Participants EOR COURSE 2013 PDF

5/6/2013
Principals of
Secondary & Enhanced Oil Recovery
Dr. Tarek Ahmed
Tarek Ahmed & Associates Ltd
www.TarekAhmedAssociates.com
Tahmed@Mtech.edu
Professor Emeritus of Petroleum Engineering
Montana Tech of the University of Montana
11/21/2011
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All

Rights Reserved
5/6/2013
OUTLINE
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
11/21/2011
Introduction and Review of Basic Reservoir Engineering

Stages of Oil Recovery
Factors to Consider When Planning an IOR
Introduction to Secondary Recovery Methods
Enhanced Oil Recovery Methods
Equations of State and Compositional Modeling
Simulation
Team project: Developing the Nameless Field
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved
5/6/2013
Stages of Field Development

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
immiscible gas injection.
2. Three Issues:
it should be clearly proven that the
natural recovery processes are
A. Optimum time to start the flood
insufficient; otherwise there is a risk
B. Size of the Gas Cap Drive
that the substantial capital
C. Strength of the Water Drive
investment required for IOR 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.
11/21/2011
5/6/2013
Segmented Stages of Oil Recovery

Primary Recovery
11/21/2011
Artificial Lift
Secondary
Recovery
Secondary Recovery
Gas Injection
(Pressure Maintenance)
Water Flood
Tertiary Recovery
Thermal
EOR
Improved Oil Recovery

(IOR)
Natural Flow
Miscible Flood
CO2
Steam
In-situ Combustion Lean Gas
LPG
Huff-and-Puff
. N2
SAGD
Air
Enriched Gas
Chemical
Micellar-Polymer
ASP
Polymer
Others
5/6/2013
Stages of Oil Recovery

Primary Recovery
5-30%
Secondary Recovery
Additional 10-25%
Gas
Enhanced Recovery
Additional 8-15%
Miscible
Fluid
5-30%
10-25%
8-15%
> 40%
5/6/2013
IOR Targets
EOR Target
45% ROIP
Primary
5% OOIP
Primary
25% OOIP
Secondary
30% ROIP
Light Oils
EOR Target
90% ROIP
Heavy Oils
ROIP= Remaining Oil in Place
Target for different crude oil systems

5/6/2013
Assume OOIP=100 STB

Primary RF=25%
100*.25= 25.0 STB
Secondary RF=30%
75.0*0.3 = 22.5STB
EOR RF= 12%
52.5*.12= 6.3 STB
Total RF=
(25+22.5+6.3)/100 = 53.8 %
Over 46% of oil remaining, can you do better??
5/6/2013
TARGET OF REMAINING OIL
Total Residual Oil =
Residual Oil in
Water Flooded Regions
Target for
EOR Flood
Residual Oil in
Unswept Regions
Target for
Infill Drilling
5/6/2013
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) Understanding the HEALTH and Behavior of reservoir by analyzing
Early production data using all available tools (e.g. MBE, Type Curves)
b) Identify boundaries, un-drained and upswept areas
c) Improve fluid distribution mapping (avoid Average So) throughout the
life of the Field
d) Very Important that you Start Planning VERY EARLY
11/21/2011
5/6/2013
IOR Assessment & Approach

1. Most important issue deals with Aquifers ( strength ; type,etc)
2. Screening ; A MUST STEP. Is the Field suitable for the selected
IOR?
3. Cost estimates= f(Sor, availability of H2O, gas, chemical, infill,
pumps;etc.)
4. Decision: Go or No-Go
5. Experimental program and qualitative simulation
6. Pilot Study, Tracer Survey, and monitoring program
7. economic evaluation
9. Matching pilot data and quantitative simulation
11. Full Field simulation and Implementation
10
5/6/2013
Tertiary Recovery Objectives

For Chemical & First Contact Miscible Techniques
Reduces surface tension that binds oil to rock
Reduces interface tension between oil and driving fluid
Mobility Control
For Multiple-Contact Miscible CO2 Flooding & WAG
Dissolve oil, swell it, reduce viscosity, vaporize into CO2
phase.
Alternating water drives oil to producing well WAG
For Multiple-Contact Miscible Gas Injection
Manufacture a Miscible Slug
11
5/6/2013
For Thermal Techniques

