in lines as in the direct line, but the injectors and producers
are no longer directly opposed but laterally displaced by a distance of a/2.
C. Five spot.
This is a special case of the staggered line drive in which the distance
between all like wells is constant, i.e., a = 2d. Any four injection wells thus
form a square with a production well at the center.
D. Seven spot.
The injection wells are located at the corner of a hexagon with a production
well at its center.
E. Nine spot.
This pattern is similar to that of the five spot but with an extra injection well
drilled at the middle of each side of the square. The pattern essentially
contains eight injectors surrounding one producer.

4- Crestal and Basal Injection Patterns
In Crestal Injection, as the name implies, the injection is through wells
located at the top of the structure. Gas injection projects typically use
a crestal injection pattern. Traditionally; a combination of Crestal and
Basal Injection (injection at the bottom of the structure) are used to
improve sweep efficiency. Many water-injection projects use basal
injection patterns with additional benefits being gained from gravity
segregation.
12/1/2011
58
SWEEP EFFICIENCIES
Areal Sweep Efficiency E
A

Vertical Sweep Efficiency E
V

Displacement Sweep Efficiency E
D

11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
Recovery Performance
Recovery Performance of an IOR Flood is based
On:
1. Displacement Efficiency E
D

2. Areal Sweep Efficiency E
A

3. Vertical Sweep Efficiency E
V

Implicitly input to simulation models
in a form of a number of
Zonation or layering system
11/21/2011
12/1/2011
59
Cumulative Oil Production:
N
P
= N
s
E
A
E
V
E
D

Recovery Factor:
RF=(N
P
/N
s
) = E
A
E
V
E
D

Volumetric Sweep Efficiency:
E
vol
= E
A
E
V

Oil Recovery Equations for Any
IOR Process
The displacement efficiency E
D

is the fraction of movable oil that has been
displaced from the swept zone at any given time or
pore volume injected. Because an immiscible gas
injection or waterflood will always leave behind
some residual oil, E
D
will always be less than 1.0.

oi
o oi
D
S
S S
E

=
12/1/2011
60
Areal Sweep Efficiency:
The areal sweep efficiency E
A

is the fractional area of the pattern that is swept by the
displacing fluid. The major factors determining areal sweep are:

a) Fluid mobilities
b) Pattern type
c) Areal heterogeneity
d) Total volume of fluid injected

Area Total
A
E
A
=
A
Swept Area
A
11/21/2011
Line Drive
K
x

K
y

5-Spot
K
x

K
y

12/1/2011
61
The vertical sweep efficiency E
V

is the fraction of the vertical section of the pay zone that is contacted by
injected fluids. The vertical sweep efficiency is primarily a function of:

a) Vertical heterogeneity
b) Degree of gravity segregation
c) Fluid mobilities
d) Total volume injection
Vertical Sweep Efficiency
Area Section Cross
A
E
V
=
The problem is
its defined by the USER;
5,10,,25-layer system !!!!
A
k
1

k
2

k
3

k
4

A
11/21/2011
Volumetric Sweep Efficiency = E
A
E
V

Volumetric Sweep Efficiency
E
V

E
A

S
w
e
p
t

a
r
e
a

Swept area
12/1/2011
62
Displacement Sweep Efficiency
Areal Sweep Efficiency
In general, reservoir heterogeneity has more
influence than any other factor on the
performance of a secondary or tertiary injection
project. The most important two types of
heterogeneity affecting sweep efficiencies (E
V

and E
A
) are:

The Reservoir Vertical Heterogeneity; and
The Reservoir Areal Heterogeneity.

12/1/2011
63

Vertical Heterogeneity

Stratification is by far the most significant parameter influencing
the vertical sweep and in particular its degree of variation in the
vertical direction; i.e. permeability variation V

Water injected into a stratified system will preferentially enter the
layers of highest permeability (thief zone s are major problems)
and consequently, a significant fraction of the less-permeable zones
will remain unflooded.

Operators spend millions of dollars coring, logging, and drilling
appraisal wells, all of which permits direct observation of vertical
heterogeneity. Therefore, if the data are interpreted correctly, it
should be possible to quantify the vertical sweep E
V
quite
accurately; however; determining optimum number of layers for
simulation could be a problem (fine to coarse)
Areal Heterogeneity

Areal heterogeneity includes areal variation in formation
properties and geometrical factors; such as:

1. position and nature of sealing faults
2. boundary conditions due to the presence of an aquifer
or gas cap.
3. direction of fractures
4. Principle axis of permeability k
x
& k
y

5. Porosity, permeability, and net thickness variations

Areally, matters are much more uncertain since methods of
defining heterogeneity are indirect

12/1/2011
64
11/21/2011
All three efficiency factors (i.e., E
D
, E
A
,
and E
V
) are variables that increase during
the flood and reach maximum values at
the economic limit of the injection project.

11/21/2011
Simple Equation: N
P
= N
s
E
A
E
V
E
D
; What is the problem
then?

Understanding Sweep Efficiencies
And Oil Recovery
E
V

E
A

S
w
e
p
t

a
r
e
a

Swept area
! ! ! of functions are , ,
s
V A D
S E E E
12/1/2011
65
I. DISPLACEMENT EFFICIENCY
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
I. DISPLACEMENT EFFICIENCY

Displacement efficiency is the fraction of movable oil that has been recovered from
the swept zone at any given time. Mathematically, the displacement efficiency is
expressed as:
flood of start at oil of volume
volume oil remaining flood of start at oil of volume
=
D
E
( ) ( )
( )
|
|
.
|
\
|
|
|
.
|
\
|
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
|
|
.
|
\
|
|
|
.
|
\
|
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
oi
oi
o
o
oi
oi
oi
oi
o
o
oi
oi
D
B
S
B
S
B
S
B
S
Volume Pore
B
S
Volume Pore
B
S
Volume Pore
E
wi
w wi
oi
o oi
D
S
S S
S
S S
E
=
1
) 1 ( ) 1 (
Assuming constant B
o

wi
wi w
D
S
S S
E
=
1
average remaining oil &water saturation in the swept area
12/1/2011
66
11/21/2011
Class Problem

A saturated oil reservoir is under consideration to be waterflooded
immediately after drilling and completion. Core analysis tests indicate
that the initial and residual oil saturations are 70 and 35%, respectively.
Assuming that B
o
will remain constant throughout, calculate:

1- The displacement efficiency when the oil saturation is reduced
to 65, 60, 55, 50, and 40%

2- Maximum displacement efficiency that can be achieved during the
project life

3- The displacement efficiency under miscible displacement with an
estimated S
orm
of 10%;
11/21/2011
Last example shows that E
D
will continually increase with
increasing water saturation in the reservoir. The problem, of
course, lies with developing an approach for determining
the increase in the average water saturation in the swept
area as a function of cumulative water injected (or injection
time), i.e:

Buckley and Leverett (1942) developed a well established
theory, called the frontal displacement theory, which provides
the basis for establishing such a relationship. This classic
theory consists of two equations:

1. Fractional flow equation
2. Frontal advance equation
wi
wi w
D
S
S S
E
=
1
12/1/2011
67
Fractional flow equation
Based on:
1) Water Cut f
w

2) Darcys Equation
Rights Reserved
11/21/2011
w o
t
w
o w
w
w
f f
q
q
q q
q
f
=
=
+
=
1
Water and Oil Cut
12/1/2011
68
11/21/2011
L
p p k A
q
p p
k A
L q
p
k A
x q
p
k A
x q
x
p k A
q
P
p
L
) (
) (
2 1
1 2
0
2
1
=
c
= c
c
= c
(
c
c
=
} }
Darcys Equation
L
p
1

p
2

11/21/2011
( )
(
c
c
= o
sin g
x
p k A
q
Darcys Equation & Water Cut

( ) o
sin : Flow Oil

o
o
o
o o
g
x
p
k A
q
c
c
=
( ) o
sin : Flow Water

w
w
w
w w
g
x
p
k A
q
c
c
=
12/1/2011
69
11/21/2011
( ) ( ) o

sin
o w
w o
o
ow o
w
w w
g
x
p
x
p
k A
q
k A
q
|
.
|
\
|
c
c
c
c
=
w o c
p p p = : Pressure Capillary
x
p
x
p
x
p
w o c
c
c
c
c
=
c
c
( )
t w o t w w
q f q and q f q = = 1
( )
o
w
w
o
c
t o
o
w
k
k
g
x
p
q
A k
f
+
(
A
c
c
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
=
1
sin 1
Developing the Fractional Flow Equation:
Step 1:
Step 2:
Step 3:
11/21/2011
( )
o
w
w
o
c
t o
o
w
k
k
x
p
q
A k
f
+
(
A
c
c
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
=
1
sin 433 . 0
001127 . 0
1
( )
( )
o
w
rw
ro
c
w o
ro
w
k
k
x
p
i
A k k
f
+
(
A
c
c
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
=
1
sin 433 . 0
001127 . 0
1
Noting that the relative permeability ratios k
ro
/k
rw
=k
o
/k
w
and the total
flow rate q
t
is essentially equal to the water injection rate, i.e. i
w
= q
t
,
the density difference = (
w

o
) in g/cm
3

12/1/2011
70
( )
o
w
w
o
c
t o
o
w
k
k
g
x
p
q
A k
f
+
(
A
c
c
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
=
1
sin 1
FOCUS FOCUS FOCUS
f
o
= 1 - f
w

That is at ANY POSITION IN THE RESERVOIR,
i.e. ANY DISTANCE FROM THE INJECTION WELL
11/21/2011
( )
( )
o
s
rs
ro
c
s o
ro
s
k
k
x
p
i
A k k
f
+
(
A
c
c
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
=
1
sin 433 . 0
001127 . 0
1
the density difference = (
s

o
) in g/cm
3

Water, Gas, or Solvent Injection:
12/1/2011
71
11/21/2011
The effect capillary pressure is usually neglected
because the capillary pressure gradient is generally
small and thus,
( )
( ) ( ) | |
o
w
rw
ro
o w
w o
ro
w
k
k
i
A k k
f
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
1
sin 433 . 0
001127 . 0
1
( )
( ) ( ) | |
o
D
rD
ro
o D
D o
ro
D
k
k
i
A k k
f
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
1
sin 433 . 0
001127 . 0
1
Similarly for ANY Type of Displacing Fluid:
the density difference (
w

o
) in g/cm
3

The shape of the water cut versus water saturation curve is
characteristically S-shaped, as shown below
Gas-Oil
Oil-Water
12/1/2011
72
f
o
= 1 f
w
The above expression indicates that during the displacement of oil by
waterflood, an increase in f
w
at any point in the reservoir will cause a
proportional decrease in f
o
and oil mobility. Therefore, the objective is to
select the proper injection scheme that could possibly reduce the water
fractional flow. This can be achieved by investigating the effect of:

1. the injected water viscosity
2. formation dip angle, and
3. water-injection rate on the water cut.
( )
( ) ( ) | |
o
w
rw
ro
o
w
rw
ro
o w
w o
ro
w
k
k
G
k
k
i
A k k
f
+

=
+
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
1
1
1
sin 433 . 0
001127 . 0
1
In general; any influences that cause the fractional flow curve to shift
upward (i.e., increase in f
w
or f
g
) will result in a less efficient displacement
process. It is essential, therefore, to determine the effect of various component
parts of the fractional flow equation on the displacement efficiency:
S
w

f
w

r
e
a
s
o
n

i.e:
1. Water & Oil viscosities
2. Wettability
3. Injection rate i
w

4. Updip or downdip injection
( )
( ) ( ) | |
o
w
rw
ro
o
w
rw
ro
o w
w o
ro
w
k
k
G
k
k
i
A k k
f
+

=
+
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
1
1
1
sin 433 . 0
001127 . 0
1
We need to increase G!
12/1/2011
73
S
w

f
w

( )
( ) ( ) | |
o
w
rw
ro
o w
w o
ro
w
k
k
i
A k k
f
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
1
sin 433 . 0
001127 . 0
1
We want to reduce f
w


1- Effect of Water Viscosity
( )
( ) ( ) | |
o
w
rw
ro
o w
w o
ro
w
k
k
i
A k k
f
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
1
sin 433 . 0
001127 . 0
1
w
= 0.5 cp
w
= 10 cp
w
= 5 cp
w
= 2 cp
w
= 1 cp
Objective is to reduce f
w

12/1/2011
74
2- Effect of Oil Viscosity of f
w

( )
( ) ( ) | |
o
w
rw
ro
o w
w o
ro
w
k
k
i
A k k
f
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
1
sin 433 . 0
001127 . 0
1
w

11/21/2011
3- Effect of Wettability
11/21/2011
w

12/1/2011
75
4- Combined Effect of Wettability and Oil Viscosity
( )
( ) ( ) | |
o
w
rw
ro
o w
w o
ro
w
k
k
i
A k k
f
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
1
sin 433 . 0
001127 . 0
1
5- Effect of Dip Angle & Injection Rate
( )
( ) ( ) | |
o
w
rw
ro
o w
w o
ro
w
k
k
i
A k k
f
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
1
sin 433 . 0
001127 . 0
1
( )
Y
i
X
f
w
w
+
(
=
1
sin
1
o
a) Injection Well is Located Downdip:
sin() is positive when injecting downdip indicating a more efficient performance
is obtained. This improvement is due to the fact that the term [X sin()/i
w
] will
always remain positive, which leads to a decrease (downward shift) in the f
w
curve.

Injection Rate:
The fractional flow equation also reveals that a lower water-injection rate i
w
is
desirable since the nominator {1 [X sin()/i
w
]} will decrease with a lower
injection rate i
w
, resulting in an overall downward shift in the f
w
curve.
Sin() > 0
12/1/2011
76
b) Injection Well is Located Updip:
sin() is negative. When the oil is displaced downdip (i.e., injection well is located
updip), the term [X sin()/i
w
] will always remain negative and, therefore, the
numerator of fractional flow equation will be 1+[X sin()/i
w
], i.e.:
( )
Y
i
X
f
w
w
+
(
+
=
1
sin
1
o
( )
( ) ( ) | |
o
w
rw
ro
o w
w o
ro
w
k
k
i
A k k
f
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
1
sin 433 . 0
001127 . 0
1
Injection Rate:
which causes an increase (upward shift) in the f
w
curve. It is beneficial, therefore,
when injection wells are located at the top of the structure to inject the water at a
higher injection rate to improve the displacement efficiency.
Sin() < 0
( )
Y
i
X
f
w
w
+
(
=
1
sin
1
o
Sin() > 0
12/1/2011
77
Water Cut f
w
>1 !!!!! How and Why?
Water Cut f
w
>1 !!!!!!!! How?
Counter Flow IN THE RESERVOIR
11/21/2011
Y
i
C
f
w
w
+
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
=
1
1
( )
Y
i
X
f
w
w
+
(
+
=
1
sin
1
o
Sin() < 0
( )
( ) ( ) | |
o
w
rw
ro
o w
w o
ro
w
k
k
i
A k k
f
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
1
sin 433 . 0
001127 . 0
1
Sin() < 0
Rights Reserved
i
w
is low
if
(C/i
w
) > Y
f
w
> 1
12/1/2011
78
11/21/2011
Class Problem
Use the relative permeability as shown in the next slide to plot the
fractional flow curve for a linear reservoir system with the following
properties:
Dip angle = 0
Absolute permeability = 50 md
Bo = 1.20 bbl/STB, B
w
= 1.05 bbl/STB
o
= 45 lb/ft3;
w
= 64.0 lb/ft3
Cross-sectional area A = 25,000 ft
2
Perform the calculations for the following values of oil and water
viscosities:

w
= 0.5, 1.0, 5, and 10 cp with a constant
o
= 5 cp

S
w

K
r

12/1/2011
79
11/21/2011
Class Problem:

The linear system in last example is under consideration
for a waterflooding project with a water injection rate of
1000 bbl/day.; which has the following characterization:
Absolute permeability = 50 md
B
o
= 1.20 bbl/STB, B
w
= 1.05 bbl/STB
o
= 45 lb/ft3;
w
= 64.0 lb/ft3
Cross-sectional area A = 25,000 ft
2

The oil viscosity is considered constant at 1.0 cp.
Calculate and PLOT the fractional flow curve for the
reservoir dip angles of: 10, 20, and 30, assuming:

updip displacement
downdip displacement

11/21/2011
Surface and Reservoir Water Cut
In waterflooding calculations, the reservoir water cut f
w
and the wateroil
ratio WOR are both traditionally expressed in two different units: bbl/bbl and
STB/STB. The interrelationships that exist between these two parameters
are conveniently presented below:

Q
o
= oil flow rate, STB/day q
o
= oil flow rate, bbl/day
Q
w
= water flow rate, STB/day q
w
= water flow rate, bbl/day
f
ws
= surface water cut, STB/STB f
w
= reservoir water cut, bbl/bbl

WOR
s
= surface wateroil ratio, STB/STB
WOR
r
= reservoir wateroil ratio, bbl/bbl

12/1/2011
80
11/21/2011
Surface and Reservoir Water Cut
In waterflooding calculations, the reservoir water cut f
w
and the wateroil
ratio WOR are both traditionally expressed in two different units: bbl/bbl and
STB/STB. The interrelationships that exist between these two parameters
are conveniently presented below:

1) Reservoir f
wr
Reservoir WOR
r
Relationship:

1 ) (
) (
+
=
+
=
o
w
o
w
o w
w
wr
q
q
q
q
q q
q
f
1 +
=
r
r
wr
WOR
WOR
f
wr
wr
wr
r
f
f
f
WOR
=
1
1
1
1
2) Reservoir f
wr
Surface WOR
s
Relationship
o w
o
w
w
o
w
o o w w
w w
o w
w
wr
B B
Q
Q
B
Q
Q
B Q B Q
B Q
q q
q
f
+
=
+
=
+
=
) (
) (
o s w
s w
wr
B WOR B
WOR B
f
+
=
) 1 (
) 1
1
(
wr w
wr o
wr
w
o
s
f B
f B
f
B
B
WOR
=
11/21/2011
3) Reservoir WOR
r
Surface WOR
s
Relationship:

o
w
o
w
o o
w w
o
w
r
B
B
Q
Q
B Q
B Q
q
q
WOR
) (
= = =
( ) ) (
o
w
s r
B
B
WOR WOR =
( ) ) (
w
o
r s
B
B
WOR WOR =
4) Surface f
ws
Surface WOR
s
Relationship:

1 ) (
) (
+
=
+
=
o
w
o
w
o w
w
ws
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q Q
Q
f
1 +
=
s
s
ws
WOR
WOR
f
5) Surface f
ws
Reservoir f
w
Relationship:

o
w
w
o
ws
B
f
B
B
f
+
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
1
1
12/1/2011
81
11/21/2011
The fractional flow equation, as discussed in the previous
section, is used to determine the water cut f
w
at any point
in the reservoir, assuming that the water saturation at the
point is known. The question, however, is how to
determine the water saturation at this particular point.

The answer is to use the frontal advance equation. The
frontal advance equation is designed to determine the
water saturation profile in the reservoir at any give time
during water injection.
Frontal Advance Theory
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
82
11/21/2011
Frontal Advance Equation

Buckley and Leverett (1942) presented what is recognized as the basic equation for
describing two-phase, immiscible displacement in a linear system. The equation is derived
based on developing a material balance for the displacing fluid as it flows through any
given element in the porous media:

Volume entering the element Volume leaving the element = change in fluid volume

Consider a differential element of porous media, as shown below, having a
differential length dx, an area A, and a porosity . During a differential time
period dt, the total volume of water entering the element is given by:
11/21/2011
Consider a differential element of porous media, as shown above, having a differential
length dx, an area A, and a porosity | . During a differential time period dt, the
total volume of water entering the element is given by:

Volume of water entering the element = q
t
f
w
dt

The volume of water leaving the element has differentially smaller water cut f
w
- df
w

and given by:

Volume of water leaving the element = q
t
(f
w
df
w
) dt

Subtracting the above two expressions gives the accumulation of the water volume
within the element in terms of the differential changes of the saturation df
w
:
q
t
f
w
dt q
t
(f
w
df
w
) dt = A| (dx) (dS
w
)/5.615
Simplifying:
q
t
df
w
dt = A | (dx) (dS
w
)/5.615
f
w
=q
w
/q
t

12/1/2011
83
11/21/2011
( )
( )
Sw
w
w
inj
Sw
Sw
w
w
w
Sw
dS
df
A
W
x
dS
df
A
t i
x
|
|
.
|
\
|
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
|
|
.
|
\
|
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
|
|
615 . 5
: or
615 . 5
The Frontal Advance Equation
11/21/2011
Water Saturation at the Front S
wf

Experimental core waterflood data confirmed that there is a distinct front, or
shock front, at which the water saturation abruptly increases from S
wc
to S
wf
.
Behind the flood front; there is a gradual increase in saturations from S
wf
up to
the maximum value of 1-S
or.
Therefore, the saturation S
wf
is called the water
saturation at the front or alternatively as the water saturation of the stabilized
zone.

