*

SPE
-~~[mm
SPE 19691
Foam Performance Under Reservoir Conditions
F,E. Suffrldge, K,T. Raterman, an$ Q.C. Russell,Amoco ProductionCo.

SPE Members

@pY:ght16SS,Sodetyot PotrokumEngineer%,
Inc.
Thispaperwaeprepared/orpresentation
at theS4thAnnualTechnicalCo+rference
andExhibikmofth~Sioclety
ofPetroleum
EngineereheldInSanAntonio,
TX,OctoberS-11,1SSS.
Alwr(8).
CMantaofthe paper,
l%kpaperwasselectedkwpreeentMonbyan SPEProgramCommittee
fottowiwreviewofinformation
containedinen ebstraotwbmlttadby the
Themet.fldtu mt.d,
* no!~fy
*
se presented,havenotbeanreviewedbytheSccietyof Pekokum Enehews andbre eubjeoltoCoffeotknW theWffIOf@).
Cofnmlttaes
o}ttmSt@sty
y position
oftheSodetyofPetroleumEngineers,Itsottioere,or mambara.PaperapraaenfedatSPEmaatingaareaubjeoftopubketiorrrevkwbyEditorlel
!~b*ismdbm~d
MmMmw.lm*mytibq.
m~-~*~
$ %%%tiEbY=m the w k presented.WflfePubtkatio+w
Manager,WE, P.O.SoXS22S3S,Rlchsrdaon,
TX730SMS3S.Telex,730S2SSPEDAL.

thought
esses.

ABSTRACT
redt?:d gas permeability
Foams that ffectively
were formed over wide range of experimental
condiof selected
foaming agents to
tions.
The bility
f orst f oars was evaluated
in bulk foam measurement,
scraening
core tester
nd in reservoir
condition
Resulte
reported
show that oil
usually
core tests.
dversely affacted foan performance with higher
molecular
weight
lkanes showing less of n dverse
Foam can be
effect
for the foaming agents tested.
ffeetively
generated
in an oil-wet
porous medium
than in a
but was shown to be much lass effactive
water-wet
medium for the feaming agents studied,
High pressure
gradients
of up to 4524 kPa/m
rasulted
in effective
foam generation
(200 psi/ft)
foam continuing
to 8500 pore voLwith an effective
umes of injected
nitrogen.
Tha enriched
gas mixture
affect
usad in this study was shown to adversely
foam even though the foaming agent was selected
through screening
testing.
This showed the importance of including
reservoir
condition
testing
prior
to the final selection
of a foaming agent for a
given reservoir
application,
Effective
foaming
for use in pilot
tasts
in a
agents were identified
West Texas c02 flood and in a typicaL CanatypicaL
dian hydrocarbon
miscible
flood.
INTRODUCTION

The concept of using foam to reduce gas mobilpatented

by Bond and Holbrook in
ity was initially
1958.
Although many individuals
have studied the
properties
of fo~g5in porous media~ the works of
nd Helm
and Raza6 are classic
studies,
Bernard
of perhapa
100 fold reported
Caa mobility
reductions
studies
have suggested
that foant could ba
in these
ffectively
used to blotk gas flow in certain
reeervoir
situations
in addition
to providing
the potenratio
tial for improving the adv~rse mobility
Referance$

nd illustrations

at end of paper.

to

be coranon to

miscible

displacement

proc-

was directed
towmd
The work herein reported
the selection
of suitable
foaming gents for use in
two field
tests
of foam.
For these tests,
foam was
to be evaluated for its bility
to reduce gas ~obilgas mixture)
in n injection
ity (C02 or an enriched
well.
Thus, laboratory
efforts
were directed
to the
for
selection
of foaming agents that would provide
the maximum gas mobility
raduction
for the longest
reservoir
conpractical
period of time at +pecific
ditions.
As this work developed,
it t,eceme obvious
that varying
reservoir
conditions
of tamperatura,
water hardness and salinhydrocarbon
composition,
ityt i~:jected gas composition,
etc.
significantly
affected
foam performance.
The purpose of this
of these condipaper is to surrartarize the effects

tions

on foam performance.
Laboratory

Three
established

Experimental

Program

levels of experimental
testing
wera
to select
suitabla
foaming agents$

1.