Reduce Viscosity
Activates solution gas drives in some cases by
evolving any dissolved gases
Thermally expand oil and increase permeability
Create distillation to generate a miscible slug
12
5/6/2013
Forms of Thermal Techniques

Cyclic Steam Drive Huff & Puff
Heat oil locally around wellbore and stimulate production
Steam Drive
Hot steam is injected in one well and oil is displaced to
surrounding producing wells
In Situ Combustion
Initiates combustion of oil in the formation
Air is pumped into the reservoir to allow ignition
Heat and gas generate reservoir pressure and decrease
viscosity by heating and cracking
13
13
5/6/2013
Forms of Chemical Tertiary Recovery

Polymer Augmented Waterflooding
High molecular weight polymer thickens water
Micellar-Polymer Flooding
ASP
14
5/6/2013
First Step for

A Successful for IOR Flood
Performing a Screening Test
11/21/2011

Rights Reserved
15
5/6/2013
Best Waterflood Reservoir Candidate

Based on the Driving Mechanism
Driving Mechanism
Oil Recovery Range
Function of
Solution Gas drive
5 30 %
PVT Properties
Gas Cap
30 50 %
Size of the Gas-Cap
Water drive
40 75%
Size and Strength
Gravity drainage
<80%
Dip Angle & Qo
Combination drive
30 60%
16
5/6/2013
Process
Crude Oil
Reservoir
N2 & Flue Gas
>35 API
<0.4 cp
High Cm
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 Cm
So: >30%
Formation: SS or carbonate with min fractures
K: Not Critical
D: >4000 ft
T: Can have a significant effect on MMP
Miscible CO2
>22 API
<10 cp
High C5-C12
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/H2O
>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
17
5/6/2013
EOR vs. Depth

EOR Method
Depth (feet)
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
Deep enough for required pressure
Miscible LPG
Nitrogen and
Lean Gas
CO2
Miscible

Surfactant
Polymer
Limited by temperature
Polymer
Alkaline
Fireflood
Steam Drive
Good
Possible
Fair
Difficult
Not Feasible
Dr. Larry Lake, Oilfield Review (Jan. 1992)
18
5/6/2013
EOR vs. Viscosity

EOR Method
Oil Viscosity (centipoise at reservoir conditions)

1.0
100
10,000
1,000,000
Miscible LPG
Nitrogen and
Lean Gas
CO2
Miscible
Surfactant
Polymer
Polymer
Alkaline
Fireflood
Steam Drive
Good
Possible
Fair
Difficult
Not Feasible
19
5/6/2013
EOR vs. Permeability

Permeability (md)
EOR Method
10
100
1,000
Miscible LPG
Not critical if uniform
Nitrogen and
Lean Gas
CO2
Miscible
100,000
High enough for good injection
Surfactant
Polymer
Polymer
Alkaline
Fireflood
Steam Drive
Good
Possible
Fair
Difficult
Not Feasible
20
5/6/2013
CHEMICAL EOR
THE PAST :
Limited Commercial Success
DOES IT HAVE A FUTURE?
FUTURE : Very Bright
21
21
5/6/2013
CHEMICAL EOR HOLDS

A BRIGHT FUTURE
Conventional oil RF <33%, worldwide
1. Unrecoverable oil = 2000x109 bbls
2. Much of it is recoverable by chemical methods
Chemical methods are attractive:

I.
Rapidly increasing energy demand and high oil prices,

most likely for long-term
II. Diminishing reserves
III. Advancements in technologies
IV. Better understanding of failed projects
22
5/6/2013
GENERAL LIMITATIONS Of
Chemical Flooding
1) Cost of chemicals
2) Excessive chemical loss: adsorption, reactions with clay and
brines, dilution
3) Gravity segregation
4) Lack of control in large well spacing
5) Geology is unforgiving!
6) Great variation in the process mechanism, both areal and
cross-sectional
23
5/6/2013
Reasons for EOR Failures