S
wc

S
wf

1-S
or

S
wc

Stabilized Zone
Non-Stabilized Zone
12/1/2011
84
11/21/2011
Welge (1952) showed that by drawing a straight line from S
wc
(or from S
wi
if
it

is different from S
wc
) tangent to the fractional flow curve, the saturation
value at the tangent point is equivalent to that at the front S
wf
. The
coordinate of the point of tangency represents also the value of the water
cut at the leading edge of the water front f
wf
.

Important to Remember:
f
wf
is the water cut at the front
(Leading Edge)
S
wf
is the water saturation
at the front (Leading Edge)
11/21/2011
From the above discussion, the water saturation profile at any given
time t
1
can be easily developed as follows:

Step 1. Ignoring the capillary pressure term, construct the fractional
flow curve, i.e. f
w
vs. S
w
.

Step 2. Draw a straight-line tangent from S
wi
to the curve.

Step 3. Identify the point of tangency and read off the values of S
wf

and f
wf
.

Step 4. Calculate graphically the slope of the tangent as (df
w
/dS
w
)
Swf
.

Step 5. Calculate the distance of the leading edge of the water front
from the injection well by applying:

Water Saturation Profile
( )
Swf
w
w w
Swf
dS
df
A
t i
x
|
|
.
|
\
|
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
|
1
615 . 5
12/1/2011
85
11/21/2011
Step 6. Select several values for water saturation S
w
greater
than S
wf
and determine (df
w
/dS
w
)
Sw
by graphically drawing a
tangent to the f
w
curve at each selected water saturation
Step 7. Calculate the distance from the injection well to each selected
saturation by applying:
( )
Sw
w
w w
Sw
dS
df
A
t i
x
|
|
.
|
\
|
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
|
1
615 . 5
11/21/2011
Step 8. Establish the water saturation profile after t
1
, days by plotting
results obtained in step 7.

Step 9. Select a new time t
2
and repeat steps 5 through 7 to
generate a family of water saturation profiles as shown schematically
below
S
wc

S
wf

1-S
or

S
wc

Water saturation profile as a function of time and distance
t
2
t
n
t
1

12/1/2011
86
11/21/2011
NOTICE
When constructing the water saturation
profile, it should be noted that there is
no water saturation with a value less
than S
wf
exists behind the water the
leading edge of the water bank.
11/21/2011
Important Approach:
Some erratic values of (df
w
/dS
w
)
Sw
might result when
determining the slope graphically at different saturations. A
better way is determine the derivative mathematically by
recognizing that the relative permeability ratio (k
ro
/k
rw
) can be
expressed by:

w
S b
rw
ro
e a
k
k
=
Notice that the slope b in the above expression has a negative
value.
The above expression can be substituted in fractional flow
equation, to give:

w
S b
o
w
w
e a
f
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
=
1
1
12/1/2011
87
11/21/2011
The derivative of (df
w
/dS
w
)
Sw
may be obtained mathematically by
differentiating the above equation with respect to S
w
, to give:

2
1
(
(
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
|
|
.
|
\
|
w
w
bS
o
w
bS
o
w
Sw
w
w
e a
e b a
dS
df
( )
Sw
w
w
w
Sw
dS
df
A
t i
x
|
|
.
|
\
|
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
|
615 . 5
2
1
615 . 5
) (
(
(
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
|
|
.
|
\
|
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
w
w
bS
o
w
bS
o
w
w
Sw
e a
e b a
A
t i
x
|
11/21/2011
Class Problem:
Given the following data is available for a linear-reservoir system:

S
w
0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75
k
ro
/k
rw
30.23 17.00 9.56 5.38 3.02 1.70 0.96 0.54 0.30 0.17 0.10
Oil formation volume factor B
o
= 1.25 bbl/STB
Water formation volume factor B
w
= 1.02 bbl/STB
Formation thickness h = 20 ft
Cross-sectional area A = 26,400 ft.
Porosity | = 25%
Injection rate i
w
= 900 bbl/day
Distance between producer and injector L = 600 ft.
Oil viscosity
o
= 2.0 cp
Water viscosity
w
= 1.0 cp
Dip angle o = 0
Connate water saturation S
wc
= 20%
Initial water saturation S
wi
= 20%
Residual oil saturation S
or
= 20%

Calculate and plot the water saturation profile after 60, 100, 120, 200 and 240 days.
12/1/2011
88
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
Understanding the Frontal Advance
Theory & its Applications
11/21/2011
Swf
w
w
BT w
dS
df
t i V P
A L
|
|
.
|
\
|
= = .
615 . 5
|
( )
iBT
Swf
w
w
BT w iBT
Q V P
dS
df
V P
t i W ) . (
.
=
|
|
.
|
\
|
= =
( )
Swf
w
w
iBT
iBT
dS
df V P
W
Q
|
|
.
|
\
|
= =
1
. 4- P.V Injected at B.T
2- Time to B.T:
3- Cum. Water Injected at B.T:
( )
Swf
w
w w
BT
dS
df i
V P
t
|
|
.
|
\
|
(
=
1 .
1- at B.T:
Swf
w
w BT w
Swf
dS
df
A
t i
L x
|
|
.
|
\
|
|
|
.
|
\
|
= =
|
615 . 5
) (
12/1/2011
89
11/21/2011
Class Problem:

Using the data given in last class problem, calculate:

time, to breakthrough
calculate cumulative water injected at breakthrough
calculate total pore volumes of water injected at B.T

11/21/2011
Average Water Saturation at B.T
12/1/2011
90
11/21/2011
Average Water Saturation at B.T
let us exam the following important expression:
( )
iBT
Swf
w
w
iBT
Q V P
dS
df
V P W .
1
) . ( =
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
If the tangent to the fractional flow curve is extrapolated to f
w
= 1 with a
corresponding water saturation of S
w
*
,
then the slope of the tangent can be
calculated numerically as:

wi w
Swf
w
w
S S dS
df
=
|
|
.
|
\
|
*
0 1
( ) ( ) ( )
iBT wi
wBT
iBT
Q V P S S V P W . . = =
Combining the above two expressions,
gives:

( ) ( ) ( )
iBT wi w iBT
Q V P S S V P W . .
*
= =
Or:
11/21/2011
One more time, Key Definitions
S
wf
is the water saturation at the
front (Leading Edge)
Average water Saturation
at B.T
f
wf
is the water cut
at the front (Leading
Edge) wf
wf
bS
o
w
bS
o
w
wi
wBT
e b a
e a
S S
|
|
.
|
\
|
(
(
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
=
2
1
12/1/2011
91
11/21/2011
There are two important points that must be considered when determining
average water saturation at S
wBT
and cumulative water injected at B.T :

Point 1. When drawing the tangent, the line must be originated from the
initial water saturation if it is different from the connate water
saturation.

S
wf

wf
wf
bS
o
w
bS
o
w
wi
wBT
e b a
e a
S S
|
|
.
|
\
|
(
(
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
=
2
1
11/21/2011
Point 2. When calculating cumulative water injected at B.T; the Areal
Sweep Efficiency E
A
and Vertical Sweep Efficiency E
V
must be
accounted for, as:

( )( )
VBT ABT wi wBT iBT
E E S S V P W = .
( )
VBT ABT iBT iBT
E E Q V P W . =
12/1/2011
92
11/21/2011
At Breakthrough
It should be noted that the average water saturation in the swept area
would remain constant with an average S
wBT
until breakthrough occurs. At
the time of breakthrough, the flood front saturation S
wf
reaches the
producing well and the water cut increases suddenly from zero to f
wf
. At
breakthrough, S
wf
and f
wf
are designated as S
wBT
and f
wBT
.

Average water saturation
11/21/2011
After Breakthrough
After breakthrough, the water saturation and the water cut at
the producing well gradually increases with continuous
injection of water. Traditionally, the produced well is
designated as well 2 and, therefore, the water saturation and
water cut at the producing well are denoted as S
w2
and f
w2
,
respectively.
1
2
12/1/2011
93
Waterflooding Performance
Performance Calculations are divided into two
Stages:

A. To Breakthrough
B. After Breakthrough
Rights Reserved
11/30/2011
Recovery Performance to Breakthrough

Step 1. Draw tangent to the fractional flow curve as originated from S
wi
and
determine:
1) Point of tangency with the coordinate (S
wf
, f
wf
) and slope of the line

2) Average water saturation at breakthrough by extending the tangent
line to f
w
= 1.0, or by applying:

wf
wf
bS
o
w
bS
o
w
wi
wBT
e b a
e a
S S
|
|
.
|
\
|
(
(
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
=
2
1
2
1
(
(
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
|
|
.
|
\
|
wf
wf
bS
o
w
bS
o
w
Swf
w
w
e a
e b a
dS
df
12/1/2011
94
Step 2. Calculate pore volumes of water injected at breakthrough by
using:
) (
) (
1
wi
wBT
Swf
w
w
iBT
S S
dS
df
Q = =
wf
wf
S b
o
w
S b
o
w
iBT
e b a
e a
Q
|
|
.
|
\
|
(
(
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
=
2
1
Or equivalently:
11/30/2011
Step 3. Assuming E
A
and E
V
are 100%, calculate cumulative water
injected at breakthrough by applying:
( ) ( )
wi wBT iBT
S S V P W = . ( )
iBT iBT
Q V P W . =
Step 4. Calculate the displacement efficiency at breakthrough by applying
wi
wi
wBT
DBT
S
S S
E

=
1
Step 5. Calculate cumulative oil production at breakthrough from
( )
DBT S
BT
p
E N N =
Step 6. Assuming a constant water injection rate, calculate time to
breakthrough from :
w
iBT
BT
i
W
t =
W
P
= 0
12/1/2011
95
11/30/2011
Step 7. Select several values of injection time less than the breakthrough time,
i.e. t < t
BT
and set:
W
inj
= i
w
t
Q
o
= i
w
/B
o

WOR =0
W
p
=0
o
inj
o
w
p
B
W
B
t i
N = =
Step 8. Calculate the surface water-oil ratio WOR
s
exactly at breakthrough
by using

(
(
=
1
1
wf
w
o
s
f
B
B
WOR
It should be pointed out that ALL calculations abve are based on
the assumption that S
gi
=0, E
A
and E
V
are 100%.
Recovery Performance After
Breakthrough
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
96
11/21/2011
when the water saturation at the producing well reaches any assumed value
S
w2
after breakthrough, the fractional flow curve can be used to determine:

I. Producing water cut f
w2

II. Average water saturation in the reservoir
III. Cumulative water injected in pore volumes, i.e. Q
i

Saturation around wellbore at the Production well
S
w2

12/1/2011
97
Step 1: Assume a value of S
w2
greater than S
wf
and draw a tangent to f
w

curve. the point of tangency corresponds to the well producing
water cut f
w2
, as expressed in bbl/bbl.

Step 2: The saturation at which the tangent intersects f
w
= 1 is the average
water saturation S
w2
in the swept area. Mathematically, the average
water saturation is determined from:

2
2
2 2
1
Sw
w
w
w
w w
dS
df
f
S S
|
|
.
|
\
|

+ =
2
2
2
2
2
2
1 ) 1 (
w
w
bS
o
w
bS
o
w
w
w
w
e b a
e a f
S S
|
|
.
|
\
|
(
(
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
=
Or:
Performance after B.T:
11/21/2011
Step 3: The reciprocal of the slope of the tangent is defined as the cumulative
pore volumes of water injected Q
i
at the time when the water
saturation reaches S
w2
at the producing well, or:
2
2
2
1
w
w
bS
o
w
bS
o
w
i
e b a
e a
Q
|
|
.
|
\
|
(
(
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
=
2
1
Sw
w
w
i
dS
df
Q
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
Remember, the b
is negative
Step 4: The cumulative water injected when the water saturation at the
producing reaches S
w2
is given by:

( )
P w V A wi
w
inj
W B E E S S V P W + = ) ( .
2
12/1/2011
98
11/21/2011
Step 5: For a constant injection rate i
w
, the total time t to inject
W
inj
barrels of water is given by:

w
inj
i
W
t =
11/21/2011
( )
P V A wi
w
inj
W E E S S V P W + = ) ( . 2
|
|
.
|
\
|
(
(
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
(
(
(
(
(
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
) ( ) . (
w
w
w
bS
o
w
bS
o
w
bS
o
w
wi w V A inj
e b a
e a
e b a
S S E E V P W
For Spreadsheet Calculations & Working Equations

2
1
1
2
w
S b
o
w
w
e a
f
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
=
2
2
2
2
2
2
1 ) 1 (
w
w
bS
o
w
bS
o
w
w
w
w
e b a
e a f
S S
|
|
.
|
\
|
(
(
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
=
wf
wf
bS
o
w
bS
o
w
wi
wBT
e b a
e a
S S
|
|
.
|
\
|
(
(
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
=
2
1
12/1/2011
99
11/21/2011
Class problem:

Using the data given in last class problem for the linear reservoir system,
calculate the following when the water saturation at the producing well
reaches 0.70 (i.e., S
w2
= 0.7):
a. reservoir water cut in bbl/bbl
b. surface water cut in STB/STB
c. reservoir wateroil ratio in bbl/bbl
d. surface wateroil ratio in STB/STB
e. average water saturation in the swept area
f. pore volumes of water injected
g. cumulative water injected in bbl

Assume that the areal and vertical sweep efficiency are 100%, i.e., E
A
=
1.0 and E
V
= 1.0.
Just in case its hard for you to go back; same data are shown next
11/21/2011
S
w
0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75
k
ro
/k
rw
30.23 17.00 9.56 5.38 3.02 1.70 0.96 0.54 0.30 0.17 0.10
Oil formation volume factor B
o
= 1.25 bbl/STB
Water formation volume factor B
w
= 1.02 bbl/STB
Formation thickness h = 20 ft
Cross-sectional area A = 26,400 ft.
Porosity | = 25%
Injection rate i
w
= 900 bbl/day
Distance between producer and injector L = 600 ft.
Oil viscosity
o
= 2.0 cp
Water viscosity
w
= 1.0 cp
Dip angle o = 0
Connate water saturation S
wc
= 20%
Initial water saturation S
wi
= 20%
Residual oil saturation S
or
= 20%
12/1/2011
100
11/21/2011

1) Reservoir f
wr
Reservoir WOR
r
Relationship:

1 ) (
) (
+
=
+
=
o
w
o
w
o w
w
wr
q
q
q
q
q q
q
f
1 +
=
r
r
wr
WOR
WOR
f
wr
wr
wr
r
f
f
f
WOR
=
1
1
1
1
2) Reservoir f
wr
Surface WOR
s
Relationship
o w
o
w
w
o
w
o o w w
w w
o w
w
wr
B B
Q
Q
B
Q
Q
B Q B Q
B Q
q q
q
f
+
=
+
=
+
=
) (
) (
o s w
s w
wr
B WOR B
WOR B
f
+
=
) 1 (
) 1
1
(
wr w
wr o
wr
w
o
s
f B
f B
f
B
B
WOR
=
Knowing you; I am sure you forgot
these relationships:
11/21/2011
3) Reservoir WOR
r
Surface WOR
s
Relationship:

o
w
o
w
o o
w w
o
w
r
B
B
Q
Q
B Q
B Q
q
q
WOR
) (
= = =
( ) ) (
o
w
s r
B
B
WOR WOR =
( ) ) (
w
o
r s
B
B
WOR WOR =
4) Surface f
ws
Surface WOR
s
Relationship:

1 ) (
) (
+
=
+
=
o
w
o
w
o w
w
ws
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q Q
Q
f
1 +
=
s
s
ws
WOR
WOR
f
5) Surface f
ws
Reservoir f
w
Relationship:

o
wr
w
o
ws
B
f
B
B
f
+
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
1
1
12/1/2011
101
Oil Recovery Calculations
The main objective of performing oil recovery calculations
is to generate a set of performance curves under a specific
water-injection scenario. A set of performance curves is
defined as the graphical presentation of the time-related oil
recovery calculations in terms of:
Oil production rate, Q
o
Water production rate, Q
w
Surface wateroil ratio, WOR
s
Cumulative oil production, N
p
Recovery factor, RF
Cumulative water production, W
p
Cumulative water injected, W
inj
Water-injection pressure, p
inj

Water-injection rate, i
w

Waterflooding Performance
Rights Reserved
Before breakthrough occurs, the oil recovery calculations are simple when
assuming that no free gas exists at the start of the flood, i.e. S
gi
= 0. The
cumulative oil production is simply equal to the volume of water injected and
no water production during this phase (W
p
= 0 and Q
w
= 0).

Oil recovery calculations after breakthrough are based on determining E
D
at
various assumed values of water saturations at the producing well.
Assuming ; S
gi
=0 ,E
A
,E
V
= 100%; the specific steps of performing
complete oil recovery calculations are composed of three stages:

1) Data preparation
2) Recovery performance to breakthrough
3) Recovery performance after breakthrough

12/1/2011
102
Stage 1: Data Preparation

Step 1. Express the relative permeability data as relative permeability
ratio k
ro
/k
rw
and plot their values versus their corresponding
water saturations on a semi-log scale.

Step 2. Assuming that the resulting plot of relative permeability ratio,
k
ro
/k
rw
vs. S
w
, forms a straight-line relationship, determine
values of the coefficients a and b of the straight line.
Express the straight-line relationship in the form as given
bSw
rw
ro
e a
k
k
=
Step 3. Calculate and plot the fractional flow curve f
w
, allowing for
gravity effects if necessary, but neglecting the capillary pressure
gradient.

Step 4. Select several values of water saturations between S
wf
and (1- S
or
)
and determine the slope (df
w
/dS
w
) at each saturation. The numerical
calculation of each slope as expressed by the following Equation to
provide with consistent values as a function of saturation, or:

2
] ) ( 1 [
) (
) (
2
2
w
w
S b
o
w
S b
o
w
w
w
e a
e b a
dS
df
=
12/1/2011
103
Stage 2. Recovery Performance to Breakthrough

Step 1. Draw tangent to the fractional flow curve as originated from S
wi
and
determine:
1) Point of tangency with the coordinate (S
wf
, f
wf
) and slope of the line

2) Average water saturation at breakthrough by extending the tangent
line to f
w
= 1.0, or by applying:

wf
wf
bS
o
w
bS
o
w
wi
wBT
e b a
e a
S S
|
|
.
|
\
|
(
(
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
=
2
1
2
1
(
(
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
|
|
.
|
\
|
wf
wf
bS
o
w
bS
o
w
Swf
w
w
e a
e b a
dS
df

Step 2. Calculate pore volumes of water injected at breakthrough by
using:
) (
) (
1
wi
wBT
Swf
w
w
iBT
S S
dS
df
Q = =
wf
wf
S b
o
w
S b
o
w
iBT
e b a
e a
Q
|
|
.
|
\
|
(
(
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
=
2
1
Or equivalently:
12/1/2011
104
Step 3. Assuming E
A
and E
V
are 100%, calculate cumulative water
injected at breakthrough by applying:
( ) ( )
wi wBT iBT
S S V P W = . ( )
iBT iBT
Q V P W . =
Step 4. Calculate the displacement efficiency at breakthrough by applying
wi
wi
wBT
DBT
S
S S
E

=
1
Step 5. Calculate cumulative oil production at breakthrough from
( )
DBT S
BT
p
E N N =
Step 6. Assuming a constant water injection rate, calculate time to
breakthrough from :
w
iBT
BT
i
W
t =
W
P
= 0
Step 7. Select several values of injection time less than the breakthrough time,
i.e. t < t
BT
and set:

W
inj
= i
w
t
Q
o
= i
w
/B
o

WOR =0
W
p
=0
o
inj
o
w
p
B
W
B
t i
N = =
s
exactly at breakthrough
by using

(
(
=
1
1
wf
w
o
s
f
B
B
WOR
It should be pointed out that ALL calculations abve are based on
the assumption that S
gi
=0, E
A
and E
V
are 100%.
12/1/2011
105
Recovery Performance After
Breakthrough
Rights Reserved
DO NOT PANIC; let us have some good
Mate, below is ONLY a SUMMARY
S
w2
f
w2
(df
w
/dS
w
) E
D
N
p
Q
i
W
inj
t W
p
WOR
s
Q
o
Q
w

S
wBT
f
wBT
- S
wBT
E
DBT
N
PBT
Q
iBT
W
iBT
t
BT
0 - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
(1 S
or
) 1.0 - - - - - - - - 100% 0 -
2 w
S
2
1
1
2
w
bS
o
w
w
e a
f
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
=
2
] ) ( 1 [
) (
) (
2
2
w
w
S b
o
w
S b
o
w
w
w
e a
e b a
dS
df
=
2
2
2 2
1
w
S
w
w
w
w w
dS
df
f
S S
|
|
.
|
\
|

+ =
wi
wi w
D
S
S S
E
=
1
2
2
1
w
S
w
w
i
dS
df
Q
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
N
P
= N
s
E
D
E
A
E
V

( )
i inj
Q V P W . =
w
inj
i
W
t =
( )( )
w
V A wi w inj
p
B
E E V P S S W
W
.
2

=
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
1
1
2 w
w
o
s
f
B
B
WOR
s w o
w
o
WOR B B
i
Q
+
=
s o w
WOR Q Q =
12/1/2011
106
Stage 3: Recovery Performance after Breakthrough:

The recommended methodology of calculating recovery performance
after breakthrough is based on selecting several values of water
saturations around at the producing well, i.e. S
w2
, and determining the
corresponding average reservoir water saturation for each S
w2
.