Sulk foam measurement

(screening

2,

Screening

core

and

3,

Reservoir

condition

tests,

core

test),

tests.

Foaming agents tested are described

in Table 1 nd
Wast Texas C02
reservoir
conditions
for typical
flood
and a typical
Canadian enriched gas flood are
sunsnarized in Tabla 2. Water nalyses
for thaea two
re drtscribad
in Tible 3. Altaough these two
fields
waters wete simi~ar in composition,
it ehould be
e low as about 2000 kg/m3
noted that aalinitie?
#oLids (TDS) to s high s bout
total dissolved
220,000 kg/m3 TDS were leo examined.
In this
study, Sol~roL 130 nd Slandol were xtensively
used,
Soltrol
130, a refined
lkane, was determined
to hsve an average lkane chain length of Cll nd

FOA!! PERFORMANCE

will

be so designated
throughout
white Oilt hao an average
of CIS nd will be so designated
paper.

dol,

UNDERIMMIUJOIR CONDITION5

Blanthis
pa#3r.
lkane chain length
this
throughout

in
gas parmnability
data re preeentet
for
Formalized
data re also present-d
condition
test
in Figme
16 to simplify

Effects
for fosming agents
was:
The simpleet
screening
dissolve,
if possible,
the foaming agent in che
ppropriate
brine;
pour this
solution
into a cylinder nd seal the cylinder$
shake the cylinder
and
Howevert our
measure the foam height generated.
xperience showed this technique to produce rather
To provide more consistent
screening
arratic
data.
the bulk foam test
was developed as is
test results,
described
in Figure 1. This test allowed the rapid
screening
of surfactants
at room temperature
and
Specifically$
the
tmospheric pressure conditions.
effects
of differing
salinitylhardae~s
levels
and
the effects
of various hydrocarbons.on
a given foamNote
ing agent could be examined by this technique.
that the larger
the foam volume generated
at a given
rate,
the less ad~erse the effect
of a given hydrocarbon

on that

foaming

agent.

of a given
A more rigorous
test
was its performance
in porous media.
teat,
of testing,
the screening
c-re
Most tests
Ta>ia 4$ was developed.

foaming
For

this

agent
!evel

ac describad
in
were performed
long Berea cores of 300-600 pm2
in 0.305-wI (1.O-ft)
absolute
permeability.
Some tests were also parformed in cores of lengths of up to 1*22-m (6.0 ft).
pressure
drop
All teats were performed t constant
226 Wa/m (10 Psitft)t
conditions
of usually
ltbou~h pressure gradients
of up to 4524 kPa/m
were lso tested.
For screening
tests,
(200 pai/ft)
ither humidified
ir or humidified
nitrogen
war
Moat screening
tests
were
used s the gas phase.
terminated
t less than 300 hours duration,
lthough
This test provided
to 500 hours.
some were extended
of saLinity/hardnesst
waterflood
for the examination
residual
oil saturation,
pressure
gradient/velocityt
nd wattability
effects
on foam performance.
The final level of testing
examined foaming
agent performance
at reservoir
conditioi
- as
described
in Table 2 and Figur~s 2 and 3. Unlike
screening
tests,
these tests
were performed at constant velocity
conditions
ranging from about
to 6.1 m/day (20 ft/day).
0.15 m/day (0.5 ft/day)
Incremental
pressure
drops were recorded along cores
t selected
distances
from the injection
faca, usully across 7+62-cm (3.O:in.)
long segments of each
core, as illustrated
in Figures 2 and 3. Meet of
after 300 hours of
these tests were terminated
ArI in screening
core tests,
all injected
injection.
gases wsrs humidified
with water so as to minimize
drying of foam.
Reservoir
condition
testing
allowed
on foamj of gas comthe examination
of the effects
etc,, in addition
position,
temperature,
pressurej
to the effects
studied
in the screening
core tests.
For these sets of reservoir
conditions,
a restoredsc~!.a San Andres dolomite core (West Texas C02) and
enriched
gas) were thought to
Serea cores (Canadian
nettability
condibe suitable
models of reservoir
tions,
the comparison of screening
core
the absolute
core permeabilities
varied
by more than 100 pm2, effective
air or nitrogen permeabilities
were normalized
to either
the
absolute
brine permeability
or the oil permeability
t SUI for aach core,
The normalized
or relative
test