Low Oil Prices
oil price instability
Insufficient description of Reservoir Geology
Underestimated Reservoir Heterogeneity
Inadequate understanding of EOR mechanism
Bad Candidate Selection
Unavailability of Chemicals in large quantities
Insufficient Budget (lack of commitment)
24
5/6/2013
CONTROLLING PARAMETRES
Secondary Recovery
a) Wettability
b) Mobility Ratio ol
Tertiary Recovery
a) Capillary Number NC
b) Mobility Ratio
oil water gas
11/21/2011
oil chemical gas

Rights Reserved
25
5/6/2013
A. Controlling Parameters For Secondary Recovery Process

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:
a) Mobility Ratio M & Mobility Control; = k/

oil water gas
b) Wettability
11/21/2011
26
5/6/2013
a) Mobility Ratio M
M
Mobility (How fast) of displacing fluid

Mobility (How fast) of displaced fluid
displacing (k rw / w ) k rw

displaced (k ro / o ) k ro
o

w
Mobility Ratio M, Question is: how to reduce it? < 1 !!!
w is the only practical way of decreasing M

Rights Reserved
27
5/6/2013
Improved Waterflood
Oil
Two Fluids are
Competing and Running
Toward the Producer
Water
oil
displacingfluid
displaced fluid
M >> 1
water
Conventional Water Flood
Oil
oil
Polymer in Water
Water
M
P
displacingfluid
displaced fluid
M<1
water
Improved mobility control
11/21/2011
28
5/6/2013
Effect of Mobility Ratio on Sweep Efficiency
GOOD
NOT GOOD
k
M rw o 1
k ro w
How to reduce?
Rights Reserved
29
5/6/2013
Mobility & Mobility Ratio M:
w
M
M
5/6/2013
krw Sw
kro So
o
displacingFluid w
displacedFluid o
krw Sw
kro So
o
w
Best if M < 1 !!!
30
5/6/2013
b) Wetability
Wettability is defined as the tendency of the Fluid to Wet the
Surface of Sand Grains. Wetability and relative permeability are
perhaps the most Important Properties that affect and control the
success & performance of waterflood project. There are two
types of Wetability:
I.
II.
Water Wet
Oil Wet
31
5/6/2013
Water
Oil
Sand
Grains
Sand
Grains
Water
Water Wet System

Good
5/6/2013
Oil
Oil Wet System

Not Good

Rights Reserved
32
5/6/2013
Water Wet System
50
Oil Wet System
50
33
5/6/2013
B. Controlling Parameters For EOR Process

The magnitude of:
the reduction and mobilization of residual oil saturation and
improving the sweep efficiency
by any Miscible process is controlled by ONLY two major
factors:
a) Capillary Number NC
b) Mobility Ratio M & Mobility Control; = k/
oil slug Buffer
In miscible displacement; wettability has no effect
11/21/2011
34
5/6/2013
The NC is the Key for a Successful EOR Process:
ko
N
c

Question:
Answer:
how to increase Nc?

Use Soap !!!
is the only practical way of increasing NC

Rights Reserved
35
5/6/2013
a) What is the Capillary Number NC?

k
N o
c

1.0
( S or ) after
( S or )before
Range of
Waterflood
Possible Range of
EOR
Critical Nc = 10-7
Effect of NC on residual oil saturation

36
5/6/2013
Water is Non-Wetting Phase

Water is Wetting Phase
Possible Range of
EOR
Sorw
Typical
waterflood
region
k
N o
c


Rights Reserved
37
5/6/2013
What is Capillary Number NC for a waterflood?

k
N o
c

oil
Miscible
Mixture
Water
High wo value
=0
wo 20 0.57692 ( w o )
go 26.9 0.036 (T 460) 0.0104 P 1.5 (106 ) p 2
5/6/2013
is the density in lb/ft3

T is in oF
wo 35 dyne/cm
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights
Reserved
38
5/6/2013
NC=
Relative permeability curves for water and oil

used at high capillary numbers
Rights Reserved
39
5/6/2013
Main Ingredients For a Successful EOR Process:

a) Surfactant:
To Reduce Surface/Interfacial Tension
b) Polymer:
To control and Improve Mobility
11/21/2011

Rights Reserved
40
5/6/2013
Miscible Flood
Oil
oil
Miscible Slug
Buffer Zone
slug
Buffer
displacingfluid
M
displaced fluid
M<1
Water
Improved mobility control
Two Main Ingredients:

1) Surfactant
2) Polymer
11/21/2011
41
5/6/2013
Miscible Displacement Mobility Ratio M

M o
s
If M >100,
EABT
Associates,
40%Ltd. All
2006Tarek
Ahmed &
Rights Reserved
42
5/6/2013
Questions and Issues
43
5/6/2013
Questions and Issues

1. Plans after Primary? Timing for Secondary is a MAJOR issue?
EOR?
2. Fill-up Volume !!!! Very Critical
3. How much oil remains at the end of primary/Secondary and where is it?
Movable oil at start of IOR
Volumes remaining in selected patterns
Sor in selected Flow patterns
4. What factors that control or might limit IOR recovery?
Reservoir quality (k,, etc)
Field maturity (current pressure, free gas,etc)
Operational effectiveness (availability of H2O/gas, capacity of
surface facilities, handling water production,..etc)
5. How can we improve recovery? Horizontal? Infill?...etc
11/21/2011
44
5/6/2013
Selecting the Time to Start Injection and

Response to the Flood is a Substantial Problems
Flow Rate
Tertiary
Secondary
Primary
Oil Recovery
Timing!!!
Time
Oil Recovery Categories
45
5/6/2013
Issues to Consider When Selecting

Optimum Time To Start the Flood
a)
b)
c)
d)
GAS-FILLUP
Converting Wells or Infill Drilling, Loss of Production, i.e. $
Infill Wells, are they Injectors or Producers? Cash Flow!!!
Horizontal Wells? Multi-Lateral? Are these producers or
Injectors, the $$$ again
e) For Any IOR Process, Existing a Movable Oil is Essential For
Success, i.e. So>Sor
5/6/2013

Rights Reserved
46
5/6/2013
Two problems:
1) Best time to Start Injection?
2) When the Field will Response to the Flood?
11/21/2011
47
5/6/2013
Flow Rate
Tertiary
Secondary
Primary
Oil Recovery
Better Chance for success

with high movable oil
i.e. DO NOT WAIT
Fill-Up
? 6-24 month
Oil Recovery Categories
Time
48
5/6/2013
The Gas Fillup Volume
49
5/6/2013
What is the Gas Fillup?

Free Gas Sgi
Free
Gas Sgi
Initial Oil Soi
Initial Water Saturation Swi
Gas Fillup Process

Free Gas
Sgi
Sor
w
Migration of
oil & water
Oil Bank
Before Fillup
No response from
The IOR Injection
Initial Oil
Soi
Injected Water
5/6/2013
Initial Water Saturation

Swi
50
5/6/2013
Fill-Up Volume
Calculate the cumulative water injected at fill-up Wif by
applying the following expression:
Wif = (P.V) Sgi

If the oil production rate Qo prior to fill-up is significant, the
cumulative water injected at the fill-up Wif must be increased
by the total volume of oil produced from the start of injection to
fill-up, i.e.:
Wif ( P.V ) S gi N P Bo
5/6/2013
51
5/6/2013
Timing to Start Injection!
EOR !
Primary
Recovery
52
5/6/2013
Response to the flood is Indicated with a

decrease in GOR through time
GOR
End of fillup
Time
53
5/6/2013
Example:
Waterflood Response with a decrease in GOR through time
GOR
54
5/6/2013
Q&A
Q: Why I dont see any response to injection ?
A:
1. Free Gas, i.e. Gas Fillup !!!
2. Loss of production from converting production wells into
Injectors!!!
3. Layering System !!!
4. Thief Zone !!!
5. Migration of Oil& Water from the flood pattern !!!
6. You probably need to run the simulator for a longer time
5/6/2013
55
5/6/2013
Modeling Performance of IOR Flood

Immediate Response:
1- Infill-Drilling
2- P > Pb
Delay Response:
1- Infill-Drilling
2- P < Pb
Primary forecast
RF
Delay Response:
1- Converting Producers into injectors
2- Gas Fillup
observed
? ?
Time
Longer
simulation time
56
5/6/2013
Parameters to Consider When Selecting

Optimum Time to Start an IOR Project
11/21/2011
57
5/6/2013
Optimum Time to Start an IOR Project is