Step 1. Select 6 to 8 different values of S
w2
(i.e. S
w
at the producer)
between S
wBT
and (1 S
or
) and determine (df
w2
/dS
w2
) values
corresponding to these S
w2
points.

2
] ) ( 1 [
) (
) (
2
2
w
w
S b
o
w
S b
o
w
w
w
e a
e b a
dS
df
=
Step 2. For each selected value of S
w2
, calculate the corresponding
reservoir water cut and average water saturation from:
2
1
1
2
w
bS
o
w
w
e a
f
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
=
2
2
2 2
1
w
S
w
w
w
w w
dS
df
f
S S
|
|
.
|
\
|

+ =
Step 3. Calculate the displacement efficiency E
D
for each selected value of
S
w2
.

wi
wi w
D
S
S S
E
=
1
2
Step 4. Calculate cumulative oil production N
p
for each selected value of
S
w2
from:

N
P
= N
s
E
D
E
A
E
V

12/1/2011
107
Step 6. Calculate cumulative water injected for each selected value of S
w2

by applying
( )
i inj
Q V P W . =
Notice that E
A
and E
V
are set equal to 100%
Step 7. Assuming a constant water injection rate i
w
, calculate the time
t to inject W
inj
barrels of water by applying
w
inj
i
W
t =
Step 5. Determine pore volumes of water injected Q
i
for each selected
value of S
w2
from
2
1
w
S
w
w
i
dS
df
Q
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
Step 8. Calculate cumulative water production W
P
at any time t from
the material balance equation which states the cumulative water
injected at any time will displace an equivalent volume of oil and
water, or:

( )( )
w
V A wi w inj
p
B
E E V P S S W
W
.
2

=
12/1/2011
108
s
that corresponds to each
value of f
w2
(as determined in step 2) from Equation
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
1
1
2 w
w
o
s
f
B
B
WOR
Step 10. Calculate the oil and water flow rates from the following derived r
elationships:

w w o o w
B Q B Q i + =
Introducing the surface water-oil ratio into the above expression, gives:

w s o o o w
B WOR Q B Q i + =
Solving for Q
o
and Q
w
gives:
s w o
w
o
WOR B B
i
Q
+
=
s o w
WOR Q Q =
Step 11. Above calculations as described in Step 1 through 10 can be
organized in the following tabulated form:

S
w2
f
w2
(df
w
/dS
w
) E
D
N
p
Q
i
W
inj
t W
p
WOR
s
Q
o
Q
w

S
wBT
f
wBT
- S
wBT
E
DBT
N
PBT
Q
iBT
W
iBT
t
BT
0 - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
(1 S
or
) 1.0 - - - - - - - - 100% 0 -
2 w
S
2
1
1
2
w
bS
o
w
w
e a
f
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
=
2
] ) ( 1 [
) (
) (
2
2
w
w
S b
o
w
S b
o
w
w
w
e a
e b a
dS
df
=
2
2
2 2
1
w
S
w
w
w
w w
dS
df
f
S S
|
|
.
|
\
|

+ =
wi
wi w
D
S
S S
E
=
1
2
2
1
w
S
w
w
i
dS
df
Q
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
N
P
= N
s
E
D
E
A
E
V

( )
i inj
Q V P W . =
w
inj
i
W
t =
( )( )
w
V A wi w inj
p
B
E E V P S S W
W
.
2

=
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
1
1
2 w
w
o
s
f
B
B
WOR
s w o
w
o
WOR B B
i
Q
+
=
s o w
WOR Q Q =
12/1/2011
109
Class Problem

The data of previous class problem is reproduced here for convenience:

S
w
0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75
k
ro
/k
ro
30.23 17.00 9.56 5.38 3.02 1.70 0.96 0.54 0.30 0.17 0.10
f
w
0.062 0.105 0.173 0.271 0.398 0.541 0.677 0.788 0.869 0.922 0.956
df
w
/dS
w
0.670 10.84 1.647 2.275 2.759 2.859 2.519 1.922 1.313 0.831 0.501
o
= 2.0 cp
w
= 1.0 cp
B
o
= 1.25 bbl/STB B
w
= 1.02 bbl/STB
| = 25% h = 20 ft
S
wi
= 20% S
or
= 20%
i
w
= 900 bbl/day (P.V) = 775,779 bbl
N
s
= 496,449 STB E
A
= 100%
E
V
= 100%

Predict the waterflood performance to abandonment at a WOR
s
of 45 STB/STB
11/21/2011
II. AREAL SWEEP EFFICIENCY
12/1/2011
110
11/21/2011
II. AREAL SWEEP EFFICIENCY
The areal sweep efficiency EA is defined as the fraction of the total flood pattern
that is contacted by the displacing fluid. It increases steadily with injection from
zero at the start of the flood until breakthrough occurs, after which E
A
continues
to increase at a slower rate.

The areal sweep efficiency depends basically on the following three main factors:

1. Mobility ratio M
2. Flood pattern
3. Cumulative water injected W
inj
4. Pressure distribution between injectors and producers
5. Directional permeability

If directional permeability trends can be identified, injection and production wells
can be arranged to take advantage of the trends to enhance areal sweep
efficiency.
Mobility Ratio M
11/21/2011
( )
( )
( )
( )
w
o
S
ro
S
rw
o
S
ro
o
w
S
rw
w
o
w
wi
wBT
wi
wBT
k
k
M
k
k
M
=
=
=
= =
Fluid displaced
Fluid displacing
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
111
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
Effect of M on Performance
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
112
11/21/2011
Sw Polymer Flooding
With favorable M
Injection
well
Injection
well
Production
well
Production
well
Viscosity Effect on
Conformance and Sweep
Efficiency
( )
( )
w
o
S
ro
S
rw
wi
wBT
k
k
M
= =
Fluid displaced
Fluid displacing
key
w S
S
wi

S
wi

Figure 6-17. Viscous fingering in water flood

displaced
=k
ro
/
o

displacing
=k
rw
/
w

Crude Oil
Injected water
S
wi

S
wi

S
wi

S
wi

w S
w S w S
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
113
225
Mobility Control is a
MUST
1-
2-
3-
mobility of oil
(
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
= =
w
o
ro
rw
o ro
w rw
displaced
displacing
k
k
M
k
k
M
) / (
) / (
possible if ; 0 . 1 s M
11/21/2011
Areal Sweep Prediction Methods

Methods of predicting the areal sweep efficiency are essentially divided
into the following three phases of the flood:
Before breakthrough
At breakthrough
After breakthrough
Phase 1: Areal Sweep Efficiency Before Breakthrough:
The areal sweep efficiency before breakthrough is simply proportional
to the volume of water injected and is given by:
( )( )
wi wBT
inj
A
S S V P
W
E
=
.
12/1/2011
114
11/21/2011
Phase 2: Areal Sweep Efficiency at Breakthrough
M
e M
E
M
ABT
00509693 . 0
30222997 . 0 03170817 . 0
54602036 . 0 + + =
11/21/2011
Phase 3: Areal Sweep Efficiency After Breakthrough
) ( log 633 . 0
iBT
inj
ABT A
W
W
E E + =
) ( ln 2749 . 0
iBT
inj
ABT A
W
W
E E + =
12/1/2011
115
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
11/21/2011
COEFFICIENTS IN AREAL SWEEP
EFFICIENCY CORRELATIONS
Coefficient Five-Spot Direct Line Staggered Line
a
1
-0.2062 -0.3014 -0.2077
a
2
-0.0712 -0.1568 -0.1059
a
3
-0.511 -0.9402 -0.3526
a
4
0.3048 0.3714 0.2608
a
5
0.123 -0.0865 0.2444
a
6
0.4394 0.8805 0.3158
( ) | | ( )
6 5 4 3 2 1
ln ln a a M a f a a M a A
w
+ + + + + =
A
E
A
+
=
1
1
12/1/2011
116
11/21/2011
III. VERTICAL SWEEP EFFICIENCY
E
V

E
v
is based on Permeability Variation
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
117
11/21/2011
V=0.90
V=0.80
V=0.7
0
Impact of V on Recovery Factor
11/21/2011
The vertical sweep efficiency, E
V
, is defined as the fraction of the vertical
section of the pay zone that is the injection fluid. This particular
sweep efficiency depends primarily on:

(1) the mobility ratio and
(2) total volume injected.

As a consequence of the non-uniform permeabilities, any injected fluid will
tend to move through the reservoir with an irregular front. In the more
permeable portions, the injected water will travel more rapidly than in the
less permeable zone.
12/1/2011
118
METHODS OF CACULATING E
V

Stiles Method
Dykstra & Parsons Methods
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
119
11/21/2011
The DykstraParsons Method
Dykstra and Parsons (1950) correlated the vertical sweep efficiency with the following
parameters:
Permeability variation V
Mobility ratio M
Wateroil ratio WOR
r
as expressed in bbl/bbl

The authors presented their correlation in a graphical form for wateroil ratios of 0.1,
0.2, 0.5, 1, 2, 5, 10, 25, 50, and 100 bbl/bbl. Dykstra and Parsons graphical
correlation for a WOR of 50 bbl/bbl.
11/21/2011
x
V M
V WOR
Y
10 ) 137 . 1 8094 . 0 (
) 499 . 2 948 . 18 ( ) 4 . 0 (
+
+
=
6891 . 0 9735 . 0 6453 . 1
2
+ = V V x
12/1/2011
120
11/21/2011
With the coefficients a
1
through a
6
as given by:

a
1
= 0.19862608 a
2
= 0.18147754
a
3
= 0.01609715 a
4
= -4.6226385x10
-3

a
5
= -4.2968246x10
-4
a
6
= 2.7688363x10
-4

Y a
Y
a
Y a Y a Y a a E
V 6
5 3
4
2
3 2 1
) ln(
)] [ln( )] [ln( ) ln( + + + + + =
x
V M
V WOR
Y
10 ) 137 . 1 8094 . 0 (
) 499 . 2 948 . 18 ( ) 4 . 0 (
+
+
=
6891 . 0 9735 . 0 6453 . 1
2
+ = V V x
FUNDAMENTALS OF
EOR
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
121
1) Micellar-Polymer
2) ASP
3) Polymer
4) Others
EOR
Thermal
Miscible Flood Chemical
1) Steam
2) In-situ Combustion
3) Huff-and-Puff
4) Hot Water
5) SAGD
1) CO
2

2) Lean Gas
3) LPG
4) N
2

5) Air
6) Enriched Gas
Planning EOR Projects
Evaluate production Data from the Primary/Secondary
Laboratory PVT/Core Investigation
o Slim Tube
o Swelling
o Core Flood, Simulator matching
Computer Modelling
oVarious operational schemes
oTiming of WAG/Miscibe Flood
oWell patterns,...etc
Pilot Project (could delay field expansion; e.g. Prudhoe Bay)
Data Acquisition During Pilot Flood
oSeparator testing
oCompositional analysis (breakthrough, vaporization)
oTracer survey (very important, layering system, thief zones,..etc)
oGOR,...etc
12/1/2011
122
Types of Displacement
A. Immiscible
B. Partial Miscible
C. Miscible
First Contact Miscibility FCM
Multiple Contact Miscibility MCM

11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
The magnitude of the reduction and mobilization of
residual oil saturation by a secondary recovery or EOR
process is controlled by three major factors, these are:

1. Capillary Number N
C

2. Mobility Ratio M
3. Viscosity-Gravity Ratio G
Controlling Parameters for a Successful
Secondary Recovery/EOR Process
12/1/2011
123
Mobilizing/Reducing the Residual Oil Saturation to Improve
Displacement efficiency is a Strong Function of N
C

force tension l interfacia
force viscous
=
c
N
|
.
|
\
| A
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
L
p
o
k
c
N
o |
1- Capillary Number N
C

Critical N
c

before or
after or
S
S
) (
) (
1.0
0
Range of
Miscible flood
Range of
Waterflood
N
C

12/1/2011
124
Relative permeability curves for water and oil
used at high capillary numbers
Designed to Improve Volumetric sweep efficiency
through ; e,g.:
Polymer: improves
displacing
& Steam: Improves
displaced
(
|
|
.
|
\
|
= = =
w
o
ro
rw
o ro
w rw
displaced
displacing
k
k
k
k
M
) / (
) / (
2- Mobility Ratio M
12/1/2011
125
3- Viscosity-Gravity Ratio G
( )
( ) ( ) | |
o
s
rs
ro
o
s
rs
ro
o s
s o
ro
s
k
k
G
k
k
i
A k k
f
+

=
+
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
1
1
1
sin 433 . 0
001127 . 0
1
S
s

f
s

r
e
a
s
o
n

M=386
M=20
f
w

12/1/2011
126
CHEMICAL FLOOD
All chemical flood methods involve mixing chemical
with water prior to injection and, therefore, these
methods require reservoir characteristics and
conditions that very favorable to water injection ; i.e.:

o Low to moderate oil viscosity
o Moderate to high permeability
o Sufficient oil saturation for developing an oil bank

Chemical EOR Methods Utilize:
Polymers
Surfactants
Alkaline agents
Combinations of such chemicals
ASP (Alkali-Surfactant-Polymer)
flooding
MP (Micellar-Polymer) flooding
12/1/2011
127
China
Venezuela
France
India
Indonesia
USA
Total Number of Projects: 27
Chemical Floods -
CURRENT STATUS WORLDWIDE
China
France
Indonesia
USA
Total oil production: 300,000 B/D
Chemical Floods -
PRODUCTION WORLDWIDE
12/1/2011
128
Comments On Chemical Flood
o Very Sensitive to Oil Prices
o Highly influenced by Chemical Additive Costs
o High Upfront Investments create the Management Fear
Factor for the Technologys Application despite the
Promise of Higher Returns
o EOR Chemical methods; in particular ASP, are PROVEN
TECHNOLOGIES that will Play a Key Role in the Very
Near Future in Mature and Water-flooded Reservoirs
o Current Energy Prices will Likely Lead to a Greater
Viability of Chemical Flood when compared to the Past
Two Decades
11/21/2011
Applicability & Concerns
1. Chemical flooding is used for oil systems that are more viscous than those
oils recovered by gas injection methods but less viscous than systems that
can be economically recovered by thermal methods
2. Adequate injectivity is required since lower mobility fluids are unusually
injected in chemical floods
3. If previously flooded, the chemical flood candidate should have responded
favorably by developing an oil bank
4. Strong water-drive reservoirs should be avoided because the potential for
low remaining oil saturations
5. Gas cap reservoirs are ordinarily avoided since the mobilized oil might re-
saturated the gas cap
6. Formations with high clay contents are undesirable since clays increase
adsorption of the injected chemicals
7. Reservoir brines of moderate salinity with low amount of divalent ions are
preferred since high concentrations interact unfavorably with the injected
chemicals
12/1/2011
129
A. Insufficient description of reservoir geology
Permeability heterogeneities
Excessive clay content
High water saturation
Bottom water or gas cap
Fractures
B. Inadequate understanding of process mechanisms
C. Unavailability of chemicals in large quantities
D. Heavy reliance on unscaled lab experiments
REASONS FOR FAILURE
Rights Reserved
POLYMER FLOOD
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
130
What is Polymer Flood?

Polymer flooding is viewed as an Improved Waterflooding
Technique since it does not typically recover residual oil that
has been trapped in pore spaces and isolated by water.
However, polymer flooding can produce additional oil over that
obtained from waterflooding by improving the sweep efficiency
and increasing the volume of reservoir that is contacted by the
injected fluid.
Most EOR methods are directed to improve displacement
efficiency by reducing residual oil saturation. Polymer flood,
however, is designed to improve sweep efficiency by reducing
the mobility ratio M as defined by
(
|
|
.
|
\
|
= =
w
o
ro
rw
displaced
displacing
k
k
M
12/1/2011
131
Simplified Dykstra and Parsons Method
Fundamentals of Polymer Flood
Polymers when are added to water, even in low
concentrations, will:

a) increases its viscosity
b) reduce the effective permeability to water
resulting in a reduction in the mobility ratio.

12/1/2011
132
a) Polymer Viscosity
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
Figure 6-17. Viscous fingering in water flood
11/21/2011

displaced
=k
ro
/
o

Crude Oil
Injected water
displacing
= k
rw
/
w

12/1/2011
133
Water flooding Polymer flooding
Figure 6-18. Comparison of viscous instability in water and polymer flood
Crude Oil Crude Oil
Injected Water
Polymer Solution
M >> 1 M 1
Rights Reserved
M 1/M E
A
at
Breakthrough
E
A
at 95% water
cut
10 .1 0.35 0.83
2 .5 0.58 0.97
1 1 0.69 0.98
.5 2 0.79 1.00
.25 4 0.90 1.00
12/1/2011
134
Pressure difference (shear Stress)
S
h
e
a
r

R
a
t
e

(
F
l
u
i
d

V
e
l
o
c
i
t
y
)

u
t
= =
rate shear
stress shear
app
Pseudoplastic Fluids polymer solutions are generally classified as
pseudoplastic fluids under most fluid injection and reservoir conditions. These
types of fluids exhibit larger apparent viscosities when flowing at low velocities and
lower apparent viscosity when flowing at high velocities

A
p
p
a
r
e
n
t

V
i
s
c
o
s
i
t
y

Shear Rate (Flow velocity)
Oil
Water
Polymer Solution
12/1/2011
135
Viscosity of the Polymer solution can be
controlled with addition of NacL
12/1/2011
136
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
1
2
1
) ( )] 1 ( 150 [
3 9
017543 . 0

|
.
|
\
| +
=
n
n
orw w P
S k
n
n
K u |
Where:
P
= apparent viscosity of the polymer solution, cp
K = power-law coefficient from the viscometer experimental data cp (sec)
n-1

n = power-law exponent
= porosity, fraction
k
w
= permeability of water, md
s
orw
= residual oil saturation to water, fraction
v = superficial fluid velocity, ft/day

11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
Class problem
The viscometric and core flood data for a polymer flood are given below:
Core data:
k
w
= 17 md
= 0.188
S
orw
= 0.32
Polymer solution data:
Polymer concentration = 200 PPm
Viscosity of brine = 0.84 cp
K = 7.6 cp(sec)
n-1

n = 0.67
Calculate and plot the polymer viscosity at the following superficial fluid velocity;
2.83, 5.67, 11.3, 17.0, 22.7, and 28.3 ft/day

12/1/2011
137
b) Permeability Reduction
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
The Permeability Reduction is essentially caused by the retention of
polymer molecules in the reservoir rock. This is a combination of:

Adsorption of polymer molecules to surface of sand grains
entrapment of polymer molecules in the pore throat

The above combinations process it is not entirely reversible. Thus most of
the polymer (and the benefits it provides) remains in the reservoir long after
polymer injection is stopped and the field is returned to water injection. This
reduction in the water permeability is fairly permanent while the permeability
to oil remains relatively unchanged.

The amount of polymer adsorbed on the rock surface depends on:

o the type and size of the polymer molecules
o polymer concentration
o rock surface properties.
12/1/2011
138
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
Polymer Adsorption:

Polymer molecules adsorb on the rock surface
as a monolayer with the thickness equal to the
diameter of the polymer molecules. Once the
monolayer saturation level is reached, no more
adsorption will occur.

Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
139
A Core Flood is a MUST

The reduction in permeability is measured in
laboratory core flood and results are expressed
in two permeability reduction factors; these are:

Residual Resistance Factor R
rf

Resistance Factor R
f

Residual Resistance Factor R
rf

R
ef
is a laboratory measured property that describes the
reduction of water permeability after polymer flood. Polymer
solutions continue to reduce the permeability of the aqueous
phase even after the polymer solution has been displaced by
brine. The ability of the polymer solution to reduce the
permeability is expressed in property that is called the residual
resistance factor and is defined as ratio of the mobility of the
injected brine before and after the injection of the polymer
solution; i.e.
injection) polymer after (
injection) polymer before (
w
w
rf
R
=
12/1/2011
140
Resistance Factor R
f

The resistance factor R
f
is a property that describes
the reduction in water mobility and is defined as the
ratio of the of the brine mobility to that of the polymer
solution; i.e.:
P P
w w
P
w
f
k
k
R
/
/
= =
Modeling of Polymer Flood
Utilizes the following three functions:
1) Permeability Reduction Factor R
k

2) Viscosity Mixing Parameter
3) Effective Polymer and Water Viscosities
e

All numerical models will use the above three functions in every grid block
(location) to adjust:
a) Effective Permeability of the Polymer Solution k
P

b) Effective Permeability of the Chase Water k
w

c) Viscosity of the Polymer Solution
Pe

d) Viscosity of the Chase Water
we

12/1/2011
141
1- Permeability Reduction Factor R
k

(
(
|
|
.
|
\
|
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
=
(
(
|
|
.
|
\
|
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
=
+
+
k
S S r
w P
w
w
k
S S r
w P
P
p
R
k k
S S
S
k
R
k k
S S
S
k
w P
w P
) (
) (
(
(
|
|
.
|
\
|
|
|
.
|
\
|

+
+ =
r P
w P
wc orw
wc P w
rf k
A
C S
S S
S S S
R R
| 016 . 0
1
) 0 . 1 ( 0 . 1
A
P
= Polymer adsorption ,ugm/gm; S
P
= Polymer saturation
C= Polymer concentration, ppm; = porosity
w
= water density,lb/ft
3
;
r
= rock density, gm/cm
3

) log(
] ) ( 22 . 0 78 . 0 log[ 4
1 &
4 / 1
M
M
M
w
P
+
= = e

Rights Reserved
3- Effective Viscosity
4
4 / 1 4 / 1
) (
22 . 0
) (
78 . 0

(
+ =
P w
m

2- Viscosity Mixing Parameter

|
|
.
|
\
|
=
rf
f
w P
R
R

e e e e

m w we m P Pe

= =
1 1
&
12/1/2011
142
Polymer Injection Process

a) Slug of Polymer Solution
b) Buffer Zone
c) Chase Water
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
Polymer Injection Process

Polymer floods are conducted by sequentially injecting:

a) injected a slug of polymer solution (approximately 25 to
50% of the reservoir pore volume)
b) fresh water buffer zone contains polymer with a decreasing
polymer concentration (a grading or taper)
c) chase water to drive the buffer zone, polymer slug and the
developed oil bank toward the production wells.

12/1/2011
143
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
Grading of the Buffer Zone:

Because the chase water-polymer mobility ratio is unfavorably, the chase
water tends to finger through the polymer slug and gradually dilute the
trailing edge of the slug. To minimize the effect of this unfavorable mobility
ratio, traditionally a fresh water buffer zone contains polymer with a
decreasing polymer concentration that separates the chase water from the
polymer slug.

The grading of the buffer zone solution is designed in a way
that the viscosity of leading edge of the buffer zone is equal to the viscosity
of the polymer slug; while the viscosity of the trailing edge of the buffer
solution is equal to the viscosity of the chase water.

Polymer flooding as a Secondary Recover Process
Production
well
Oil Bank
Connate
water
Water Bank
Oil Bank
Polymer
Slug
Residual Oil
Buffer
Zone
Chase
Water
Injection
Well
Only Oil & Water
Are flowing
Only Oil is
flowing
12/1/2011
144
Polymer Performance

Polymer flooding can yield a significant increase in oil recovery as compared to
conventional water flooding techniques, as shown schematically below:
Time
Oil Recovery
Water Flood
Polymer Flood -
FIELD PERFORMANCE
Sanand Field, India
1989
1991
1993 1995
0
25
50
75
100
125
500
530
560
590
620
650
Projected
EOR OIL
12/1/2011
145
Polymer Grading (Courtenay, France)

Rights Reserved
Polymer Flood Oil Production(Courtenay, France

Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
146
Polymer Flood FIELD PROJECTS
Project Flood Type Formation Polymer Rec., %OIP
1 Taber Manville South Secondary Sandstone PAA 2
2 Pembina " " " 0
3 Wilmington " " " 0
4 East Colinga " " Biopolymer 0
5 Skull Creek South " " PAA 8
6 Skull Creek Newcastle " " " 10
7 Oerrel " " " 23
8 Hankensbuettel " " " 13
9 Owasco " " " 7
10 Vernon " " " 30
11 Northeast Hallsville " Carbonate " 13
12 Hamm " Sandstone " 9
13 Sage Spring Cr. Unit A " " " 1.2
14 West Semlek " " " 5
15 Stewart Ranch " " " 8
16 Kummerfeld " " " 6
17 Huntington Beach " " " 4
18 North Stanley Tertiary " " 1.1
19 Eliasville Caddo Tertiary Carbonate " 1.8
20 North Burbank Tertiary Carbonate " 2.5
Simulator
TA.exe (this is the driver program)
TAREK.exe (The simulator)

Three Files are needed to run the simulator:
TA.dat (Initialization File)
TA.Sim (Simulation File)
TA.out (Output File)

Be SURE to use Notepad when you open
TA.dat & TA.sim (Remember that PLEASE)
292
2006Tarek Ahmed & AssociEtes, Ltd. All Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
147
STEPS TO RUN THE MODEL
Step 1:
1) Click on: TA.exe
2) Select: Initialization
Run
3) Open: TA.dat with
Notepad and Enter
Missing Reservoir Data
4) Click on: Tarek.exe
(this is a MUST STEP)

Step 2:
1) Click on: TA.exe
2) Select: Simulation Run
3) Open: TA.sim this file
contains wells info
4) Click on: Tarek.exe
(this is a MUST STEP)

11/21/2011
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd.
All Rights Reserved
Initialization File: TA.dat
! 3) Reservoir Model Grid Dimensions
! **********************************
10 10 1 ! x,y, and z blocks

! 4) x-direction Grid Block Lengths
! *********************************

! Warning Warning Warning
! ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
! Please, enter below the x-direction grid dimension (length)
! for each grid block. 10 values MUST BE entered :
! *************************************************
10*300

! 5) y-direction Grid Block Lengths
! *********************************

! Warning Warning Warning
! ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
! Please, enter below the y-direction grid dimension (length)
! for each grid block. 10 values MUST BE entered :
! *************************************************
10*300
You enter the data
You enter the data
Each time you see
The Warning message;
you must enter some data
12/1/2011
148
295
File Name Contents
--------------------- ---------------------------------------------
1- Summary.dat > History Matching info.& Well data
2- DailyQ.dat > Field Daily Flow Rates
3- OilRec.dat > Field Oil Recovery Factor
4- GasRec.dat > Field Gas Recovery Factor
5- FieldQg.dat > Field Monthly Flow Rates
6- WellQw.dat > Well Monthly Water Flow Rates
7- GasQ.dat > Field Total Daily Gas Flow Rate
8- WellQg.dat > Monthly Gas Flow Rates/well
9- Pmap.dat > Pressure Map
10- Sgmap.dat > Gas Saturation Map
11- Swmap.dat > Water Saturation Map
Open the Following Files with EXCEL to Make Plots
(e.g. GasRec.dat, FieldQg.dat,etc)

Modeling a Polymer Flood
Compare with Waterflood

Grid dimensions= 10 x 10 x 1
Reservoir dimensions= X=300 ft, Y=300 ft, Z=20 ft
# of wells= 2 wells
Depth to top= 5000 ft
Start date= Jan 1, 1990
Total Thickness = 20 ft
S
oi
= 0.80
Simulation time= 10000 days

12/1/2011
149
Initial Pressure =3000 psia
30
o
API
Temperature 150
o
F
Gas gravity=0.65
S
or
= 0.30
S
gc
= 0.02
S
wc
= 0.20
GOR=200 scf/STB
Model will calculate P
b

Pressure at 5020 ft =3000 psi
Minimum P
wf
= 300 psi

Layer 1
K
x
, md 20
K
y
, md 20
K
z
, md 1.
0.20
h, ft 20
Z, ft 20
1
1
2
2
10
10
Layer 1
K
x
, md 20
K
y
, md 20
K
z
, md 1.
0.20
h, ft 20
Z, ft 20
12/1/2011
150

3.00 ! Polymer viscosity
200.0 ! Polymer concentration ppm
0.7000 ! Polymer mixing parameter
10.000 ! Polymer adsorption; ugm/gm
2.400 ! Rock density, gm/cc
2.1600 ! Residual Resistance Factor
0.3000 ! Residual oil saturation

9.700 ! Power-Law K
0.770000 ! Power-Law n

Injection Rate = 350 bbl/day

Polymer Properties
Surfactant Slug and Micellar
Solution Flood

Reserved
12/1/2011
151
Oil Recovery Equation
E
A
& E
V

can be Improved
with Polymer
E
A
= f ( )

E
D
can be Improved with
Alkali and Surfactant
E
D
= f ( )
o
o
V A D P
B
PV S
E E E N
) (
=
Rights Reserved
Surfactant Slug and Micellar Solution Flood

Oil recovery processes using surfactant are
classified as:

a)Surfactant-Polymer slug SP
b)Micellar-Polymer MP
c)Alkaline-Surfactant-Polymer ASP

12/1/2011
152
SURFACTANTS
a) Soaps or Soap-like substances
b) Contains two parts: head of the molecule is attracted to
and soluble in water ( Called hydrophilic); tail is attracted
to and soluble in oil (Called Oleophilic)
c) This dual attracting nature of these surfactants that enables
them to solubilize oil and water
d) One type of surfactants that is commonly used in the industry
is petroleum sulfonate. This chemical agent is produced from
hydrocarbons ranging from LPG to the crude oil itself. The
chemistry of the petroleum sulfonates are very complex and
traditionally they be described by their molecular weights
that vary widely from 350 550.

Surfactant Slug Injection Process
Preflush
the objective of the preflush is to condition the reservoir by injecting a brine
solution prior to the injection of the surfactant slug. The brine solution is
designed to lower the salinity of the reservoir existing water phase so that
mixing with surfactant will not cause the loss of the surfactant interfacial
property. The preflush solution volume is typically ranging from 50 to 100%
pore volume.
Surfactant slug
the volume of the surfactant slug ranges between 5 15% pore volumes in
field applications. Extensive laboratory studies show that the minimum the
minimum slug size is 5% pore volume in order to effective oil displacement
and recovery.
Mobility Buffer
the surfactant slug is displaced by a mobility buffer solution with varying
polymer concentrations between the slug and chase water. The mobility
buffer solution separating chase water and the surfactant slug prevents rapid
slug deterioration from the trailing edge of the surfactant slug. This process of
injecting and designing a mobility buffer solution is essential and integral
process in all chemical flooding techniques in order to minimize the chemical
slug size required for efficient and economical oil recovery.

12/1/2011
153
Rights Reserved
Figure 6-25. Chemical Flood as a Secondary Recover Process
Production
well
Oil Bank
Connate
water
Water Bank
Oil Bank
(Micellar,
Surfactant,
ASP)
Chemical
Slug
Chase
Water
Injection
Well
Oil and Gas
are flowing
Oil & Water
Are flowing
Buffer
Zone
Gas
12/1/2011
154
Production
well
Figure 6-26. Chemical Flood as an EOR Process
Oil Bank
Injected water
From
Water Flood

Water Bank
Residual
Oil
(Micellar,
Surfactant,
ASP)
Chemical
Slug
Chase
Water
Injection
Well
Only Water is
flowing
Oil & Water
Are flowing
Buffer
Zone
Micellar Flood
Is another variation of the surfactant slug process with various
labeled as:

Micellar solutions Flood
MaraFlood
Micro emulsions Flood, etc.

The chemical slug essentially contains other chemicals that added to
it. The Micellar Solution is a type of surfactant solution slug that is
composed of the following five main ingredients:

a) Surfactant 4% to10%
b) Hydrocarbon 4% to 80%
c) Co-surfactant (alcohol) 4%
d) Electrolyte 1%
e) Water 10% to 92%

12/1/2011
155
II. Co-Surfactant
Because one of the main problems in any chemical flood process
is the adsorption of the chemical agent (surfactant) on the
surface of the porous media, the co-surfactant (alcohol) is
added to the solution slug to reduce adsorption of the surfactant
to the eservoir rock.
III. Electrolyte
The electrolyte is usually a SALT such as sodium chloride or
ammonium sulfate, is added to the Micellar solution to adjust and
control the changes in the viscosity of Micellar solution as it
contacts the reservoir water phase.
I. Preflush Bank
In all types of chemical floods, often the composition of the
reservoir water phase has an adverse effect on the injected
chemical slug. Therefore, floods are traditionally started by first
injecting a preflush bank of water which is compatible with the
chemical slug solution and displaces the formation brine out of the
reservoir
Electrolyte
12/1/2011
156
Mobility Control and Design

The mobility is perhaps one of the most important controlling properties
that must be considered when designing a chemical or miscible injection
process. A properly designed chemical or miscible process must have a
solution slug with mobility that equal to or less than the mobility of the
stabilized displaced fluid bank; i.e.:

slug
<
displaced

bank

The minimum total relative mobility is designated as the maximum
required mobility of the chemical slug. The viscosity of the chemical slug
is adjusted the concentration of polymer in the slug to achieve the
optimum solution mobility.
k
rw

k
ro

Minimum Total Mobility
0%
100%
Total Relative Mobility
w
+
o

o
ro
w
rw
k k

+
S
w

100%
0%
Figure 6-27. Total relative permeability vs. water saturation
12/1/2011
157
Designing the Mobility Buffer Zone

I. Due to the unfavorable mobility between the chase water drive and the
mobility buffer solution, the drive water will penetrate and bypass the
mobility buffer and the chemical slug. Therefore, the volume of
mobility buffer must be large enough to protect the slug; usually will
require 50 to 100% of reservoir pore volume.

II. Using a polymer concentration grading of the mobility buffer solution
will decrease the rate of chase water penetration and improve the
economics of the process. Although different grading procedures
can be used, a semi-logarithmic relationship is a simple approach for
designing the buffer zone.

1.0
10
20
30
5.0
2 3 4 5 6 1
Viscosity
Batch #
Chase
Water
2 3 4 5 6 1
Graded Mobility Buffer
Chase Water
=1 cp
Chemical
Slug; =30
Figure 6-28. Grading the Mobility Buffer
of
Batch #6
of Chemical
Slug
of
Batch #1
X
X
12/1/2011
158
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
Class Problem
Given the following data; design a tapered buffer zone solution of 60% reservoir
pore volume Assume that 6 batches of equal volumes will be injected, i.e. each
10% reservoir pore volume.
Viscosity of the chemical slug
slug
= 30 cp
Viscosity of the chase water
Chase
= 1.0 cp

12/1/2011
159
1
10
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
X
X
X
X
X
X
Viscosity
30
Batch 1 Batch 2 Batch 3 Batch 4 Batch 5 Batch 6
Figure 6-29. Grading the Mobility Buffer for Example 6-5
Rights Reserved
Micellar Slug Size, %PV
0
0
20
40
60
80
100
2 4 6 8 10 12
14
Henry S
119-R
Henry E & Henry W
Wilkins
Dedrick
Micellar floods Core Flood TESTS
A MUST
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
160
10
100
1,000
0.1
1
10
Dec. 81 Dec. 82
Dec. 83 Dec. 84 Dec. 85
Oil Cut
Oil Rate
micellar
injection
Micellar flood
TYPICAL PERFORMANCE
Rights Reserved
Micellar-Polymer Projects
Illinois basin

Project Location
Size,
Acre
Pore
Volume, BBL *
Chemical
Cost, $
Incremental
Oil, BBL *
Incremental
Oil, V
p

Chemical
Cost per
BBL Pore
Volume,
$/BBL
Chemical
Cost

$/BBL
119-R IL 40 1,635,000 3,119,000 243,200 0.149 $1.91 $12.82
219-R IL 113 3,032,000 5,559,000 400,000 0.132 $1.83 $13.90
Salem IL 60 3,571,000 12,636,000 512,100 0.143 $3.54 $24.67
M-1
20
IL 407 16,575,000 14,385,000 1,387,400 0.084 $0.87 $10.37
Note that the chemical cost per incremental barrel of oil
produced varies from about $10- $25 for micellar/polymer
floods.
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
161
Applications of Micellar Flood
o API >20
o

o Viscosity <35 cp
o S
o
>35 %
o K >10 md
o T <200
o
F
o Depth See temperature
o Formation SS
o Thickness Not critical

Micellar Oil Recovery
RF = E
D
(E
A
E
V
)
E
D
90-100%
Issues and Concerns:

1) Costs
2) Adsorption
3) The difficulty of predicting Micellar flooding efficiencies
4) Laboratory studies bear little resemblance to the field
results because:
- improper scaling
- oversimplification of the reservoir

11/21/2011
12/1/2011
162
Advantages
1. High displacement and areal sweep efficiencies
2. Generally speaking; where ever a waterflood has
been successful, Micellar flood may also be
applicable
3. In many cases where waterflooding was a failure
because of poor mobility relationships, Micellar could
be successful because of the required mobility
control.

11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
Disadvantages
1. Main disadvantage is the large amounts of high cost
chemicals needed
2. Large expenditures must be made very early in the
life of the project; most of it during the first year
3. In a depleted waterflood reservoir, only water is
produced for to 2 years depending upon S
or
and
pattern size
4. Adsorption of surfactant and stability of the slug
under reservoir conditions
5. determining slug size
6. Injectivity problems
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
163
Alkaline-Surfactant-Polymer
ASP
Reserved
ASP Flood

The Alkaline-Surfactant-Polymer ASP technology uses similar
mechanisms as in the Micellar flood technique that is designed
to mobilize the residual oil. The ASP technology is essentially
based on combining:

A. interfacial-tension-reducing chemicals with
B. mobility control chemical to improve the overall
displacement efficiency and increase the incremental oil
recovery.

12/1/2011
164
The Alkali:

The technology relies on reducing the expensive surfactant concentration by
20 to 70 folds by adding the much lower-cost Alkali as one of the main
ingredients of the injected ASP slug.

The alkali has the natural ability to generate in-situ surfactants by
interaction with the residual oil if the oil contains natural organic acids; most
commonly are the naphthenic acids. Therefore, lowering the slug cost
significantly by reducing the amount of the required commercial surfactants.
The additional benefits of using sodium carbonate (alkali) include:

a) It reduces the adsorption of surfactant and polymer on the rock
b) It alters the wettability of the formation to become a more water-wet;
or to change the wettability from an oil-wet to a water-wet system

The design of an ASP flooding process must achieve three main
objectives:

1. propagation of the chemicals to contact and displace the residual oil
with 100% displacement efficiency
2. complete volumetric coverage of the area of the interest by controlling
the slug mobility through optimizing the polymer concentration in the
solution
3. injection of enough chemicals and slug size to account for retention
and slug breakdown by adsorption

Achieving these objectives is significantly affected by the design and
selection of the chemicals used in formulating the injected slug. The two
most common alkaline agents used for ASP flooding are:

1. Soda ash (Sodium Carbonate Na
2
CO
3
) and
2. Caustic soda (Sodium Hydroxide Noah).

12/1/2011
165
As in all types of chemical flooding techniques, ASP flood proceeds in the four
traditional distinct phases); these are:

a) Preflush:
Often the composition of the brine in a reservoir has an adverse effect on
the ASP solution. To correct this problem and separate the hard formation
brine from the slug, floods are started by first injecting a preflush bank of
water ahead of the slug. This preflush water, which is compatible with the
ASP solution, flushes the formation brine out of the reservoir.

b) ASP Slug:
The slug size can range from 15-30% pore volume. The slug formulation
is similar to that of the Micellar slug except that much of the surfactant is
replaced by the low-cost alkali so slugs can be much larger but overall
cost is lower. As the slug moves through the formation, it displaces 100%
of the oil contacted in a miscible type displacement; however; E
A
& E
V

are controlled by the mobility ratio. A pre-determined amount of polymer
is added to the ASP slug to adjust its mobility to approach, or be less than,
the total mobility of the oil-water.
c) Mobility Buffer:
A displacing solution is required to displace the ASP slug through the
reservoir. A favorable mobility between the displacing solution and the
ASP slug is also desired. If water is used as the displacing fluid, an
unfavorable mobility ratio might exist. This would result in reduced areal
sweep efficiency and in water fingering through the ASP slug diluting
and dissipating the slug. To protect the slug, a mobility buffer of thickened
water is injected immediately behind the slug. This thickened water is a
solution of water and polymer. The viscosity of the polymer bank is
graded from high viscosity behind the ASP slug to a low value at the
trailing edge of the polymer bank. This grading is accomplished by varying
the polymer concentration in the solution. This graduated bank is less
costly and achieves a more favorable mobility ratio between the chase
water and the polymer bank. The minimum size of the polymer bank is in
the range of 50% of pore volume.

d) Chase Water:
The mobility buffer is displaced by chase water until the economic limit of
the project is reached.