To si;nplify
data where

SP% 19691
Figures
8-10.
the reservoir
comparison.

of Hydrocarbons

Usually the presence of oil was found to be

deleterious
to foam s:ability.
The effect
of oil
(West Texaa separator
crude oil) on bulk foam volume
can vary from relatively
mild, as shown in the case
of a fluorinated
surfactant
in Figure 4. to essenas shown in the case of a Clo
tially
catastrophic
d-olefin
sulfonate
as shown in Figure 5. Note that
the more adverse the effect
of oil as measured in
the bulk foam stability
test,
the greater
is the gas
required
to denerate
foam in the pressnce
flow rate
of that oil.
For the surfactants
and oils tested,
the trend
establi.ghed
was that lower molecular
weight alkanes
were m:ce adverse to foam volume.
Data shown in
Figure 6 indicate
a marked difference
in bulk foam
stability
between Cll and Cls with CIE offering
no
adversity
to foam for this particular
foaming agent.
it WOU1 1,
xpected
For this series
of alkanes,
in porous media it, de presence of
that gas mobility
foam and C~l would be much greatw
than gas mobility
in the presence of foam, and C18.
LimiEed testing

with romatic

hydrocarbon
7.
These results
implied
that
the alkane ctiinponent domin~ced the ffect
aromatic/alkane
mixture
had on foams generated
Alipal CO-128.
this
particular
foaming gent,
sunwnerized

in

Figure

ia

that
the
with

of oil
on Alipal
CD-128
To confirm the effects
foama, series
of screening
core tests
was conducted using 0.305-m
(l.O-ft)
long Berea cores t A
residual
oil saturation.
waterflood
These results

are shown in Figure 8. For comparison purposes,

the
at a waterflood
SOR
top curve is for gas injection
(CIS) in the abaence of foam. Other curves shown
indicate
the relative
effectiveness
of foam t
in the prezence
of CII,
West
reducing gas mobility
Texas separator
crude oil, and the Cla.
Note that
the order of oil adversity
shown in this core teat
eeries matched the order of adversity
suggested
by
the bulk foam test results
shown in Figure 6.
Compare the Cls curve in Figure 8 to the lower
of a waterflood
SOA shown in
in the absence
Figure 9. For this comparison,
the futm generated
in ths presence of the CIS is somewhat more effective in reducing gas permeability,
Bulk foam measurements indicated
this trend on foam performance
and cope test results
confirmed that the presance of
enhanced foam performance,
CIS may have actually
perhaps by causing the formation of low levels of
oil-in-watar
emulsions
in ddition
to foam.
curve

Although not extensive;

evaluated,
other foamhave shown cn-sistent
results
with &he
above data in which lower molecular
weight alkanes
to foam.
These data
tended to be more destabilizing
indicated
the likelihood
of having to match given
foaming agent to the hydrocarbon
representative
of
given net of reservoir
conditions,
In addition,
the
test appeared adequately
relibulk foam scrcenini
test so s to reduce the number
able as screening
of core tests
raquired
in the selection
of a cuiting

agents

F. B. SUFFRIDOZ,K. T

3PE 19691

b~o foaming
tion.

gent

for

specific

reservoir

RATMMAN~

ior of foame 8enerated

tions.

tpplica-

number

residues
would not be expected
to many surfactant
systems.

~f:cts

to

show severe

of Wettabiiity

Serea core material

was extensively
used in
Berea is a strongly
waterthis study.
By nature,
wet, relatively
clean sandstone.
Its Wettsbility
can be readily
modified by treatment
with Quilon C,
a DuPont product developed for modifying wazer-wet
surfaces
to oil-wet. 7 Berea cores 5.08-cm (2.O-in.)
by 30.5-cm
(lZ-in.)
long were treated
in diameter
with Quilw. C and determined
to $e intermediateto
oil-wet
by the .hn~tt imbibition
technique.
Foam test resutts
using Alipal CD-128 as a
foaming gent are suoanarized in Figures 9 nd 10.
ir mobility
in the
Foam ffectiveness
in reducing
bsence of an oil saturation
is shown for QuilonBerea in Figure 9. For
treated
Berea nd untreated
conditions,
foam effectively
both nettability
reduced air relative
permeability
with a more effecBerea core.
For
tive foam observed in the water-wet
comparison in the presence of a
the Quilon-treated
residual
:1 saturation,
the results
re
w~terflood
indicated
much
shown in Figure 10. These results
foam in the Quilon-traated
core,
less effective
air
relative
permeability
was reduced
Nevertheless,
by an order of magnitude
over the no-foam case under
intermediateto oil-wet
conditions.
At water-wet
conditions,
nitrogen
relative
permeabilities
were
Thus ,
reduced
by over two orders
of magnitude.
these results
illustrate
the importance of including
representative
nettability
conditions
in the
selection
of a suitable
fcaming agent for a given
reservoir
application,
Pressure