Related to Reservoir Pressure
O at Pb
High P
Cost of Injection Productivity of delaying

investment
equipment
wells
Low P
High P
Low P
Oil
saturation
High P
5/6/2013
58
5/6/2013
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.
Rs
Bo
k
M rw o 1
k ro w
pb
0
59
5/6/2013
Effect of oil viscosity on mobility ratio
oil
o
ob
pb
displacing D
M
displaced o
k ro
& D
k rD
Best :
D o
Reserved
60
5/6/2013
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.
11/21/2011
61
5/6/2013
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 IOR at a higher
pressure.
High residual oil saturation after primary recovery is

essential because:
A. High So improved mobility; i.e. higher kro
B. High So required to develop an oil bank
C. High So required to improve sweep efficiencies
11/21/2011
62
5/6/2013
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
63
5/6/2013
Effect of trapped gas on Any IOR Process
Free Gas
Gas SS
gi gi
Free
Initial Oil Soi

11/21/2011
64
5/6/2013
Delay Response to the flood
No trapped gas
Free Gas Sgi
Sorw
Oil+Water
Migration of
Oil & Water (or Solvent)
Oil Bank
Initial Oil Soi
Injected Water
11/21/2011
65
5/6/2013
Delay Response to the flood
With Trapped Gas

Any Possible Benefits????
Trapped Gas Sgt
Shrw
Oil+Water
Oil Bank
Free Gas Sgi
Initial Oil Soi
Injected Water
11/21/2011

Rights Reserved
66
5/6/2013
Possible Benefits????
67
5/6/2013
68
5/6/2013
a5
S gi
a
a1 a 2 S gt a3 S gt2 a5 S gt3 5
S gt
S gt a1 a 2 S gi a3 S gi2 a 4 S gi3
S or
11/21/2011
Coefficients
Equation (14-1)
Equation (14-2)
a1
0.030517211
0.026936065
a2
0.4764700
0.41062853
a3
0.69469046
0.29560322
a4
-1.8994762
-1.4478797
a5
-4.1603083 x 10-4
-3.0564771 x 10-4
69
5/6/2013
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, Sor , due to
the presence of the initial gas at the start of the
flood.
11/21/2011
70
5/6/2013
Important Comments on Trapped Gas

There are three important mechanisms that
must be considered BEFORE evaluating the
effect of Sgt; if exists:
Displacement of the gas by water & oil
Migration of the oil to gas space
Effect of pressure; i.e. pressurizing the reservoir
5/6/2013

Rights Reserved
71
5/6/2013
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
72
5/6/2013
Distribution of the remaining So is a MAJOR Problem
Questions:
A. How do you calculate oil saturation ? Material Balance
Equation !
B. Average Remaining Oil Saturation; What does it mean?
C. How this oil saturation is distributed in the reservoir?
D. How do you identify areas with high So?
E. How do you select areas for infill drilling?
F. The objective is to target movable oil; Where is

the Movable Oil?
73
5/6/2013
1- Oil Saturation Adjustment to Water Influx
We W p Bw
Sorw
1 S wi Sorw
N Boi We W p Bw
1 S wi 1 S wi Sorw
N N B
p
So
P.V WIZ
We W p Bw
1 S wi S orw
74
5/6/2013
2- Oil Saturation Adjustment Gas Cap Expansion
P.V GIZ
Bg
m N Boi
1
Bgi
1 S wi S org
Bg
1
m N Boi
Bgi
S
N N p Bo
org
1
S
wi
org
So
B
N Boi
m N Boi
g
1 S wi 1 S wi Sorg Bgi
75
5/6/2013
3- Oil Saturation Adjustment to

Gas Cap Expansion & Water Influx
Bg
1 Sorg
mNBoi
Bgi
We W p Sorw
N N p Bo
1 S wi Sorg
1 S wi Sorw
So
Bg
1
mNBoi
Bgi We W p Bw
NBoi
1 S wi 1 S wi Sorg
1 S wi Sorw
76
5/6/2013
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:
[ G pc B g m N Boi (
Oil Lost
Bg
B gi
1 ) ] S org
( 1 S wi S gr ) Boa
Where:
Gpc= Cumulative gas production from the gas cap, scf
Bg= Gas FVF, bbl/scf
You Must Consider:
Migration of oil to the Gas Cap !!
77
5/6/2013
Oil saturation adjustment in