12/1/2011
166
Rights Reserved
For a Successful ASP Flood
1) Core Flood is a MUST (Adsorption)
2) Fluid Composition for Identifying the Organic Acid Groups
3) Testing Reservoir Water For Proper Surfactant
4) Designing the Slug and Slug Volume
5) New Chemical Additives
6) Pilot Flood; We Need to Learn
7) Possibility of Using ASP as Secondary Recovery Process

Possibility of Using ASP (or any other EOR Process) as
Secondary Recovery Process; is gaining Momentum

Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
167
Chemical Costs

A rough estimation of the chemical costs is listed below:

Surfactant Prices:
Prices range from: $0.36-$0.75 per active pound, or
$2.75 - $6.10 per barrel of injected solution.
Alkali Prices:
Prices range from: $0.06 to $0.15 per pound.

Polymer Prices:
Prices vary from: $1.15 per dry pound to a high of $1.45

As an alternative is to build a polymer mixing plant and purchase polymer at a lower cost per
pound; Polymer can be available from commercial suppliers in a self-contained polymer mixing
plant for an increase in the price per pound of polymer. This provides an economic benefit by
distributing the mixing plant costs over the duration of the polymer injection

How to Minimize The
Capital Cost and Environmental Impact ?
The Potential of Detecting and the Reuse of the
Chemicals in the Produced Oil
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
168
Field & Core Flood Tests
Reserved
Micellar Flood
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Pore Volumes Injected
O
i
l

C
u
t
,
%
;

C
u
m
.

R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y
,
%

O
I
P

Slug 5% Buffer 50%

Soi 32%
92% OIP
Oil Cut
ASP Flood
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Pore Volumes Injected
O
i
l

C
u
t
,
%
;

C
u
m
.

R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y
,
%

O
I
P

Alkali 5%,Surfactant 10%,Polymer 60%
Soi 38% 80% OIP
Oil Cut
ASP vs. MICELLAR FLOOD -
Lab Results Mitsue Oil Core Floods
12/1/2011
169
Currently; there are several ongoing ASP floods with reported promising
responses; include:

1) The La Salina Field in eastern cost of Lake Maracaibo, Venezuela

2) The Viraj oil field of Cambay Basin in India

3) Flooding Test in Central Xing2 Area of Daqing Oilfield, China (2-pilots)

4) Major expansion underway in Daqing Oilfield, China

5) The White Castle Field, Louisiana, near-offshore Gulf of Mexico (Shell)

6) Maracaibo Lake, West Venezuela

7) 5 reservoirs in Argentina (Designed by SURTEK, Golden, CO)
Industry Experience With
ASP Flood
Rights Reserved
Tanner
Alkaline-Surfactant- Polymer Flood
Tanner Field
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
170

ASP Flood in the Tanner Field

Depth 8,750 ft
Temperature 175 F
Pore Volume 2,528 Mbbl
Thickness 25 ft
Average Porosity 20%
Average Permeability 200 md
Oil API Gravity 21
Oil Viscosity 11 cp
Water Viscosity 0.45 cp
Mobility Ratio 3.2
ASP
Injection Well
Tanner Alkaline-Surfactant-Polymer Flood
Net Pay Isopach
11/21/2011
Reserved
12/1/2011
171
Primary Production April 1991
Waterflood October 1997
Alkaline-Surfactant-Polymer Solution May 2000
Polymer Drive June 2002
Water Flush January 2005
Tanner, Wyoming
Alkaline-Surfactant-Polymer Flood
Timeline History
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
Cumulative Produced Fluids (PV)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

O
i
l

R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y

(
%
O
O
I
P
)
O
i
l

C
u
t

(
V
o
l
u
m
e

%
)
Na
2
CO
3
-Petronate EOR 2094
-Alcoflood 1275A Flood
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
Cumulative Produced Fluids (PV)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

O
i
l

R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y

(
%
O
O
I
P
)

O
i
l

C
u
t

(
V
o
l
u
m
e

%
)
Waterflood
NaOH-ORS-41HF-Alcoflood 1275A Flood
Tanner Alkaline-Surfactant-Polymer Flood Radial
Coreflood Comparison
Caustic Soda
Soda Ash
12/1/2011
172
Injected Solution
1.0 wt% Caustic Soda
0.1 wt% active ORS-41HF
1000 mg/L Alcoflood 1275A
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
Total Field Performance
ASP Flood
1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007
1.0
10.0
100.0
%

O
i
l

C
u
t
1,000
10,000
100,000
M
o
n
t
h
l
y

O
i
l

P
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n

(
b
b
l
s
)

Primary
Waterflood
Alkaline-Surfactant-
Polymer Flood
Oil Production
Oil Cut
calculated
continued
waterflood
oil cut
calculated
continued
waterflood
oil rate
ASP
May 2000
Total Field Performance
Waterflood
12/1/2011
173
Well Performance
Tanner 24-30
1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007
0.1
1.0
10.0
100.0
%

O
i
l

C
u
t
100
1,000
10,000
100,000
M
o
n
t
h
l
y

O
i
l

P
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n

(
b
b
l
s
)

Primary
Waterflood
Polymer Flood
Oil Cut
Oil Production
Well Performance
Tanner 24-30
1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007
0.1
1.0
10.0
100.0
%

O
i
l

C
u
t
100
1,000
10,000
100,000
M
o
n
t
h
l
y

O
i
l

P
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n

(
b
b
l
s
)

Primary
Waterflood
Polymer Flood
Oil Cut
Oil Production
calculated
continued
waterflood
oil cut
calculated
continued
waterflood
oil rate
12/1/2011
174
Tanner Alkaline-Surfactant-Polymer Flood Production
Compared to Eight Minnelusa Waterfloods
Tanner

0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50
Cumulative Oil Produced After Injection Begins (Vp)
1
10
100
%

O
i
l

C
u
t

Field Comparisons
Camridge
Total Tanner Field
Tanner 24-30
Tanner 22-31
Average Waterflood
arrows indicate
start of ASP
for Tanner
May 2000
ASP as
Secondary Recovery
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved

Recovery Summary through July 2005

Ultimate Oil Recovery 65.0 %OOIP
Primary and Waterflood 48.0 %OOIP
ASP Increment Recovery 17.0 %OOIP

Cost per Incremental Barrel
(Includes Chemical and Facilities) $4.49
12/1/2011
175
ASP PILOT Daqing, China
10
100
20
1993
Oil Cut
Oil Rate
1994
1995 1996
50
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
Conclusions
Tanner Alkaline-Surfactant-Polymer flood
was technically and economically successful.

17% OOIP incremental oil

cost of chemicals, plant, and design
- $5.85/ per incremental barrel
rate of return - 71.2%
payout 2.5 years
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
176
Shell Marmul Chemical
Flood
Polymer development and
surfactant trials
On-going ASP Pilot Flood in
the Viraj Oil Field- India
Pre-flush: 200 m
3
/day for a week
ASP Slug: 20% PV slug having a composition of 1.5
wt% alkali, 0.2 wt % surfactant, and 800 ppm
polymer.
Mobility Buffer: Total 30 %PV of a series of graded
concentrations of polymer solution. 1
st
slug is
10%PV of 600ppm polymer solution; 2
nd
slug is
10%PV 400ppm, and 3
rd
slug is 10%PV of 200ppm
Chase water: 60%PV of chase water
12/1/2011
177
ASP and Other EOR Projects in
Offshore Oil Fields
Space and weight restrictions
High capital cost and economics
Large well spacing gives less detailed information
about the reservoir; especially degree of continuity
between wells
Temperature limitations
seawater-based process would require higher
concentration of polymer
One of the Largest current offshore EOR projects is
N
2
; Cantarell Field in The Gulf of Mexico. It has been
very Successful at Increasing Oil Recovery
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
Current Offshore Applications
oLa Salina Field, Venezuela
oWill be the first offshore ASP Pilot in the World
oWill use existing platform instead of a barge
oSlug:
- Alkali: 0.75 wt% Soda Ash
- Surfactant: 0.1 wt%
- Polymer: 800 mg/L

12/1/2011
178
ASP in Carbonate Reservoirs

Traditionally Applied to Sandstone; however; has
been Tested in Carbonate Formations at the
Laboratory Scale

Recent Studies Indicate that ASP can Change the
wettability of the Carbonate minerals from Oil
Wet to Water Wet

an ASP Flood is currently being tested at The
Mauddud Carbonate Reservoir in Bahrain
Recent Developments
New Surfactant - SS-6066 & SS-6066A showed
most promising performance in terms of
solubility, stability, and interfacial tension
New co-surfactant to reduce adsorption-
ANTISORB
TM
1416
Tested in the Chihuido de la Sierra Negra field,
Argentina
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
179
1. It displaces all the oil it contacts
2. High displacement and areal sweep efficiencies
3. Mobility of the Slug can be optimized to
maximizing the volumetric sweep efficiency
4. Field operation is a little different from a water
flood except for additional of mixing and
filtering equipment.
5. If meets conditions and designing criteria; it can
recover additional 20% OOIP
Advantages of ASP Flood
Disadvantages
1. Main disadvantage is the large amounts of high cost
chemicals needed
2. Large expenditures must be made very early in the
life of the project; most of it during the first year
3. In a depleted waterflood reservoir, only water is
produced for to 2 years depending upon S
or
and
pattern size
4. Degradation of chemicals at high temperature.
6. Injectivity problem
7. Not well suited for carbonate reservoirs
12/1/2011
180
Miscible Gas Flood
Hard to determine:
1. S
or
from core analysis might not be representative for the entire
reservoir.
(S
or
)
res
= f [(S
or
)
core
, M, V]
2. Determining the distribution of remaining oil is a challenge
3. S
orm
is a key property for Simulation and Screening Studies
4. Slim Tube or Core Flood ?

Issues to Address Before
Miscible Gas Injection

11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
181
Miscible Gas Flood

The reduction of interfacial or surface tension between the displacing and
displaced fluids is one of the major keys that contribute to the success of
the miscible injection process.

In contrast to the definition of immiscibility, two fluids are considered
miscible when they can by mix together in all proportions and resulting
mixtures remain single phase. Because only one phase results from
mixtures of miscible fluids, there are no interfaces and consequently no
interfacial tension between fluids.

|
.
|
\
| A
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
L
p
o
k
c
N
o |
Critical N
c

before or
after or
S
S
) (
) (
1.0
0
Range of
Miscible flood
Range of
Waterflood
N
C

It is apparent from the definition of capillary number N
c

that the interface between oil and displacing phase is
eliminated completely and the two phases become
miscible when 0

12/1/2011
182
Impact of Remaining Residual Oil on Ultimate Recovery

S
or
can be reduced to its lowest possible value with displacement efficiency
E
D
approaching 100%. This is essentially the objective of any form of
miscible displacements (e.g. chemical, gas, etc.). Therefore, classifying a
system as miscible or immiscible can have a substantial impact on ultimate
oil recovery by fluid injection. The ultimate oil recovery factor RF for any
forms of secondary or tertiary recovery processes is defined by:

RF = E
D
E
A
E
D

oi
or oi
D
S
S S
E

=
|
.
|
\
| A
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
L
p
o
k
c
N
o |
They Key for a Sucessful EOR Project:
There are two types of miscible displacements, these are:

First-contact miscible FCM displacement:
Displacements in which the injection fluid and the in-situ reservoir fluid form
a single phase mixture for all mixing proportions; e.g.:
I. Chemical Flood (Micellar, ASP,etc)
II. LPG

Multiple contact miscible MCM displacement:
Processes in which the injected fluid and the reservoir oil are not miscible in
the first contact but miscibility could develop after multiple contacts (dynamic
miscibility). These processes are categorized into:

I. Vaporizing CO
2
and lean gas drive; alternatively is called high
pressure lean gas Injection, e.g. CO
2
, N
2
, Air,etc
II. Condensing rich gas drive, and
III. Combined vaporizing-condensing drive.

Miscibility
12/1/2011
183
First-Contact-Miscible FCM
Displacement

Rights Reserved
First-Contact-Miscible FCM Displacement

Some injection fluids mix directly with the reservoir crude oil in all proportions and
their mixtures remain single phase. This displacement process is classified as first-
contact miscible displacement. Liquefied petroleum gas products (LPG) such as
ethane, propane, and butane are the common solvents that have been used for first-
contact miscible flooding FCM, i.e. miscible with reservoir crude oils immediately
on contact. The LPG products are miscible with oil only as long as they remain in
the liquid state, i.e. when reservoir temperatures below their critical temperatures
and at pressures at or above their vapor pressures.
T,
o
F P, psia T,
o
F P, psia T,
o
F P,psia
50 460 50 92 50 22
90 709 100 190 100 52
150 360 150 110
200 590 200 198
206 617 250 340
300 530
305 550
Ethane Propane N-Butane
12/1/2011
184
Production
well
Figure 6-30. LPG Flood as an EOR Process
Oil Bank
Injected water
From
Water Flood
Water Bank
Residual
Oil
LPG
Slug
Water
Injection
Well
Only Water is
flowing
Oil & Water
Are flowing
Chase
Gas
Chase
Gas
Gas Water Water
Connate Water
T,
o
F P, psia T,
o
F P, psia T,
o
F P,psia
50 460 50 92 50 22
90 709 100 190 100 52
150 360 150 110
200 590 200 198
206 617 250 340
300 530
305 550
Ethane Propane N-Butane
11/21/2011
L
P
G

S
l
u
g

problem
Chase Gas is a PROBLEM !!!
12/1/2011
185
11/21/2011
Chase Gas is a PROBLEM !!!
The chase gas must be miscible with the hydrocarbon slug to prevent
deterioration of the slug at the trailing edge.
Parameter South Ward
Field, CA
Arco
South Cuyama
Field, CA
ARCO
Johnson Field,
Neb.
Marathon
Burkett Unit,
Kan.
phillips
Adena Field,
Colo.
Union
Depth, ft 2400-2500 4300 4580 2100 5560
Pattern 5-spot peripheral Entire field 5-spot 5-spot
Slug size 5% PV 5.4% PV 8.85% PV 6.5 % PV 9% PV
RF 37 % 33% 64%
bbl oil/bbl
C
3

1.5 3 5 0.75 0.6
Industry Experience
LPG Flood
12/1/2011
186
Applications
API >23
o

Viscosity <10 cp
S
o
>30 %
k >not critical if uniform
T Must need exceed 206
o
F for C
3

Depth >2500 ft, restricted be temperature
Formation SS or carbonate
Thickness relatively thin

Advantages
1. Displaces essentially all residual oil it contacts
2. Requires lower pressure than that is needed
for miscible gas injection; there; can be used
in shallower reservoirs
3. Can be used as secondary or tertiary method.

11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
187
Disadvantages
1. Areal and Vertical seep efficiencies are usually low
2. Sizing of the slug is difficult
3. Miscibility can be lost if the slug is dispersed and
dissipated as it moves through the reservoir; cant
regain miscibility it back
4. Stability of the slug under reservoir conditions
6. Costs
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
Multiple-Contact-Miscible Displacement
MCM

Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
188
Dynamic Miscibility

The injected gas at a certain pressure can achieve miscibility after multiple
contacts with reservoir crude oil, this miscibility and is termed (dynamic
miscibility). This dynamic displacement mechanism during the process is
described as the in-situ manufacture of a miscible slug. Miscibility is
achieved in this process by in-situ mass transfer vaporizing or
condensing of components resulting from repeated contacts of oil with the
injection fluid.

This process of developing miscibility is as classified as multiple contact
miscible displacement. It should be pointed out that because mixtures in
the reservoir miscible region remain as a single phase, the wettability of the
rock and relative permeability lose their significance since there is no
interface between fluids. However, the mobility ratio has a significant effect on
the recovery efficiency simply because it is a strong function of the viscosity
ratio of the miscible solution and the displaced oil.

Ternary Diagram
A valuable approach for representing the phase behavior of multicomponent
hydrocarbon mixtures and their interaction with a displacing gas is the use of the
pseudo-ternary diagram. The components of the reservoir fluid are grouped into
three pseudocomponents located on the corners of the ternary plot. One possible
grouping that has been used frequently includes the following mixed components:
Component 1:
represents a volatile pseudocomponent and is composed of methane,
nitrogen and carbon dioxide located on the uppermost of the triangle,
Component 2:
represents a pseudocomponent that is composed of intermediate
hydrocarbon components such as ethane through hexane. The
component is located on the lower right corner of the plot. It should be
pointed out that sometimes CO
2
is included with the intermediate
components
Component 3:
is essentially the heptanes-plus fraction C
7+
and is located on the lower
left corner of the plot.

12/1/2011
189
CO
2
+ N
2
+C
1

100%
C
2
-C
6

100%
C
7+

100%
0
0
0
Each corner of the triangular
plot represents 100% of a
given pseudocomponent,
progressive from 0% at the
opposite side of each corner to
100 % (usually with
incremental step size of 10%).
Understanding and Use of the Triangular Diagram
Bubble-point Curve
C
7+

100%
C
2
-C
6

100%
CO
2
+ N
2
+C
1

100%
10%
20%
50%
70%
90%
0%
90%
70%
A
B
C
z
x
y
12/1/2011
190
The Triangular Diagram

1. An area in the graph is surrounded by the curve ACB is called the
phase envelope and represents the phase behavior of mixtures with
varying combinations of the three pseudocomponents. For example,
point Z in Figure (6-31) represents a mixture that is composed of 50%
of C
1
+N
2
+CO
2
, 20% of C
2
-C
6
and 30% of C
7+
.
2. Any system of the three components whose composition is inside the
phase envelope, e.g. point z, will form two phases, a saturated gas
phase with a composition represented by point y and a saturated
liquid phase composition represented by point x. The dashed line
connecting points x and y and passing through point Z is called the tie
line.
3. The segment AC of the curve is called the bubble-point curve and
represents the composition of the saturated liquid, with the segment
BC is called the dewpoint curve representing the composition of the
saturated gas. The dewpoint curve joins the bubble-point curve at the
plait point (critical point) C which indicates that the compositions
and properties of the equilibrium gas and liquid are identical.