Gradient/Velocity

tTffects

It was recognised
early that foam texture
has a
effect
on the mobility
of foam in porous
media.g
Furthert
it was recognized
that under
steady-state
flow condition,
bubble sizeio affectad
foam mobility
and that the dynamics of foam bubble
formatf;n
controlled
foam texture
in porous
edia.
For the data included
in this paper, all
foams were generated
under unsteady-state
flow conditions
with no attempt made to separate
the effects
of the dynamics of foim formation
from foam rheological properties.
It was recognized
that under
unsteady-state
would be
Jnditions,
foam texture
changing with gas throughput,
dynamic and constantly
However,
it was observed in the data to be presented
that the effect
of foam on gas mobility
with gas
throughput
was relatively
consistent
over large volumes for a given set of core test conditions.
For
discussion,
the terms of
purposes of the following
shear thickening
and shear thinning
will be used s
descriptive
terms to describe the stabilized
behavpronounced

under

unsteady-stat,~

condi-

Higher pressure
gradients
and resulting
highar
velocity
(higher
qhaar rate)
conditions
modified
the
ability
of frims
to reduce gas permeability.
Varion
CAS foama generated
with nitrogen
in screeninc core
te-ts
showed shear thickening
characteristic,
s
t higher
indicated
by reduced nitrogen
permeability
s shown in Figure
11. Thie charactershear rates,
istic
was lso observed
at reservoir
condition
using the enriched
gas mixture,
aa shown in
Figura 12. The opposite
effect,
that of ohear thinning, was shown by foams ganeruted
in screening
core
tests using nitrogen
and Enordet X2101, as shown hi
Figure 13. Velocity
was over 1,219 miday
(4,000 ftldayi
at the endpoint of the4tS24kPa/m
(200 psi/ft)
test and an effective
foam still
existed.
Although neither
characteristic
was
adverse
to foam pe-Tormexpected to be practically
ante away from the wellbore,
thickening
or tiinning
ok sear
behavior could confound the interpretation
in an injection
well
test.
well performance

These data suggest that oil presence may not be

For misci:svere problem in miscible
processes.
if foam is co be generated
in zones
ble processes,
previously
swept by C02 or an enriched gas, oil saturation
would be expected to be much lower than waterflood
residuals
and oil remaining in these zones
would likely
be a higher molecular
weight
residue because of solvent stripalkane/aromatic
ping.
Lower oil saturations
and higher carbon

adversity

G. C. RUSSELL

reduced
nitroAlthough these foams effectively
en permeability
for large throughput
volumes
f 2500 pore volumes t 1,810 kPa/m (80 psi/ft)],
t such high gradients
showed the
foams ~enerated
@xp@ct?d trend of Wch shorter
lifeti~s
on an beeLute time scale.
In ? dditional
test? illustrated
in

Figure

14,

pressure

gradients

of

i,131-1,810
kPa/m (50-80 psi/ft)
resulted
in ever
8500 pore volumes of nitrogen
injection
throush
foam.
ffffactive
nitrogen
permeability
reduction
remained throughout
the 149 hour lifetime
of this
test.
Had foam not been preeent,
nitrogen
pe~ability
would have been expected to be t least
150 ~z.
Further,
effective
foama have been generted at very low velocities
of about 0.1S mfday
(0.S ft/day)
in 50 pm2 dolomite cores.
I%US foa
generation
is practical
over very wide range of
velocity/pressure
gradient
conditions.
Foam at Reservoir