Gravity Drainage Reservoirs
Secondary gas cap
Lost Residual Oil
78
5/6/2013
So Adjustment for Gravity Drainage

Secondary gas cap pore volume; gives:
N Boi
[ N Rsi ( N N P ) Rs N P R P ] B g [
]S gc
1 S wi
(P.V) SGC
(1 S wi S org S gc )
Adjust the saturation equation to account for the migration of the evolved
gas to the secondary gas cap, to give:
So
N N B
p
N Boi
1 S wi
(P.V) SGC S org
(P.V) SGC
79
5/6/2013
Distribution of the remaining So is a MAJOR Problem

Questions:
A. How do you calculate oil saturation ? Material Balance
Equation !
B. Average Remaining Oil Saturation; What does it mean?
C. How this oil saturation is distributed in the reservoir?
D. How do you identify areas with high So?
E. How do you select areas for infill drilling?
F. The objective is to target movable oil; Where is

the Movable Oil?
80
5/6/2013
Oil Saturation from the MBE

OOIP N STB
Cum Oil Prod NP STBArea A acers
Thickness h ft
Porosity
AVERAGE So
Pore Volume P.V = 7758 A h
N Boi = (P.V) (1 Swi)
remainingoil volume
So
pore volume
N p Bo
So 1 S wi 1
N
Boi
N Boi
( P.V )
1
S
wi
So
N N B
p
N Boi
1 S wi
Sg = 1 So - Swi
81
5/6/2013
Knowing Fluid Distributions in the Reservoir Is Essential

Before Initiating IOR Project
NP, GP
SO
NP, GP
SO
NP, GP
SO
N p Bo
So 1 S wi 1
N Boi
5/6/2013
82
5/6/2013
Distribution of Oil & Gas Saturations

at the Start of IOR Project
So&Sg?
So&Sg?
So&Sg?
So&Sg?
So&Sg?
So&Sg?
So&Sg?
5/6/2013
83
5/6/2013
What really is the Bubblepoint Pressure?

Pi > P b
Pi = Pb
Pi < Pb
Gas Cap
Initial
Initial
Oil
System
Oil System
Undersaturated
Oil Reservoir
11/21/2011
Initial
Initial
Oil
Oil System
System
Saturated
Oil Reservoir
Initial
Oil System
Gas-Cap
Drive Reservoir
84
5/6/2013
Hydrocarbon Analysis of Reservoir Fluid Sample
Bubblepoint Pressure = 1936 psig

Temperature
=237 oF
85
85
5/6/2013
PVT Data
Rs, Bo, o, o
Rs
Bo
o
o
Pb = 1936 psig
0
pressure
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.
86
5/6/2013
End of Primary and Start of IOR

Pb =1936 psi Pb = ?
100 scf
Swi
5/6/2013
100 scf
Swi
- 40 scf
Pb = ?
NP
60 scf
Swi
87
5/6/2013
Pressurizing the Reservoir

NP, GP
Sg , Bg
So , Rs , Bo
Swi
Rsnew & Bonew

Swi
88
5/6/2013
Proposed Approach
(Rs)new
Rs
Rs, Bo, o, o
(Rs)new
Bo
o
o
(pb)new
0
pb
(pb)new
pressure
89
5/6/2013
What is the Bubble-Point Pressure?

How can we approximate it?
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates,

Ltd. All Rights Reserved.
90
5/6/2013
Distribution of Oil & Gas Saturations

Before IOR Project
So&Sg?
So&Sg?
So&Sg?
So&Sg?
So&Sg?
So&Sg?
So&Sg?
5/6/2013
91
5/6/2013
Pb =1936 psi Pb = ?
100 scf
Swi
5/6/2013
100 scf
Swi
- 40 scf
Pb = ?
60 scf
Swi
+ 40 scf
Pb = ?
140 scf
Swi
92
5/6/2013
Variable Bubblepoint Pressures !!!