There are two additional principals must be recognized when representing
phase behavior relations with the ternary diagram:
A. If the coordinates of the overall composition z of a hydrocarbon mixture
place the mixture within the phase envelope, the mixture will form two phases
under the prevailing pressure and temperature; however, when placed
outside that phase envelope the mixture will exist as a single phase.
B. The ternary diagram as shown schematically on the next slide illustrates the
concept and the basic requirement for achieving first contact miscible FCM
displacements and identifies the multi-contact miscible MCM region. The
illustration shows two different mixtures of hydrocarbon gases and a crude oil
system at a constant pressure and temperature. These three hydrocarbon
systems are:
o Lean gas with a composition as represent by A
o Rich gas (LPG diluted with lean gas) as represent by point D.
o original oil in place with a composition represented by point B

Identifying Type of Displacement
12/1/2011
191
Figure 6-32. First and Multiple-Contact Miscible Regions
B
C
2
-C
6

100%
C
7+

100%
CO
2
+ N
2
+C
1

100%
C
A
D

y
x
z
Oil
Tie Line
The differentiation between FCM and MCM is based on whither the straight-line
connecting the composition of the injected fluid with that of oil will or will not cross the
phase envelope. However, the size of the phase envelope depends upon the pressure
and temperature. For a constant temperature, the size of the two phase region will
shrink with increasing the pressure, as shown schematically below. The illustration
suggests that first contact miscibility will be achieved at a pressure equal to P
3
. This
pressure is termed the minimum miscibility pressure MMP.
C
7+

100%
C
2
-C
6

100%
CO
2
+ N
2
+C
1

100%
10%
20%
50%
70%
90%
0%
90%
70%
A
B
C
P
2

P
3
>P
2
>P
1

A
P
1

P
3

B
12/1/2011
192
Vaporizing (High pressure) lean gas
Injection
Rights Reserved
Vaporizing (High pressure) lean gas drive:

In vaporizing-gas drive process or high- pressure gas process,
the injected lean gas (e.g. methane, nitrogen, or flue gas) tends
to vaporize the intermediate components (ethane through
hexane) of the reservoir fluid and creates an in-situ miscible
hydrocarbon slug. In this displacement mechanism, miscibility
is achieved at the leading edge of the injected gas front. As the
injected high pressure lean gas contacts the original reservoir
oil, it vaporizes and enriched in intermediate components.
12/1/2011
193
B
G
Basic Concept of the
Vaporizing Gas Injection
Multiple (Infinite) Contact Miscibility
C
1
C
1
C
7+ C
2
C
6
Multi-contact Miscible
Gas Injection
12/1/2011
194
B
G
C
Critical Point
High Pressure Lean Gas Injection
Methane, Nitrogen, Air, Flue Gas
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
a lot of
water
S
or

Water from
H
2
O flood
Oil
Bank
Gas
(C
1
, N
2
,..etc)
Connate Water
Miscible zone formed by gas
becoming enriched with C
2
-C
n

12/1/2011
195
C
1
C
7+
a lot of
water
C
2
C
6
S
or

Water from
H
2
O flood
Oil
Bank
Gas
(C
1
, N
2
,..etc)
Connate Water
L = f (P
inj
, z
i
, y
inj
, S
start
, ..etc)
Nitrogen Injection
12/1/2011
196
1. Block 31 Field: Crane County; Texas. Ultimate
RF 60%
2. Fairway Field, Texas: Ultimate RF 50%
3. Hawkins Field, Texas
Industry Experience
With Lean Gas
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
Essential Laboratory Tests
For Any Types of Gas Injection
1. Flow Assurance Tests
2. Slim Tube Test
3. Swelling Tests (Very important to match)
4. PVT Tests (Differential, CCE,etc.)
12/1/2011
197
Advantages Of
Lean Gas Injection
1. Although it does not remove all S
or
from the
contacted area; S
or
is reduced to a very low value
2. Less expensive than others
3. The miscible front regenerates itself if it is lost at
any point
4. Lean gas is used from the start to finish;
eliminating the difficult determination of slug
size
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
Disadvantages Of
Lean Gas Injection
1. Crude oil characteristics must be ideal for
the process to work (rich in C
M
)
2. Requires high injection pressure; high
compression costs
3. Gravity segregation can exit in highly
permeable reservoirs.
4. The oil should be under-saturated
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
198
Air Injection
Rights Reserved
Air Injection in Light Oil !!!!!
an Emerging Technology
A. The main idea; O
2
in the Injected Air will
React with a Fraction of the Reservoir Oil at
an Elevated Temperature to Produce CO
2
.
B. The Resulting Flue Gas (mainly N
2
and CO
2
)
will Mobilize the Oil to Production Wells
C. Gas-Oil Mixture may be Immiscible, Partly
Miscible, or Completely Miscible
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
199
Air Injection in Light Oil !!!!!
an Emerging Technology
A. The application of the In-Situ Combustion ISC is associated
with the existence of high T> 660-1120
o
F front; i.e. it creates a
heat wave, however; the Air Injection Process AIP does not
B. Air injection can be viewed as a conventional gas injection
process
C. low temperature oxidation LTO can occur at 150
o
F< T< 200
o
F and consume all O
2
to Generate flue gas.
D. Flue gas comprises of 10-14% CO
2
and rest being N
2

E. Does NOT suffer from ANY constraint on supply; as in the case
of CO
2

11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
20%
O
2

N
2
O
2
, CO
2
,
CO, S
or
, H
2
O
Oil
&
H
2
O
Bank
N
2

CO
2

CO
C
2
-C
n
?
Oil
H
2
O
Original
Oil
&
H
2
O
0
air
Reaction Zone
Flue gas:
85% N
2

13% CO
2

2% CO
Consumption of O
2

air
12/1/2011
200
Air Injection In
Light Oil Reservoirs !!!
A total consumption of 7 to 10% of the
remaining oil in place can be expected to
maintain a propagation of the in-situ
oxidation process
The generated flue gas and steam can:
o Vaporize oil components
o displace the oil at near miscible conditions
o increase oil swelling
o reduce oil viscosity

11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
Industry Experience with
Air Injection
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
201
Incremental Oil Recovery
Based on Field Experience
in Hydrocarbon miscible flood:
o Horizontal Flood 12-15%
o Vertical Flood 20-30%
in Air Injection:
o Horizontal Flood 6-10%
o Vertical Flood 15-20%

11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
GOM Experience- 3 BSTB
CO
2
, N
2
, Air !!!!

CO
2

Air, N
2

(MMP)
CO2
= 3500 psi
(MMP)
Air, N2
= 7500 psi
200 Miles from Shore
CO
2
Pipeline!!!
12/1/2011
202
Pilot Air Injection
Handil Field, Indonesia TOTAL
o Air injection started 2005
o OOIP = 6 MMSTB
o RF by H
2
O = 26%
o Central processing facilities with a 3MMMscf capacity
o Laboratory data suggests:
Auto-ignition occurred at 275
o
F
Stable front displacement at 518
o
F
Flue gas: 13% CO
2
, 3% CO, and 84% N
2

Scenario Total Time
Years
N
P

MMSTB
RF
%
Cum GOR
Scf/STB
Depletion 35 15.43 9.14 -
H
2
O flood
After depteion
5 years of depletion
30 years of air injection

77.07 45.68 -
Air inj 35 years from start
Of production
95.80 56.78 2388
Secondary air recovery 5 years of depletion
30 years air injection
93.11 55.19 2402
Tertiary air injection After 5 years depletion and
22.5 years of H
2
O flood
7.5 years air injection
83.71 49.61 1509
Teriary air injection After 5 years depletion and
10 years of H
2
O
20 years air injection

85.73 50.81 1882
Oil Recovery
BPs Thermal Model
11/21/2011
12/1/2011
203
Field h,
m
Depth, ft T,
o
C P
inj

%

cp
K, md Q
o
,
b/D/well
Air/oil ratio
scf/bbl
W. Hakberry
LA
10 3000-12000 94 - 27 0.9 300 - -
Sloss
Nebraska
6 6200 94 3600 11 0.8 190 480 16900
Buffalo red-
river unit
MPHU
6 9500 104 4400 17 0.5 5 600 12000
Buffalo

- 8500 102 4400 19 0.5 18 2500 10000
Madison CAPA - 8600 99 4400 11 0.5 10 - 20000
11/21/2011
Other Fields:
- North sea-Ekofisk; is being considered
- Handil Field, Indonesia, Started 2005
- Wilson basin- N&S Dakota. Started in 1979
- Romania and Russia
Deepwater GOM Experience
VIP Compositional:
Split to 45 components- Lumped into 16
Components
Excellent Match with Swelling Test
IOR (RF)
N2&Air
= 69%
IOR (RF)
CO2
= 54%

12/1/2011
204
Rich Air Injection !!!
Rights Reserved
Rich Air Injection
Another Emerging Technology
1. Rich Air Injection has Received Considerable Attention
Recently due to several Successful Light-Oil Air Injection
and the Building of Massive N
2
Generation Plants for
Offshore EOR
2. Rich Air contains 30% to 40% O
2

3. The logic Arises from the Fact that whenever Nitrogen is
Manufactured; Waste gas, Rich in O
2
, is Produced
4. When Injected; the Generated Combustion Product Gas
is Richer in CO
2

5. Can also be used in Heavy Oil and Low Permeability
Reservoirs
11/21/2011
Reserved
12/1/2011
205
Screening Air Injection
Prospects
o
o
< 10 cp
o > 15%
o No fracturing and NO FREE GAS or Gas Cap
o T > 140
o
F
o K > 10 md
o h > 10 ft
o API > 35
o
o S
o
> 50%

11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
Advantages
1. An alternative for water injection due to low injectivity
2. reduction in
o
, generation of steam and hot water, miscible
effects owing to the vaporized light-oil ends
3. The miscible front regenerates itself if it is lost at any point
4. Injected air/gas is used from the start to finish; eliminating the
difficult determination of slug size
5. Produced Gas can contain 2 gallons of NGL/Mscf
6. The generated flue gas and steam can:
- Vaporize oil components
- displace the oil at near miscible conditions
- increase oil swelling
- reduce oil viscosity

11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
206
Disadvantages
1. Potential problems related to: corrosion,
oxygen production (safety)
2. At high temperature; potential of producing
H
2
S
3. Might require a pilot test to evaluate risks
and uncertainties
4. Injection well head must be equipped with
dual injection lines; one for air injection and
other for purge water (or N
2
) line.

11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
Lean Gas
MMP Correlations
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
207
11/21/2011
Correlation #1:

MMP = 9433 188x10
3
F + 1430x10
3
F
2

With
F = I/(M
C7+
T
2.5
)
Where
I = concentration of intermediates, MOL%
T = temperature, F
M
C7+
= molecular weight of C
7+

Correlation #2:

MMP = 5568 e
R
1
+ 3641 c
R
2

With:
R
1
= 792.06 [C
2
C
5
] / W
R
2
= 2.158x10
6
[C
1
]
5.632
/ W
Where:
W = M
c7+
T
0.25

T = temperature, F
C
1
= mole fraction of methane
C
2
C
5
= mole fraction of C
2
C
5

11/21/2011
Correlation #3:

For API < 40:
MMP = 80.14 + 35.35 H + 0.76 H
2

Where:

For API > 40:

MMP = -648.5 + 2619.5 H 1347.6 H
2

Where:

] ) ( ) [( /
33 . 0
1
64 . 0
6 2
11 . 0 88 . 0
7
C C T M H
c +
=
] ) ( ) (
42 . 0
1
12 . 0
6 2
25 . 0 48 . 0
7
C C C T M H
c
=
+
12/1/2011
208
11/21/2011
Class problem:

The Nameless Oil Field under consideration for miscible displacement
by lean gas injection. Estimate the MMP using all available correlations
11/21/2011
Class problem; Estimation with EOS:

by different types of gas injection; these are:

1. 100% C
1

2. 100% N
2

3. 80% C
1
& 20% CO
2

Using the PVT simulator:
a) Tune EOS to match saturation pressure of 1936 psig
b) Perform DE, CCE , and Separator Tests on original oil
composition
c) Perform Swelling test on each type of gas injection
d) Estimate the MMP EOS for each type of gas
Separator Test:
1st Stage Separator: 28psig & 130
o
F
Stock Tank: 0psig & 60
o
F
12/1/2011
209
11/21/2011
Nameless Field
API=40.1 & T=247
o
F
P
b
= 1936 psig
1sr Stage Separator: 28psig & 130
o
F
Stock Tank: 0psig & 60
o
F
PVT from EOS
1. Driver Program: Butte.exe
2. Simulator: Montana.exe
3. Two files:
PVTall.dat
PVTall.out
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
210
11/21/2011
&RDW Psat=1936
Temp=247
CO2=0.25
N2=0.88
C1=23.94
C2=11.67
C3=9.36
iC4=1.39
nC4=4.61
iC5=1.50
nC5=2.48
C6=3.26
C7plus=40.66
MWC7plus=196
spgrC7plus=0.8494
&end
With Notepad; open PVTall.dat to enter composition,etc:
PVAall.dat
&separator Tsep1=130
Psep1=28
Tsep2=-1
Psep2=-1
Tsep3=-1
Psep3=-1
Tsep4=-1
Psep4=-1
Tsep5=-1
Psep5=-1
Tsep6=-1
Psep6=-1
Tsep7=60
Psep7=0
Tscrub=-1
Pscrub=-1
&end
Separator Data
12/1/2011
211
! Description of the Injection Gas
! ----------------------------------------------
! Enter the composition of the injection gas after
! the equal sign (=) :

&INJ CO2inj=0.0
N2inj=0
C1inj=0.8
C2inj=0
C3inj=0
iC4inj=0
nC4inj=0
iC5inj=0
nC5inj=0
C6inj=0
C7inj=0
&end
Injection Gas Composition for
Swelling & MMP Tests
Rich Gas (Condensing) Gas
Injection
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
212
CO
2
+ N
2
+C
1

100%
C
2
-C
6

100%
C
7+

100%
0
0
0
L
G
Swelling and Slim Tube
Tests
A MUST TESTS

2006Tarek Ahmed &
Associates, Ltd. All Rights
Reserved.
12/1/2011
213
Types of Gas Displacement
1) Immiscible
2) Partial Miscible
3) Miscible
Swelling Test
H
g

Original Fluid
(gas or oil) @
saturation
Pressure P
sat

P
sat

H
g

P
H
g

(P
sat
)
new

i.e. P
b
or P
d

(V
sat
)
orig

V
t

Original Fluid
+
Injection Gas
Injection gas
(V
sat
)
new

A
C B
Original Fluid
+
Injection Gas
12/1/2011
214
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.
(V
sat
)
new
/(V
sat
)
original

Scf/bbl
C
1

CO
2

Scf/bbl
P
sat

CO
2

C
1

Swollen
Volume
Swollen
Oil
Injected
Gas
Oil
Swelling Test
3000
3200
3400
3600
3800
4000
4200
4400
4600
4800
5000
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
scf/bbl of Fluid
N
e
w

s
a
t
u
r
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

12/1/2011
215
429
relative volume vs. volume of gas injected
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2
2.2
2.4
2.6
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
s
w
e
l
l
i
n
g

r
a
t
i
o
,

(
V
s
a
t
)
n
e
w
/
(
V
s
a
t
)
o
r
i
g

scf/bbl of Fluid
Slim Tube Test
2006Tarek Ahmed &
Reserved.
12/1/2011
216
Modeling of Miscible Gas Injection
With Black Oil Simulator
Based on Three Functions:
1) Miscibility Function
2) Viscosity Mixing Parameter
3) Miscible Phase Relative Permeability k
rm

11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
1- Miscibility Function
MMP
P
vap

RF
MMP P
MMP P P
P P
P MMP
P P
vap
vap
vap
vap
> >
< < < <
< <
=
i.e. ; miscible , 1
i.e. ; Partial , 1 0
i.e. ; immiscible , 0
: if
o
o
o
o
immiscible miscible Partial miscible
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
217
1- Miscibility Function
11/21/2011
nt. Displaceme Miscible , 1
nt Displaceme Miscible Partial , 1 0
et Displacemn immiscible , 0 ;
: if
> >
< < < <
< <
=
o
o
o
o
MMP P
MMP P P
P P
P MMP
P P
vap
vap
vap
vap
e e e e

m s se m o oe
o s
m
s
o
M
M
M

= =
(
+ =
+
=
=
1 1
4
4 / 1 4 / 1
4 / 1
&
) (
22 . 0
) (
78 . 0
) log(
] ) ( 22 . 0 78 . 0 log[ 4
1
2- Viscosity Mixing Parameter
12/1/2011
218
11/21/2011
rm
orm w
g
rg eff rg
rm
orm w
orm o
ro eff ro
k
S S
S
k k
k
S S
S S
k k
(

+ =
(

+ =
1
) 1 ( ) (
1
) 1 ( ) (
o
o o
rg
orm w
g
row
orm w
orm o
rm
k
S S
S
k
S S
S S
k
(

+
(

=
1 1
3- Miscible Phase Relative Permeability k
rm

CO
2
Injection
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
219
Physical Properties of
CO
2

Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
220
You must account for the solubility of CO
2
in the Water
(loss of volume )Problem During WAG Flood
12/1/2011
221
CO2 Drive Mechanisms

A number of mechanisms take place that may initiate oil displacement when CO2 is
injected into an oil reservoir. CO2 may create a miscible front and hence miscibility
is initiated by extraction of significant amounts of heavier hydrocarbons from C5
through C30, or at different reservoir conditions, CO2 saturates the reservoir fluids
to an extent where the swollen crude is miscible with the trailing CO2 and may
resemble enriched gas drive. This combination of mechanisms enables a portion of
the remaining trapped oil to be mobilized and produced.

The miscible-like recoveries achieved by CO2 were a multiple-contact vaporization
drive mechanism in which CO2 strips intermediates from the liquid until the
composition is rich enough to be miscible with the original oil.

Several laboratory experiments on reservoir fluids using CO2 as the displacing
phase have concluded that more than one mechanism (vaporizing and
condensing) is possible for a CO2-reservoir fluid system and that reservoir
temperature and displacement pressure determine the type of mechanism
(vaporization, condensing or vaporizing/condensing) that will control the
displacement process.
12/1/2011
222
Regardless of how CO
2
is injected into the reservoir, oil displacement by CO
2

injection relies on a number of mechanisms related to:

The phase behavior of CO
2
crude oil mixtures
Reservoir temperature
Reservoir pressure
Crude oil composition

the dominant displacement characteristics for a given CO
2
displacement fall into
one of the five regions based on P & T:

Region I Low pressure applications
Region II Intermediate pressure, high temperature applications
Region III Intermediate pressure, low temperature applications
Region IV High pressure applications
Region V High pressure, low temperature (liquid) applications

Co2 Application Regions:
Region I Low pressure applications
Region II Intermediate pressure, high temperature applications
Region III Intermediate pressure, low temperature applications
Region IV High pressure applications
Region V High pressure, low temperature (liquid) applications
Region 4
R
e
g
i
o
n

5

Region 1
12/1/2011
223
Low Pressure Applications Region I

At reservoir pressure below 1000 psia (Region I), the major effects of CO
2
injection
on oil recovery appear due to the solubility of CO
2
in the crude oil with the following
adding benefits:
a) Swells the oil
b) Reduces oil viscosity significantly
c) Contributes to internal solution gas drive
d) Increases injectivity
Region I
Intermediate Pressure, High Temperature (>122
F) Region II

The CO
2
displacement process in this region exhibits:
a) oil swelling
b) viscosity reduction and increased injectivity
c) Vaporizing the crude oil.
Region II
12/1/2011
224
Intermediate Pressure, Low Temperature (<122
F) Region III

The CO
2
displacement process in this region exhibits:
a) extract the crudes heavy ends forming CO
2
rich liquid mixtures
b) Multiple liquids exist in this region
High Pressure Miscible Applications Region 4
At high reservoir pressures (>2000 to 3000 psia ) as represented by Region
4, CO
2
may vaporize significant quantities of crude oil so rapidly that multiple-
contact miscibility occurs in a very brief time period and over a very short
reservoir distance
Region 4
Miscible Displacement Region
12/1/2011
225
Applications:

The CO
2
miscible process is applicable to a high
percentage of reservoirs. Required conditions are as
follows:

1. Crude oils with gravities above 25 deg API
2. Pressures starting at above 1500 psi and ranging
upward, with 6000 psi being a practical upper limit.
Prospective reservoirs must be of sufficient depth that
they can be operated above the pressure needed for
miscible displacement without parting the formation.

12/1/2011
226
Extensive Network of CO2 Pipelines in The U.S.
12/1/2011
227
12/1/2011
228
Injection Manifold
<< Injection Well
Injection Pressure = 1400 psi
12/1/2011
229
Production Well >>
Back pressure held at
400 psi wells flow
without artificial lift
Denver Unit Production / Injection History
CO2 miscible flood developed by Shell
12/1/2011
230
Advantages

1. CO
2
provides an efficient low pressure miscible displacement for many
reservoirs. The displacement efficiency is high, with the oil saturation
above 5% of pore volume in the contacted area.
2. Under some reservoir conditions, the density of CO
2
is close to that of
crude oil and approaches that of water. This greatly minimizes the
effects of gravity override.
3. CO
2
is two to four times as viscous as methane or Nitrogen over the
usual range of pressures. This favorable viscosity; as compared with
other types of gases, will improve sweep efficiency over that of the
hydrocarbon miscible gas methods.
4. The miscible front, if it is lost, regenerates itself for CO
2
as it does with
the lean gas process.
11/21/2011
11/21/2011
Disadvantages

1) CO
2
generally is not readily available.
2) Suffers from viscous fingering
3) Gravity override could be a problem
4) Possible Early Gas Breakthrough
5) CO
2
with water forms carbonic acid which is highly
corrosive. Special metal alloys and coatings for facilities
are needed.
6) Where alternate injection of CO
2
and water is to be used,
dual injection systems are required one for CO
2
and the
other for water.