Conditions

Bulk foam height measurements and screening

core test results
identified
Enordet X2101 as being
an effective
foaming agent for uae at either
the
Canadian hydrocartypical
West Texas or the typical
bon miscible
flood test conditions
illustrated
in
F;Sures 2 and 3. Figure 15 sunsnarizes foam performante at the Wast Texas conditions.
After
about
9.5 pore volumes (300 hours) of C02 injection
in the
presence
of foam, COZ permeability
was reduced
approximately
a factor
of 10 compared to C02 permeability
in the absence of foam. These data refLact
tap [0.61-In
performance at the laat pressure
(24-in.)
at the tap midpoint from the injection
long San Andres dolomite
1 face] of a 0.79-m (31-in.)
core,
For both data sets, oil saturation
was t a
This test was
C02 residual
of 8.3% pore volut~e.
at 300 hour~ of C02 injection
with effecterminated
tive
foam continuing
throughout
the test,
For tests at the typical
Canadian
miscible
flood cortditiona,
an enriched
gaa mixture having the
composition
described
in Table 2 was used,
Initial
attempts
to generate
foam using this gas mixture nd
Enordet X2101 resulted
in a weak foam being Senerated.
It was speculated
that the combination
of
residual
separator
oil hd the intermediate
compo..637

FOAM
-.

PERPORMANcE
UNDER RMBRVOIR

nonts (Cg-Cs) in the gas mixture destabilized

the
foam. Since other testing
had identified
Varion CA$
foaming agent for use at thie set of
*S potential
condition,
further
core testing
was ps?fcrmed with
in Figura 16, a very
the Varion CAS. AL illustrated
effective
foam was ge~erated
at the mid and end secThis
long Berea core.
tions of the 0.79-m (31-in.)
core contained
a residual
oil saturation
to the
enriched gas of 9.7% pore vohme during the foam
sequence.
Note that there was a trend of increasing
foam effectiveness
with diztance.
This has been
observed in other tests with this surfactant
and
dense phase ethane at core length~ of 0.91-m
(3oO ft) and 2.~,4-m (8.9 ft).
It was speculated
that oil and w~.ter emulsions,
as well as foam, were
gas
formed with distaiice,
resulting
in additional
permeability
reduction.
These results
(the comparison of Enordet X2101 and Varion CAS) have emphasized the importance of approximating
reservoir
conditions
in final testing
to, select
a foaming
agent for a give~. application.

ACNNOULKDCEIIENT

The authors
thank the manageme~.c of the Amoco
?roduction
Company for the privilege
of publishing
Our gratitude
is lso extended to
this information.
C, R. Chadwell, 1, M. Cook, J. ?4: Corgan, D. S.
Denham, S. Hendricks and R. Walters for performing
the laboratory
experiments.

REFERENCES

.
1.

Boud, D. C, and Holbrook; 0. C., Gas Drive Oil

Recovery Process, w uoB@ patent 2~wit507~
December 1958.

2,

Bernard, George C. and Holm~ L. W., Effect of

Foam on Permeability
of Porous Media to Gas9
SPEJ, September 1964, pp. 267-274.

3.

Bernard, George C., Helm, L. W. and Jacobs,

W. L., Effect
of Foam on Trapped Caa Saturation
and on Permeability
of Porous Media to
Water, SPEJ, December 1965, pp. 295-300.

4.

Helm. L, w,, ~t~e Mechanism of Cae nd Liquid

of
Flow Through Poroue Media in the Presents
, December 1968, pp. 359-369.

5.

Bernard, George C., Holm~ L. W. nd Harvey,

Craig P., Use of Surfactant
to Reduce C@
Mobility
in Oil Displacement?
August 1980.

6.

Raza, S. H, Foam in Porous Hedia:

istic
and Potential
Applications,
December 1970, pp. 328-336.

7.

of
Tiffin~
D. L. and Yellig,
W. F.) %ffects
Mobile Water on Multiple
Contact Miscible Gas
Displacements,
SPEJ, June 1983, pp. 447-455.

8.

Amott, Earl, Observations

Relating
to the
AIME?:
Nettability
of Porous Rockj Transactions
vol.
216, 1959, pp. 156-162.