Distribution of Oil & Gas Saturations After
the Start of IOR Project
So&Sg?
So&Sg?
So&Sg?
So&Sg?
So&Sg?
Sg, Bg
So&Sg?
Gas
Oil
So&Sg?
So&Sg?
So, Rs, Bo
Swi
11/21/2011
93
5/6/2013
pbnew
P
Sg, Bg
So, Rs, Bo
Swi
Sonew , Rsnew & Bonew
Sw
Somehow; we need to calculate NEW Rs
5/6/2013
94
5/6/2013
S g, B g
S o, Rs , B o
Swi
Rsnew
Sonew , Rsnew & Bonew
Sw
TotalVolume of Gas in Solution

OilVolume at ST
S Pore Volume
S o Pore Volume
RS g
Bo
Bg
new
Rs
So Pore Volume
Bo
RSnew
Sg
RS
So
Bo
Bg
5/6/2013
95
5/6/2013
Again, Oil & Gas Saturations from MBE:

OOIP N STB
Cum Oil Prod NP STBArea A acers
Thickness h ft
Porosity
AVERAGE So
Pore Volume P.V = 7758 A h
N Boi = (P.V) (1 Swi)
remainingoil volume
So
pore volume
N p Bo
So 1 S wi 1
N
Boi
N Boi
( P.V )
1
S
wi
So
N N B
p
N Boi
1 S wi
Sg = 1 So - Swi
96
5/6/2013
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 Swi = 20%
oInitial pressure pi = 2377 psi
Results from the MBE in terms of cumulative oil production Np as a function of
reservoir pressure are given below:
Pressure
Np
Psi
MMSTB
2377
2250
1.10
1950
1.76
1650
2.64
1350
3.3
97
5/6/2013
The PVT properties of the crude oil system are tabulated below:
Pressure
Bo
Rs
Bg
psi
Bbl/STB
scf/STB
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
1- Calculate remaining oil saturation as a function of pressure

2- Estimate the pressure that is required to dissolve the evolved gas By IOR
process when the reservoir pressure declines to:
1650 psi;
1350 psi
98
5/6/2013
Factors to Consider When Planning an IOR Project:

The following reservoir characteristics must be considered
when determining the suitability of a candidate reservoir for
IOR flood:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Wettability
Fluid properties
Lithology and rock properties
Heterogeneity of the Reservoir
Reservoir depth
Fluid saturations
Reservoir Uniformity and Pay Continuity
Primary reservoir driving mechanisms
What is about UPSCALING; major problem
99
5/6/2013
1- Wettability
Waterflooding option is generally not considered
appropriate in Oil Wet Reservoir Systems. However; is
considered a candidate for EOR
2- Fluid Properties
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.
k
M rw o 1
k ro s
100
5/6/2013
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:
To deliver a desired
s
injection rate
inj
i
hk
The above relationship suggests that to deliver a desired daily injection rate
of iw in a tight or thin reservoir, the required injection pressure might exceed
the formation fracture pressure.
101
5/6/2013
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.
Ky
Ky
Kx
Ky >>> Kx
Kx
102
5/6/2013
Horizontal Producer
ky
kx
Ky >>> Kx
103
5/6/2013
Injection-well Hydraulic Fracture Orientation
Improves sweep efficiency
104
5/6/2013
5- Reservoir Depth
I.
II.
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.
a shallow reservoir imposes a restraint on the injection pressure
that can be used, because this must be less than fracture
pressure.
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 fluid 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.
105
5/6/2013
Step-Rate Test
2400
2350
2300
2250
Pressure
2200
2150
2100
2050
0
100
200
300
400
500
Rate
600
700
Fracture pressure = 2270 psi

Fracture gradient = 2270/3243 = 0.70 psi/ft
Optimum injection rate = 380 bbl/day
5/6/2013
106
5/6/2013
6- 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.
11/21/2011
107
5/6/2013
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 in case of waterflood, and bypassing will
develop that will effect the EUR by any IOR
process. This zone must be located and shut off
II. These thief zones will contain less remaining oil
from Primary Stage than the other layers, and their
flooding will lead to lower oil recoveries than other
layers.
108
5/6/2013
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
Which one is the best candidate for IOR Flood?
Why?
109
5/6/2013
Class problem:
Assume that you are planning to develop the Big
Texas Oil Filed by 10 producers with an estimated
ultimate primary oil recovery of 20%; what
would be the estimated ultimate primary oil
recovery by alternatively assuming that the field
will be developed by:
20 Producers?
10 Horizontal producers wells?
10 Vertical wells and 10 Horizontal wells?
5/6/2013
110
5/6/2013
Driving Mechanism
Oil Recovery Range
Rock & liquid expansion
37%
undersaturated or Heavy oil
Solution Gas drive
5 30 %
Gas Cap
20 40 %
Water drive
35 75%
Gravity drainage
<80%
Combination drive
30 60%
111
5/6/2013
I.
SOLUTION GAS DRIVE
11/21/2011
112
5/6/2013
II. GAS-CAP DRIVE
11/21/2011
113
5/6/2013
Size of the Gas Cap
Gas Cap
Oil
Zone
Oil recovery
Volume of Gas Cap