12/1/2011
231
Estimation of MMP
Rights Reserved
Based on Numerous
Laboratory & Field Data
A. Extraction/Vaporizing Hydrocarbon
Components from the Crude Oil by CO
2

occurs when
CO2
0.25-0.35 gm/cm
3

B. Miscibility occurs when
CO2
> 0.42 gm/cm
3

Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
232
Proposed Methodology
Step 1: Using the reservoir and specific gravity of the gas; calculate the Z
Factor as a function pressure
Step 2: Plot P/Z vs.P on a Cartesian (regular) scale
Step3: Calculate P/Z that is required to produce a gas density of
0.42 gm/cm
3
from:

Step 4: Enter the generated plot in step 2 with P/Z and determine the
corresponding pressure value on the x-axis; to give the MMP
Rights Reserved
T R
M
Z
P
a
) 4 . 62 ( 42 . 0
=
12/1/2011
233
All Gas Properties are Correlated in Terms of:

1) specific gravity of the gas
g
:

2) Pseudo-critical Properties; p
pc
and T
pc
:

75 . 0 5 . 0
SC @
~ =
|
|
.
|
\
|
28.96
M
=
a
air
gas
g

2
g g pc
2
g g
pc
37.5 15.0 + 677 = p
12.5 325 + 168 =
T
-
-

3) Pseudo-reduced Properties; p
pr
and T
pr
:
pc
pr
pc
pr
T
T
= T
P
p
= P &

2
g g
pc
12.5 325 + 168 =
T
-

2
g g pc
37.5 15.0 + 677 = p -
12/1/2011
234
T R
M
m
Z = pV
a

Real Gas EOS
T R n Z = pV
ft psi
ft lb
T R Z
M p
V
m
g
a
g
/ ,
144
gradient gas
/ ,
3
=
= =
correction factor
called number of moles
gas constant 10.73
volume, ft
3

gas density
12/1/2011
235
Approximation of Compressibility Factors
pr pr
T
pr
T
pr
p p
Z
9813 . 0 8157 . 0
2
10
53 . 3
10
274 . 0
1 + =
Class Problem:
A slim tube test on a crude oil sample with pure CO
2

indicated an MMP of 3500 psia at 200
o
F. Further
assessments of the field temperature suggested that the
temperature is better represented as 150
o
F. Estimate the
MMP at 150
o
F
12/1/2011
236
1- Extrapolate Vapor Pressure (EVP) Method:

The method suggests that the vapor pressure curve of CO
2
can be extrapolated
and equated with the minimum miscibility pressure to estimate the MMP for low
temperature reservoirs (T<120F); as given by:
(
+
=
T
EVP
5556 . 0 372 . 255
2015
91 . 10 exp 7 . 14
Temperature T in F.
2- Petroleum Recovery Institute PRI:

The PRI proposed equating the MMP with the vapor pressure of CO
2
when
the system temperature below T
c
of CO
2
. For temperatures greater than T
c
;
they proposed the following expression:

MMP = 1071.82893 10
b

With the coefficient b as defined by:

b = [2.772 (1519/T)]

where MMP is in psia and T in R.

12/1/2011
237
3- Yellig and Metcalfe:
From their experimental study, the authors proposed a correlation for
predicating the CO
2
MMPs that uses the temperature T as the only
correlating parameter. The proposed expression is given below:

MMP = 1833.7217 + 2.2518055T + 0.01800674T
2
103949.93/T

If the bubble point pressure of the oil is greater than the predicted MMP,
then the CO
2
MMP is set equal to the bubble point pressure.

12/1/2011
238
4- Alstons Correlation:
The author presented an empirically derived correlation for estimating the
MMPs for pure CO
2
oil systems. Alston and co-workers used the
temperature, oil C
5+
molecular weight, volatile oil fraction, and intermediate oil
fraction, as the correlating parameters. The MMP for pure CO
2
oil systems
is given by:

MMP = 0.000878 T
1.06
[M
c5+
]
1.78
[X
vol
/X
int
]
0.156

Where:
M
c5+
= molecular weight of oil pentane and heavier fractions
X
int
= mole fraction of intermediate oil components (C
2
C
4
, CO
2
and H
2
S)
X
vol
= mole fraction of the volatile (C
1
and N
2
) oil components
T = system temperature in F

5- National Petroleum Council (NPC):

The NPC proposed an empirical correlation that provides rough estimates
of the pure CO
2
MMPs. The correlation uses the API gravity and the
temperature as the correlating parameters as shown below:
Gravity MMP
(API) psi
< 27 4,000
27 to 30 3,000
> 30 1,200
Reservoir Temperature Correction

T Additional Pressure
(F) (psi)
< 120 0
120 to 150 +200
150 to 200 +350
200 to 250 +500
12/1/2011
239
6- Croquist:
The proposed empirical equation was generated from a regression fit on
58 data points. Croquist characterizes the miscibility pressure as a
function of T, molecular weight of the oil pentanes-plus fraction, and the
mole percentage of methane and nitrogen. The correlation has the
following form:

MMP = 15.988 T
A

With:

A = 0.744206 + 0.0011038 M
C5+
+ 0.0015279
c1

Where:
T = Reservoir temperature, F
c1
= mole percentage of methane and nitrogen

11/21/2011
Class problem:

by CO
2
gas injection. Estimate the MMP using:
a) all available correlations
b) PVT Simulator
12/1/2011
240
11/21/2011
Nameless Field
API=40.1 & T=247
o
F
P
b
= 1936 psig
CO
2
Huff & Puff !!!
High S
o

Thick h
Soak Intervals 2-4 Weeks
High Injection Volume
Maximum of 3 Cycles
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
241
Foam-Assisted WAG
an Old Technology
1. Despite the favorable characteristics of CO
2
; it
suffers from:
Viscous fingering
gravity override
Possible Early Gas Breakthrough
2. Foam Treatment (surfactant Solution) for Mobility
Control has the Potential to Improve Gas Sweep
3. The North Sea Snorre Field is the Worlds Largest
Application of Foam (F-A-WAG)
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
242
EOR
O
API Viscosity
cp
S
O

%
Formation
Type
h
ft
k
md
Depth
ft
T,
O
F
Compositio
n
CO
2
>22 <10 > 25 SS or
carbonat
e
NC NC >2500 NC High %
of
C
5
to C
7

ASP 20-
35
<35 >35 SS NC >50 <9000 80-
200
Some
organic
acids
Screening Criteria
WAG Flood
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
243
The Water-Alternating-Gas WAG injection was originally proposed as a
method to improve sweep of gas injection, mainly by using the water to control
the mobility of the displacement and to stabilize the front.

Because the microscopic displacement of the oil by gas is normally better than
by water, the WAG injection combines the improved displacement efficiency of
the gas flooding with an improved macroscopic sweep by water injection. This
has resulted in improved recovery as compared to a pure water injection
What is WAG?
Traditional Miscible WAG Injection
Traditional Immiscible WAG Injection
Simultaneous Water and Gas injection SWAG
Hybrid WAG Injection (large volume of gas is
injected followed by a number of small slugs of
water and gas)
Classification of WAG
12/1/2011
244
.
Miscible WAG Injection.

It is difficult to distinguish between miscible and immiscible WAG injections. In
many cases a multicontact gas/oil miscibility may have been obtained, but much
uncertainty remains about the actual displacement process. Miscible projects are
mostly found onshore, and the early cases used expensive solvents like propane,
which seem to be a less economically favorable process at present. Most of the
miscible projects are repressurized in order to bring the reservoir pressure above
the minimum miscibility pressure (MMP) of the fluids. Because of failure to
maintain sufficient pressure, meaning loss of miscibility, real field cases may
alternate between miscible and immiscible gas during the life of the oil production.
Most miscible WAG injections have been performed on a close well spacing, but
recently miscible processes have also been attempted even at offshore type well
spacing.
Immiscible WAG Injection.

This type of WAG process has been applied with the aim of improving frontal
stability or contacting unswept zones. Applications have been in reservoirs where
gravity-stable gas injection cannot be applied because of limited gas resources or
reservoir properties like low dip or strong heterogeneity. In addition to sweep, the
microscopic displacement efficiency may be improved. Residual oil saturations are
generally lower for WAG injection than for a waterflood .Sometimes the first gas
slug dissolves to some degree into the oil. This can cause mass exchange
(swelling and stripping) and a favorable change in the fluid viscosity/density
relations at the displacement front. The displacement can then become near-
miscible.
12/1/2011
245
Miscible WAG with CO
2

Hybrid WAG Injection.
When a large slug of gas is injected, followed by a number of small slugs of water
and gas, the process is referred to as hybrid WAG injection

Simultaneous Water and Gas injection SWAG
SWAG injection has been tested in a few reservoirs.

Water Alternating Steam Process (WASP).
Water
Gas \or Steam)
Production Well
Pilot WAG- Middle East
Two Injectors
12/1/2011
246
Factors Affecting the WAG Process
1. WAG Parameters:
Cycling frequency, based on Length or Volume!
Slug size
WAG ratio
Injection rate
2. Reservoir Heterogeneity
Stratification (gas channeling)
Anisotropy
3. Rock Wettability
4. Fluid Properties
5. Miscibility Conditions
6. Gas Trapped
7. Water Blocking
8. Cross Flow
9. S
or

WAG Injection Pattern
Onshore Fields:
- 5-spot with close well spacing is widely used
- Line-Drive pattern
Offshore Fields:
- Drilling new wells is extremely expensive and therefore fixed
injection pattern is seldom used
- Current industry trend rely on the use of horizontal WAG
injection wells placed near the bottom of the formation with
sidetracked production wells (GOM K2)

12/1/2011
247
Displacement Mechanism
1- Initial Reservoir Condition
Analogy to a set of Tanks connect by pipe.
Rock Pores Pore Throat Water
12/1/2011
248
2- Oil Migration
S
wi

S
oi

3- Waterflooding
S
orw
S
oi

S
wi

S
w

12/1/2011
249
4- Gas Displacement
P
inj
> MMP
S
orm
.

S
w

S
orm

S
wr

Miscible Front
S
orw

5- Waterflood
S
gr
S
gt

12/1/2011
250
Permeability Hysteresis & Trapped Gas
Optimum WAG Ratio
Crossflow
Diffusion and Dispersion

Gas Saturation
K
rg

0
0
100
1
A
B
C
D
A-B: 1
st
gas cycle
B-C: 1
st
water cycle
F-D: 2
nd
gas cycle

E
S
gc
(S
gt
)
C
(S
gt
)
E

WAG Flood
Gas Relative Permeability Hysteresis during
12/1/2011
251
Optimum WAG Ratio
1
f
opt

f
0
0
1
1
Saturation
Optimum WAG Ratio in
Tertiary Floods
Optimum WAG Ratio in
Secondary Floods
opt
opt
f
f
WGR
= =
1 gas injected
water injected
B
f
opt

f
0
0
1
Saturation
A
C
Optimum WAG Ratio WGR
12/1/2011
252
Injectivity Concerns
1. As shown by the drawing to
the right, it is not possible
to entirely displace an
existing fluid from the
pores. Each new fluid being
injected has less space open
for flow.
2. Asphaltene and flow
assurance
Modeling of WAG
&
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
253
Reservoir dimensions= X=500 ft, Y=500 ft
S
oi
= 0.70

1. Initial Pressure =4000 psia
2. S
wi
=0.20
3. 45
o
API
4. Temperature 160
o
F
5. Gas gravity=0.65
6. S
or
= 0.35
7. S
gc
= 0.05
8. S
wc
= 0.20
9. S
orm
= 0.10
10. GOR=573 scf/STB
11. Model will calculate P
b

12. Pressure at 8400 ft =4000 psi
13. Pressure at 8300 ft =3980 psi
14. Minimum P
wf
= 300 psi

12/1/2011
254
Layer 1 Layer 2 Layer 3
K
x
, md 500 50 200
K
y
, md 500 50 200
K
z
, md 50 50 25
0.30 0.30 0.30
h, ft 20 30 50
Z, ft 20 30 50
S
oi
0.80 0.80 0.08
y-direction (rows)
1 7
1
7
2
x-direction (columns)
3
1
Wells Location:
Well Type Column Row Layer
Producer: 1 7 3
Injector 7 1 1
MMP 3200.00
P
vap
1700.00

gas
0.020
0.620
S
orm
0.10000
Water Blocking 0.000

a) minimum oil flow rate, STB/day =0
b) maximum oil flow rate, STB/day =12000 STB/day
c) Total Fluid Voidage Rate in bbl/day=0

Production Scenario:
One Production well producing for 2 years
WAG Cycle after two years
Each cycle is one year
Water injection rate is 12000 STB/day
Gas Injection Rate is 12000 Mscf/day
Total Simulation Time 5000 days

12/1/2011
255
Thermal Recovery Process
Rights Reserved
Thermal recovery Methods
Heat is applied to:

Reduce oil viscosity
Increase S
o
and improve K
ro

Create distillation and thermal cracking of
the oil
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
256
THERMAL RECOVERY

In general, thermal recovery techniques is
divided into three categories:

1)Cyclic steam stimulation
2)Steamflooding
3)In-situ combustion.

Cyclic steam stimulation:
The Cyclic Steam Stimulation method, also known as Huff-and-Puff or
Steam Soak and is applied to heavy-oil reservoirs to improve recovery
during the primary production phase. The process consist of three stages:

1. Injection
2. Soaking, and
3. Production

In the initial stage, steam is injected into a well at a relatively high injection
rate for approximately one month. At the end of the injection period, the well
is shut-in for a few days (approximately 5 days) to allow steam soaking to
heat the oil in the area immediately around the wellbore. The well is then put
on production until it reaches the economic flow rate and at this point, the
entire cycle is repeated. The steam injection and soak may be repeated four
to five times or until the response to stimulation diminishes to noneconomic
level. In general, the process can be quite effective, especially in the first few
cycles.
12/1/2011
257
Stimulating the well by the Huff-and-Puff process significantly improves oil
rate by two means:

1. Removing accumulated asphaltic and/or Paraffinic deposits around the
wellbore resulting in an improvement of the permeability around the
wellbore (i.e. favorable skin factor)
2. Radically decreases the oil viscosity which in turns improves oil mobility
and well productivity
3. Increase the thermal expansion of the oil which impacts the oil
saturation and its relative permeability.

12/1/2011
258
Estimation of the Oil Rate
( )
(
(
+ + +
+
=
] ) / [ln( ) ( ] ) / ln( [ ) (
] ) / ln( [
) ( ) (
cold
S r
e
r
cold o hot
S
w
r r
hot o
cold
S
w
r
e
r
cold
o
cold o
q
hot o
q
hot hot

( )
wi steam or
inj
hot
S S h
i
r

=
) ( 1
615 . 5
| t
The above expression shows the increase in the well productivity is attributed to
the combine reduction in oil viscosity and skin factor.

After several applications of steam cycling process, the huff and puff application is
converted to a steam flooding project.

Steam flooding:

In steam flooding, high-temperature steam is injected into a reservoir to heat
the oil. The oil expands, becomes less viscous and partially vaporizes,
making it easier to move to the production wells. Steamflooding is generally
used in heavy oil recovery to overcome the high viscosity that inhibits
movement of the oil.

Steam flooding is a pattern drive is a process similar to waterflooding in that a
suitable well pattern is chosen and steam is injected into a number of wells
while oil is produced from adjacent wells with Most steamfloods are
traditionally developed on 5-acre spacing. The recovery performance from
steam flooding depends highly on the selected flooding pattern, pattern size,
and reservoir characteristics. The Steam flood project typically proceeds
through four phases of development; these are:
1) Reservoir screening
2) Pilot tests
3) Fieldwide implementation; and
4) Reservoir management

12/1/2011
259
Large scale steam injection in California
12/1/2011
260
Most reservoirs that are subject to successful Huff-and-Puff operations
are considered good candidates for steam flood. The process involves
continuous injection of system to form a steam zone around the injector
that continues to advance in the reservoir with injection. In typical steam
drive projects, the injected fluid contains 80% steam and 20% water, i.e.
steam quality of 80%. The majority of the steam drive field applications
are typically conducted jointly with the Huff-and-Puff Process where the
process is conducted on producing wells, particularly when the oil is too
viscous to flow before the heat from the steam injection wells arrives.

A B
C D E
0
80
S
oi

S
or

S
o
, %
X
X
Hot water Bank Cold Oil Bank
Steam
Zone
Solvent
Bank
Original Reservoir
Fluid Zone
Steam
Zone
Solvent
Bank
Hot water Bank Cold Oil Bank Original Reservoir
Fluid Zone
T
s

T
r

Temperature
Distance from injection well to producing well
As steam moves through the reservoir between the injector and producer, it creates
five regions each with the associated temperature and oil saturation profiles:
12/1/2011
261
Steam Zone Region A
As the steam enters the pay zone, it forms a steam saturated zone around with a
temperature that is nearly equal to that of the injected steam. A typical temperature
profile for the steam flood is shown by the upper curve of Figure 6-4. The profile
shows the gradual transition from the steam temperature at the injection well to the
reservoir temperature at the producing well. Due to the high temperature in Region
A, the oil saturation is reduced to its lowest saturation.This drastic reduction in the
oil saturation is attributed to the following:
1. Significant improvement in oil mobility by reducing viscosity
2. Steam distillation and vaporization of the lighter component in the crude oil. In
the steam zone, the hydrocarbon recovery by steam is greater for lighter oils
because they contain a greater fraction of steam-distillable components.
Steam
Zone
Solvent
Bank
Original Reservoir
Fluid Zone
T
s

T
r

Temperature
B C D E
A
Hot Condensate Zone Regions B&C
The hot condensate zone can be divided into a solvent bankB and hot water bank
C. As the steam zone moves away from the injector, its temperature drops due to
the heat loss to the surrounding formation and at some distance from the injection
well, the steam and some of the vaporized hydrocarbon vapor condense to form
the Hot Condensate Zone, i.e. Region B and C. The hot condensate zone can be
described as a mix of solvent bank (condensed hydrocarbon fluid bank) and hot
water bank. In this hot condensate zone, the solvent bank extracts additional oil
from the formation to form a miscible hydrocarbon-slug drive that is miscible with
the initial oil in place. This miscible displacement contributes significantly to the
ultimate oil recovery process by steam injection.
Steam
Zone
Solvent
Bank
Original Reservoir
Fluid Zone
T
s

T
r

Temperature
B C D E
A
12/1/2011
262
Oil Bank Region D
As the mobilized oil is displaced by the advancing steam and hot water
fronts, an oil bank with higher oil saturation than the initial saturation is
formed in Region D. The zone is characterized by a temperature profile
ranging from the hot condensate zone temperature to that of the initial
reservoir temperature.
Steam
Zone
Solvent
Bank
Original Reservoir
Fluid Zone
T
s

T
r

Temperature
B C D E
A
Reservoir Fluid Zone Region E
Region E essentially represents that portion of the reservoir that has
not been affected or contacted by the steam. The region contains the
reservoir fluid system that exists at the initial reservoir condition in terms
of fluid saturations and original reservoir temperature
Steam
Zone
Solvent
Bank
Original Reservoir
Fluid Zone
T
s

T
r

Temperature
B C D E
A
12/1/2011
263
Steam Recovery Mechanisms

Under stem injection, the crude oil is recovered under several combined
recovery mechanisms, all with different degree of contribution and
importance. Essentially, there are five driving mechanisms that have been
identified as the main driving forces, these are:

1) viscosity reduction and
2) thermal expansion and swelling of the oil
3) Steam distillation
4) Solution Gas drive
5) Miscible displacement
Figure 6-5. Contribution of steamflooding mechanisms to oil recovery
Viscosity Reduction
Oil Recovery, %
Waterflood at reservoir
Temperature
0
Temperature,
O
F
200 300 400
80
20
Figure 6-5 illustrates the contribution of each mechanism to the overall recovery by
steamflooding of heavy oil.

12/1/2011
264
Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage SAGD
Steam assisted gravity drainage SAGD is based on the use steam injection,
coupled with horizontal well technology, to assist the movement of oil to a
production well by means of gravitational forces. The procedure utilizes a pair
of parallel horizontal wells, one at the bottom of the formation and the other is
placed about 10 to 30 feet above it. The wells are vertically aligned with each
other with their length in the order of 3,500 feet
Steam
injection
well
Production
well
Figure 6-12. Schematic illustration of the SAGD concept
Steam Chamber
12/1/2011
265
SAGD Process:

Initially, the cold heavy oil is essentially immobile. Therefore, an initial preheating stage
is necessary to create a uniform thermo-hydraulic communication between well pair. In
this start-up period, steam is injected in both wells to preheat the reservoir between the
wells. This steam circulation process in both, the injector and producer, continues, for
approximately 2-4 months to enhance the oil mobility by reducing its viscosity. Once
mobility has been established, steam is injected continuously into the upper well only.
With the continuous injection of the steam, the steam rises to the top of the formation
forming a steam chamber that grows vertically and horizontally. The injected steam will
reach the chamber interface, heating the surrounding cold oil sand. The condensate
and heated oil drain by gravity and flow towered the horizontal well near the base of the
reservoir in countercurrent to the rising steam. It should be noted that since the flow
path of oil and steam are separate, the displacement process is slow. However, the
fingering problem that is traditionally associated with steamflooding is essentially
eliminated and, thereby, improving the oil recovery efficiency by SAGD.

Steam flows into
Interface and condenses
Production Well
Injection Well
Heated oil
Flows to well
Heated oil
Flows to well
Formation Top
Figure 6-13. Schematic illustration of the SAGD mechanism
Steam Chamber
The steam chamber expansion process and associated drainage flow are
shown schematically in Figure 6-13.
12/1/2011
266
In-situ combustion "Fire-flood"

The in-situ combustion process is commonly used to recover heavy oil that is too
viscous to be produced by conventional means. The fireflood is generally maintained
by igniting air to create a combustion zone that moves through the formation toward
production wells. The intense heat forms zones of steam and vaporized oil that move
in advance of the combustion zone toward production wells, where the oil, water, and
gases are brought to the surface and separated.