9*

Eerligh!
J. J. P.,
Marsden, S. S., Jr.,
Albrecht,
R. A. and David, A*) Use of Foam in
Proceedings
of the Sev~
Petroleum Opevations$
enth World Petroleum Congress,
Mexico City,
April 2-7, 1966, Elsevier,
Essex, England~
vol.
3, pp. 235-242.

OBSERVATIONSANDCONCLUSIONS,
Injection
well field tests of foam at these two
of reservoir
conditions
(West Texas C02 and
Canadian hydrocarbon miscible)
have been successfully performed with the foaming agents selected.
In each field tes$lcase,
measurable
injectivity
occurreil.=t
is concluded
from this
reductions
study that reservoir
condition
testing
is a necessary part of the evaluation
procesz in selecting
reservoir
application.
foaming agents for a specific
A number of observations
concerning
foam behavior
are relevant:
sets

1.

2,

3.

It was reasoned that the presence of oil in

miscible
processes
(C02 or enriched
gas) would
not severely
restrict
foaming because of the
expected lower saturation
of solvent
stripped
residual
oil (higher chain length residues)
in
swept zones.
an adverse enviThe presence of oil is usually
ronment for generating
an effective
foam; however, foaming agents can be identified
that
wiLl effectively
foam in the presence of oils.
For the foaming a&en? a included
in this study,
Lower molecular weight alkanes offered
a more
adverse environment
to foam than did higher
I,lolecular weight alkarves.
core tests
Bulk foam measurements and screening
of foaming
are useful tools in the selection
ngenta for a given reservoir
application.
Results
from these tests
should be confirmed in
a limited
number of core tests
at reservoir
conditions
before final selection
of a foaming
agent for a given reservoir.

4.

Foam can be effectively

generated
at high
[4,524
kPa/m (200 psi/ft)]
pressure
~adient~
and may be either
shear thinning
or shear
thickening,
depanding upon the foaming agents
selected
and the conditions
tasted.

5.

Effective
foama can be generated
in oil-wet
porous medii$ however, it is thou~-,t that careful selection
of foaming agent w~i be required
generate
foam in an
in order to successfully
oil-wet
environment.

CONDITIONS

Character~,

Lo.

A. ,.,
Must.era, J. J. and Ratulowski,
Falls,
J., The Apparent Viscosity
of Foams in Beadpacke, BPE Reservoir
Engineering,
Hay 1989)
pp. 155-164.

11,

Falls,
A. H., et al.,
Development of Mechanistic Foam Simulator:
The Population
Balance and
Generation
by Snap-off,
SPE Reservoir
Engineering,
August 1988, pp. 884-892.

SPE 19691

TAtL12
2
lescewir
Typical
Apparent
~ming

AliPal

Ag*nt

CO-128

PraduetDa-criptiom

supplier

dnlc.nic-st~oxy
l~ted

CAQCorporation

lcohol sulfate,
wmnonium salt
Enordat

Zonyl
Varion

X2101

FSK

Shetl

Chemimi CO,

OuPc.nt Company

GAS

Sherex

@:C~Cyi

fonatc,

sodium

Pluorlnattd

ChemlceL

Co.

( 10,342

kPa)

35h
TypkeL

lUl-

salt

Amphoteric

Anphoceric-Coco

Ucrt Texas COZ Fioodl

~ocmmion:EenAndtesDolomite
1.16 1#
Avcra~ePermeabiLLtyl
10.JX
t~l
Avera#e POre#i

Mole.16t
,
352

Tam~t&ture8
105 F (40.6C)
Opereting
Presaurel
1S00 p8ic

Anionic-Ethoxylated

lcohol

Teat Condition8

mine-

propyt sultobecelne

Can6dlan

Forutienl
Avcrege
Avara~e

809

ws

Flood:

Giluood

SendsCone
Pecmcabi 1 i t y:
600 paz
Porositgl
15.5%

Tcmpereturel

3,70

lhwiched

135 P (57.2C)

OpcratincPce#9ure! Zooop~ig

(13, 790 kPa)

Composition!

Solvent

Mit rofpn

7.84 MOICz
>0.37
0.37
1S.06

Mwhene
~er~ m Oioxide
Kthene

PrOpcna
n-~utane

13.93
B.36

n-P*n:en8

4.07
m

mol.