The process is initiated by continuous injection of air into a centrally located injection
well. Ignition of the reservoir crude oil can either occur spontaneously after air has
been injected over some length of time of it requires heating. Chemical reaction
between oxygen in the injected air and the crude oil generate heat even without
combustion. Depending on the crude composition, the speed of this oxidation process
may be sufficient to develop temperatures which ignite the oil. If not, ignition can be
initiated by:

a) Downhole electric heaters
b) Preheating injection air, or
c) following air injection with oxidizable chemicals

Forms of In-Situ Combustion

There are three forms of in-situ combustion processes, these are:

1. Forward combustion
2. Reversed combustion
3. Wet combustion

12/1/2011
267
Forward Combustion

Figure 6-14. In situ combustion Process. (Courtesy Bartlesville Energy Technology Center , DOE)
Oil Bank
Burned
Region
Hot Water
Burned zone
Steam &Light
Hydrocarbons
Coke
Air
Production well
Burning Front
Reservoir
Temperature
Combustion
Temperature

Steam
Plateau
Water
Temperature
Distance
Temperature
Figure 6-15. In situ combustion Temperature Zones
12/1/2011
268
Reverse Combustion
The reserve combustion technique has been suggested for application in
reservoirs that contain extremely viscous crude oil systems. The reverse
combustion process is first started as a forward combustion process by injecting
air in a well that will be converted later to a producer. After establishing ignition
and burning out a short distance in the oil sand, the well is put on production and
air injection is switched to another adjacent well. The air injection in the adjacent
well displaces the oil toward the producing well passing through the heated zone
while the combustion front travels in the opposite direction towards the air injection
well. However, if the oil around the air injection well ignites spontaneously, the air
(i.e. oxygen supply) is stopped and the process reverts to a forward combustion
scheme.
These conditions require special, high-cost tubular to protect against high
temperatures and corrosion. More oxygen is required to propagate the front
compared to forward combustion, thus increasing the major cost of operating an
insitu combustion project.

Wet Combustion COFCAW
Heat utilization in the forward combustion process is very inefficient due to the fact
that air has a poor heat carrying capacity. Only about 20% of the generated heat
during the forward combustion scheme is carried forward ahead of the combustion
front where it is beneficial to oil recovery. The remaining heat is stored in the
burned zone and is eventually lost to the cap and base rock of the pay zone.
Several variations of the in-situ process have been proposed to utilize this lost heat.

Water may be injected simultaneously or alternately with air resulting in better heat
distribution and reduced air requirements. In the burned zone, injected water is
converted to superheated steam which flows through the flame and heats the
reservoir ahead. This is called COFCAW process (combination of forward
combustion and waterflood).

As the superheated system mixed with air reaches the combustion front, only the
oxygen is utilized in the burning process. Upon crossing the combustion front, the
superheated steam mixed with nitrogen from the air and flue gas consisting mainly
of CO AND CO
2
. This mixture of gases displaces the oil in front of the combustion
zone and condenses as soon as its temperature drops to about 400. The length
of the steam zone is determined by the amount of heat recovered from the burned
zone upstream.
12/1/2011
269
Equations of State
&
Compositional Modeling
537
The term lumping or pseudoization then denotes the reduction in the
number of components used in equation of state calculations for reservoir fluids.
This reduction is accomplished by employing the concept of the pseudo-
component. The pseudo-component denotes a group of pure components
lumped together and represented by a single component with a Single Carbon
Number (SCN).

Components Lumping
12/1/2011
270
There are essentially two main problems associated with regrouping the original
components into a smaller number without losing the predicting power of the equation
of state, these are:

How to select the groups of pure components to be represented by one pseudo-
component each.

What mixing rules should be used for determining the physical properties (e.g. p
c
, T
c
,
M, and e) for the new lumped pseudo-components
)] log( 3 . 3 1 [ n N Int N
g
+ =
g
N I
C
N
C I
M
M
M M
/
7
7
) (
+
=
Lumping Scheme
N
g
= Optimum Number of Multiple-Carbon-Number groups
N = Number of carbon atoms of the last component in the hydrocarbon system
n =Number of carbon atoms of the first component in the plus fraction, i.e. n = 7 for C
7

M
N+
= Molecular weight of the last reported component in the extended analysis of the
hydrocarbon system
M
C7
= Molecular weight of C
7

I = 1, 2, , N
g

The molecular weights M
I
separating each MCN group are calculated
from the following expression:

12/1/2011
271
Class problem
Given the following compositional analysis of the C
7+
fraction
in a condensate system, determine the appropriate number of
pseudo-components forming in the C
7+
.

Component z
i
M
i

C
7
0.00347 96
C
8
0.00268 107
C
9
0.00207 121
C
10
0.001596 134
C
11
0.00123 147
C
12
0.00095 161
C
13
0.00073 175
C
14
0.000566 190
C
15
0.000437 206
C
16+
0.001671 259
e
=
L
L i
i
i
i
z
z
z
*
e
=
L
L i
i i L
M z M
*
e
=
L
L i i
i i
L L
M z
M ] [ /
*
e
=
L
L i L
ci i i
cL
M
V M z
V ] [
*
e
=
L
L i
ci i cL
p z p ] [
*
e
=
L
L i
i i L
z ] [
*
e e
e
=
L
L i
ci i cL
T z T ] [
*
Lees Mixing Rules:
Defining:
12/1/2011
272
Class problem
Using Lees mixing rules, determine the physical and critical properties of the four
pseudo-components in last Example

Group I Component M
i
z
i
z
I

1
C
7
96 0.00347
0.00822
C
8
107 0.00268
C
9
121 0.00207

2
C
10
134 0.001596
0.002826
C
11
147 0.00123

3
C
12
161 0.00095
0.002246
C
13
175 0.00073
C
14
190 0.000566

4
C
15
206 0.000437
0.002108
C
16+
259 0.001671
Rights Reserved
The Peng-Robinson EOS
12/1/2011
273
545
) ( ) (
) (
b V b b V V
T a
b V
T R
p
+ +
=
o
c
c
a
c
c
p
T R
p
T R
a
2 2 2 2
45724 . 0 O = =
c
c
b
c
c
p
T R
p
T R
b O = = 07780 . 0
2
)] 1 ( 1 [ ) (
C
T
T
m T + = o
m = 0.3796 + 1.54226 e - 0.2699 e
2

) ( ) (
] ) ( [
m m m
m
m
b V b b V V
T a
b V
T R
p
+ +
=
o
and Mixing Rules
2
) (
) (
RT
p a
A
m
o
=
RT
p b
B
m
= &
0 ) ( ) 2 3 ( ) 1 (
3 2 3 2 3
= +
=
B B B A Z B B A Z B Z
p
T R Z
V
) 1 ( ) (
ij j i j i
C
i
C
j
j i m
k a a x x a =
+ +
o o o
+
=
C
i
i i m
b x b
12/1/2011
274
547
p
T R n Z
V
B B B A Z B B A Z B Z
=
= + 0 ) ( ) 2 3 ( ) 1 (
3 2 3 2 3
Imagine that you can calculate OIL VOLUME
From:

P V = Z n R T
Problems Associated with Equations of State
Severely Underestimate Density and Overestimate
Volume
Finding the Correct Z-Factor Root
12/1/2011
275
T R Z
M p
=
overestimates the
Z-factor
PR EOS PR EOS
0 ) ( ) 2 3 ( ) 1 (
3 2 3 2 3
= + B B B A Z B B A Z B Z
p
T R Z
V =
1
V
Most Cubic equations of state grossly:
overestimate liquid volumes V
and
underestimate Liquid densities
1
V
Solution : Volume Translation c
Simply; a Volume Correction Factor
=
=
=
=
n
i
i i
EOS
v
Corr
v
n
i
i i
EOS
L
Corr
L
c y V V
c x V V
1
1
12/1/2011
276
Problems Associated with
Equations of State
2. Finding the Correct Z-Factor Root; through
the concept of:
Gibbs Free Energy Function & FUGACITY
552
Fugacity
The fugacity f may be looked upon as a
vapor pressure modified to correctly represent
the escaping tendency of the molecules from
one phase into the other, at equilibrium:

n i f f
L
i
v
i
s s = 1
Assume for now that we know
how to calculate the fugacity
12/1/2011
277
553
Z
V
, n
V
& y
i

f
i
L

Gas
Liquid
P
T
Z
L
, n
L
& x
i

f
i
V

Overall System
Z
i
, n
t

554
Gibbs Free Energy Function
g
*

The normalized Gibbs energy function g
*
is defined in terms of the
Composition of the system and the individual component fugacity
in the system:
=
=
n
i
v
i i gas
f y g
1
*
) ln(
=
=
n
i
L
i i Liquid
f x g
1
*
) ln(
12/1/2011
278
555

Assume that a liquid phase with a composition of x
i
has multiple Z-factor roots; the
middle root is discarded automatically and the remaining two are designated as Z
L1

and Z
L2
. To select the correct root; calculate the normalized Gibbs energy function
using the two remaining roots; i.e.:

=
=
n
i
L
i i Z
f x g
L
1
*
) ln(
1

=
=
n
i
L
i i Z
f x g
L
1
*
) ln(
2
the correct root is chosen as the one with the lowest normalized
Gibbs energy function g
*
.
Finding the Correct Z-Factor Root
556
g
*
V

g
*
L

g
*

g
*

Phase Splitting and Stability
Gibbs Free Energy Function
Stable-single Phase
P, T
2-Phase system
x y
P, T
3-Phase system
X
L2

y
i

X
Li

P, T
y
i
X
Li

P, T
=
=
n
i
i Z
Z f Z g
1
*
)] ( ln[
Z
Z
False V & L
Violate
Tangent-Plane criteria
12/1/2011
279
557
Fugacity
The fugacity f may be looked upon as a vapor pressure
modified to correctly represent the escaping tendency of
the molecules from one phase into the other, at
equilibrium:

n i f f
L
i
v
i
s s = 1
i
i
i
i
i
i
v
i
L
i
i
L
V
L
i i
i L
i
v
V
v
i i
i v
i
x
y
p y
f
p x
f
K
Z dV
V
T R
n
p
T R p x
f
Z dV
V
T R
n
p
T R p y
f
= = =
|
|
.
|
\
|
c
c
= =
|
|
.
|
\
|
c
c
= =
}
}
) /( ) (
) ( ln
1
) ln( ) ln(
) ( ln
1
) ln( ) ln(
|
|
|
|
v
i
L
i
i
L
V
L
i i
i L
i
v
V
v
i i
i v
i
K
Z dV
V
T R
n
p
T R p x
f
Z dV
V
T R
n
p
T R p y
f
|
|
|
|
=
|
|
.
|
\
|
c
c
= =
|
|
.
|
\
|
c
c
= =
}
}
) ( ln
1
) ln( ) ln(
) ( ln
1
) ln( ) ln(
Fugacity coefficient
i
, Fugacity f
i

and Equilibrium Ratio K
i

12/1/2011
280
559
0
1 ) 1 (
) 1 (
) ( =
+
i i v
i i
v
K n
K z
n f

i v L
i
i
K n n
z
x
+
=
i i
i v L
i i
i
K x
K n n
K z
y =
+
=
n
L
= 1 - n
v

Flash Calculations
Solve for:
n
V
, n
L
, x
i
, and y
i

Given:
K
i
and Z
i

n
V
& y
i

Gas
Liquid
P
T
n
L
& x
i

Given
Z
i
, K
i

560
Flow diagram of the K-Value determination by EOS
)] 1 )( 1 ( 37 . 5 exp[
T
T
p
p
K
ci
i
ci
i
+ = e
Given:
z
i
, P, T
Assume K
A
i

Perform flash
calculations
X
i
, n
L

Z
L
,
L
i

y
i
, n
V

Z
V
,
V
i

Calculate K
i

Test for
convergence
0001 . 0 where
1
1
~
s
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
c
c
n
i
A
i
i
K
K 0001 . 0 > c
0001 . 0 s c
Yes
i
A
i
K K = set No,
i
A
i
K K =
Solution; gives:
K
i
, x
i
, y
i
, n
L
, n
V
, Z
L
, Z
V

12/1/2011
281
561
Z
V
, n
V
& y
i

Gas
Liquid
P & T
Z
L
, n
L
& x
i

Overall System
Z
i
, n
t

p
T R n Z
V
V
V
V
=
p
T R n Z
V
L
L
L
=
From K-Value Flow Diagram
The fluid phases; i.e. liquid and gas, can be described within the framework of the
equation of state (EOS) while the precipitated pure solid phase is described by an
additional equation that is derived from the Flory-Huggins solubility model.

Let s represents the solid phase in equilibrium with the two fluid hydrocarbon
phases, liquid L and vapor v. The thermodynamic basis for phase equilibrium
conditions states that the fugacity f
i
for each component i in entire system is the
same in all phases. In a mixture of n components, let the asphaltene component
be the nth component. When the vapor, liquid, and solid phases coexist at
equilibrium, the following thermodynamic equilibrium conditions must be satisfied.

L
i
V
i
f f =
s
n
L
n
V
n
f f f = =
12/1/2011
282
563
Vapor y
i
i=1,2,, n
A+

y
nB+
= 0
+ +
+
+
+
= =
= =
nB nB
nB
s
nB
A
s
i
x x
s
K
n i K
1
,.., 1 , 0
+ +
+
+
+
= =
= =
nB nB
nB s
nB
A
s
i
x x
s
K
n i K
1
,.., 1 , 0
Liquid x
i

i=1,2,, n
A+
, n
B+

Solid s
i

i= n
B+

n
t
= n
v
+ n
L
+ n
S

Three Phase Flash Calculations

The component and phase material balance constraints state that for one mole
of feed ; i.e. n
t
=1, with composition z
i
; can be distributed into three phases:

Vapor phase with composition y
i
and n
v
moles
Liquid phase with composition x
i
and n
L
moles
Solid phase with composition s
i
and n
s
moles

The material balance can then be written as:
1 = + +
s v i
n n n
i i s i v i i
z s n y n x n = + +
0 . 1 = = = =
i i i i
z s y x
Combining the above relationships and introducing the equilibrium ratio; give
12/1/2011
283
0
1 ) 1 ( ) 1 (
) 1 (
) , ( =
(
+ +

=
=
n
i i
s
i i v
i
s v
K K n
K z
n n f
0
) 1 ( ) 1 (
) 1 (
) , (
1
=
(
+

=
=
n
i
s
i s i v
s
i i
s v
K n K n
K z
n n g
These two relationships can be solved tentatively for the number of moles
of the vapor phase n
v
and solid phase n
s
. The phase composition can
then be determined from:

s
nB nB nB
i i i
s
i s i v
i
i
K x s
K x y
K n K n
z
x
+ + +
=
=
+ +
=
) 1 ( ) 1 ( 1
TUNING OF
EQUATION OF STATE
2006Tarek Ahmed &
Reserved.
12/1/2011
284
Why do we TUNE EOS ?
Why EOS in NOT predictive ?
The Plus Fraction C
+

Methane C
1
Mixing Rules
First Problem !

a, b, and (T) of the Plus Fraction!
+
+
+
O =
c
c
a C
p
T R
a
2 2
+
+
+
O =
c
c
b C
p
T R
b
2
2
2699 . 0 54226 . 1 3796 . 0
] ) 1 ( 1 [ ) (
+ +
+
+ =
+ =
C C
C
m
T
T
m T
e e
o
T
C
, p
C
, and of the C
+
! ?

a+
and
b+
same as for pure components ! ?
12/1/2011
285
+
+
+
O =
c
c
a C
p
T R
a
2 2
+
+
+
O =
c
c
b C
p
T R
b
Methane; is another problem
T >>> -116
o
F
T
C
= -116
O
F
Problems when
T>T
c

12/1/2011
286
The Traditional Methodology of
Tuning EOS
Extending the C
7+
to C
45+
or more
Lumping into 3-5 pseudo fractions, e.g. F1, F2,, F5
Adjusting ( p
C
& T
C
)
C1 & C+ Fractions
; or
Adjusting (
a
&
b
)
C1 & C+ Fractions

Binary interaction coefficient k
C1 C+

Adjusting volume correction parameters c
i

C
a
a
b
b
C
C
a
b
b
a
C
b
p p
T T
(
O
O
O
O
=
(
O
O
O
O
=
O O O O
*
2 *
2
*
*
*
*
*
b
*
a a
) (
: means ; & to & Adjusting
Risky approach
12/1/2011
287
DO NOT:
Adjust Critical Volume V
c
,
Adjust Acentric factor w, very risky
Regress on CCE (very misleading
approach)
574

12/1/2011
288
575
# Original
Component
k
ij

a

b
c
1 N
2

2 CO
2

3 C
1
x x x x
4 C
2

5 C
3

6 i-C
4

7 n-C
4

8 i-C
5

9 n-C
5

10 C
6

11 F
1
x x x x
12 F
2
x x x x
13 F
3
x x x x
C
a
a
b
b
C
C
a
b
b
a
C
p p
T T
(
O
O
O
O
=
(
O
O
O
O
=
*
2 *
2
*
*
*
*
) (
Most important components;
WHY?
1. Undefined
2. System is Characterized
by these Fractions
STEP 1
576
# Component k
ij

a

b
c
1 N
2
+C
1
x x x
2 CO
2
+C
2
x x
3 C
3

4 i-C
4

5 n-C
4

6 i-C
5

7 n-C
5

8 C
6

9 F
1
x
10 F
2
x
11 F
3
x
# Component k
ij

a

b
c
1 N
2
+C
1
x
2 CO
2
+C
2

3 C
3

4 i-C
4
n-C
4
x x
5 i-C
5
n-C
5
x x
6 C
6

7 F
1
x
8 F
2
x
9 F
3
x
# Component k
ij

a

b
c
1 N
2
+C
1
x
2 CO
2
+C
2

3 C
3
+ i-C
4
n-C
4
x x
4 i-C
5
n-C
5
+ C
6
x x
5 F
1
x
6 F
2
x
7 F
3
x
STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4
12/1/2011
289
Rock and fluid properties:
Porosity=0.12
Reservoir dimensions: X=300 ft, Y=300 ft, Z=20 ft
Thickness= 20 ft
Kx=0.8 md, Ky=10.0 md, Kz = 0.8md
T = 120 deg F
Gas Gravity = 0.65
Critical gas saturation=0.02
Critical water saturation=0.25
Initial water saturation=0.25
Pressure @5020 ft (bottom of the formation) = 3500
Total Simulation time: 7200 days

The Nameless Gas Field
Project #1
Objectives:
maximize gas recovery
Stimulate wells
Reservoir Simulation
11/21/2011
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
290
The Nameless Gas Field
1
35
16
14
50
50
1
32
Rows
Project #2: SPE Comparative Study
Odehs Gas Injection Project

11/27/2011
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
291
12/1/2011
292
Project #3: SPE Comparative Study
Horizontal Well Simulation

11/27/2011
Rights Reserved
12/1/2011
293
12/1/2011
294
12/1/2011
295
12/1/2011
296

Team project
Big Texas Oil Field

Total area= 1290 acres
Reservoir dimensions= X=300 ft, Y=300 ft, Z=20 ft
Maximum # of wells= 8 wells
S
oi
= 0.70

Initial Pressure =4500 psia
35
o
API
Temperature 150
o
F
Gas gravity=0.65
S
or
= 0.35
S
gc
= 0.02
S
wc
= 0.30
S
orm
= 0.05
GOR=500 scf/STB
Model will calculate P
b

Minimum P
wf
= 300 psi

12/1/2011
297
Layer 1 Layer 2 Layer 3 Layer 4 Layer 5
K
x
, md 60 50 30 20 10
K
y
, md 60 50 30 20 10
K
z
, md 6 5 3.0 2 01
0.15 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.10
h, ft 20 20 20 20 20
Z, ft 20 20 20 20 20
y-direction (rows)
1 2
0
1
20
1
5
Objectives:
Maximize Oil Recovery
Compare Water Injection with Gas Injection
Drill Horizontal injectors /producers and:
test completion in Layer 1,2,3,4, and 5
Effect of horizontal well orientation
document the difference in RF
Stimulate Wells
Miscible Displacement
Document your Team Results Graphically
Team Presentation
12/1/2011
298
Suggestions & Comments
Always start with a BASE run; i.e. only producers;
compare the subsequent field development runs
with the base
On layers completion: notice that shutting off
layers does not stop flow across layers

Eor Ior Course T Ahmed

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Descrição original:

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Eor Ior Course T Ahmed

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

12/1/2011

sin : Flow Oil

sin : Flow Water

For Spreadsheet Calculations & Working Equations

12/1/2011 2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All

2- Viscosity Mixing Parameter

Você também pode gostar