TABLE 3

lnjeetiOn Brine Selini~

TABLE b

ScregninS

Core Tsst

Conditions
Techniqug

Un6tea6y-Stete
Ion

COZ Flood

Cae Flood

sodium

40,310

32,062

1.

400 psie

Celcium

11,600

13,600

2.

$urfactent-filled
-- mey or My

Ilecnesium
Chloride

2,800

(2,7S8

kPa)

not

Sulfate

900

(689 kPe)

sbseluto

J.

2-in.

h.

Wumidifiad

(S. OB-cm)

9B

5.

?SF (23.9c)

lJ2 or

waterflood

diamet*r
Air

x 12-in.

Glass Column
Foam

PROCEDURE:

Surfactant

Solution

1.

15 cc wrfactant soiution

2.

5 cc oil

Frit

In]ec! air to constant

3* foam height

Hydrator
Alr
Pump

4.

Measure flow rate and

foam height

QJ
Figure1. BulkFoamTesI Appara!us

(30.S

cm)

t Cmwtant AP D 10 pei

1,100

OH

pressure

core
contain

79,100

580

100 psie

2;223

90,100

DienrbOnat*

or

lcn~th Berea
(69 kPe)

,,

SPE 19691

40.6% {105?)
Tompersture:
10,342 kPa (1500 pelg)
Preaeum:

Tempsraturw

Core Deecrtptton:
ComooeftmSan Andrea dolomtto
100.$cc la Vohmle
dla x 78-era (314n.) length
3.53=cmr1.18-in.)

Pressure: 13,760 kPa (2000 pslg)

Core Description:
Berea Sandstone
26100 average pom volume
300-600pmz Absolute Brine Permesbillties
5.08-cm (2.04n.) dia. x 61-om(244n.) length

%nH!%%-m9isiBdmk=m,
Inlit SectIon:
,d

Middle Section:
End Section:

59.2V (135P)

Aba; Btinak m 9.02 pm;

Aba. Brtne k x 6.15 pm

Flow Velooltles: 0.61 m/day (2.0 Wday and

0.3.0,6 m/day (1.O.2.Gftlday)

Flow Volocitles:
13ecomblnedWestTexaa 011@ SOF

SeparatorOil @ SWmday nday)

1 I

i
~
~

Middle

Inlet

Exit

Inlet

II

Middle

11

Exit

6.4 cm
15.2 cm

F@ma 2- West T*WM Cm tire Teat

Figure 3- Cmnedian Hyffooarbon Mholbla Core Teat Condlba

conditbna

{1
/

I
I

I
I
/
I

60-

40-

With Oil
------

/
20-

No 011

/
/

/
I

I
1

Gas Flowrate,cc/rein
Figure4. BulkFoamStablllty.0,0568MZonyl FSK, West Texas Separator Crude

640

*
.,

19691

SPE

---

\
\
i

\
\

\
\

%.,.
...*
......*.
...

.*
,,
.,
.. . . .
.
%.

-----..
--I

I
1

:8ss8
w oUmloAUJwj

-;
?5; g
I
~~I

\
\
\
\
\
\
\
I
I
I
\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

Ml

1
1

0.1
0.01
I

---

O.0001
O.owol

k ----\ \__-

,p~%--41,r

,/
-/

NoPoam
water-wet
-

\
\

WIlon-Treeted
------

G--

/0

O.00001
o~

13E@icl

--\/-\

\\

No Foem
.
We?er-Wet
Quilon-Treeted
-----

\,

-Y

lm

10
mm, houre

1-

Tkne, houre
CD-128
Foam

lm

9. AJiiI

_/-

-~

Fgwe

/---__---

-- \

,-FI
1

/ ---

No oil Preeent

O.ml

0.-

0.1

Fwre

in Treated and Untreated Mea

10- Effact of.Weltabilii

Al@

CD-128

Foam

30

Pf /-//J!
----

E
a

10

L+
I

Y
/

0
50

mll-She&Thidmnmaf

EzEiiEl

-~

226 kl%lm

6.1 mkiey -----

4S24 kWm
------

0.61 mhtey

valimcAsFoams@Sm

_---%

_------

150
Pore Volumee injected
100

------

--

.-

_--*----

1
I

--

O.oml
o

P.V.Throughftut
Fii

12- Miscibk COnmims :shwlMkMing

&wkwior@MiMalw

SPE

19691