Volume of Oil Zone
114
5/6/2013
III. WATER DRIVE

Reserved
115
5/6/2013
IV. Gravity Drainage Drive
gas
Oil
Ultimate recovery from gravity drainage reservoirs is a function of:

1- permeability in the direction of dip
2- Oil Rate; Should need Exceed a certain CRITICAL RATE
3- dip angle of the reservoir
4- oil viscosity
5- relative permeability characteristics (lab does not consider it)
Reserved
116
5/6/2013
What is the Maximum Oil Rate to Ensure Counter

Flow?
qo
Secondary gas cap

Lost Residual Oil
117
5/6/2013
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:
qo
7.83x10 6 k k ro A ( o g ) sin( )
This calculated value of qo represents the maximum oil rate that should not
be exceeded without causing the gas to flow downward.
Where:
qo
= oil production rate, bbl/day
o
= oil density, lb/ft3
g
= gas density, lb/ft3
A
= cross-sectional area open to flow, ft2
k
= absolute permeability, md
= dip angle.
Comment; can be unrealistic

118
5/6/2013
Class Problem:
An oil reservoir is produced under gravity drainage driving
mechanism with the following fluid and reservoir
characteristics:
Oil density = 49 lb/ft2
Gas density = 8 lb/ft2
Oil viscosity = 2.3 cp
Cross sectional area = 24,000 ft2
K= 120 md
Kro = 0.85
Dip angle = 60 degree
Calculate the maximum oil rate that should not be
exceeded for counter flow
119
5/6/2013
9- The Upscaling Problem
2006Tarek Ahmed &

Associates, Ltd. All Rights
Reserved.
120
5/6/2013
Why the difference in Water Injection results

between:
Observed data
Numerical Simulation Studies
Theoretical/Analytical Approach ?
Again; the question is why the difference?
What caused that?
121
5/6/2013
How do you upscale:

1.
2.
3.
4.
Relative Permeability
Absolute Permeability
Capillary Pressure
Porosity ?
Sector Modeling is a
MUST
5/6/2013

Rights Reserved
122
5/6/2013
Performance of the TAGI Formation

19Layers Coarse System vs. 173 Layers Fine System
TAGI Formation- Oil Rate
Coarse-Scale, RC/cell
250
Coarse-Scale, RC/Layer
Fine-Scale
What is causing this difference ?
OIL PRODUCTION RATE (STM3 / DAY)
200
150
Fine-Scale
100
50
1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 11000 12000 13000 14000
123
5/6/2013
Performance of the TAGI Formation

19Layers Coarse System vs. 173 Layers Fine System
TAGI Formation - Cum Oil Prod
19 Layers System, RC/cell
19 Layers System, RC/Layer
Fine-Scale
1600
CUMULATIVE OIL PRODUCTION (KSTM3)
1400
1200
1000
800
Fine-Scale
600
400
200
0
?
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
10000 11000 12000 13000 14000
124
5/6/2013
Residual Oil Saturation

&
11/21/2011

Rights Reserved
125
5/6/2013
Residual Oil or Critical!!!!

What Does That Mean? and Why?
Residual due to WHAT? Gas, water, miscible etc
o Soc or Sor !!!! What is the difference?
o Sorw
o Sorg
o Sgc , Srg & Sgt !!!!
Movable oil saturation Som & Sorm
Som = 1- Swc- Soc
Sorm is the Residual Oil Saturation to Miscible Flood;
usually <0.10
Reserved.
126
5/6/2013
Drainage Process
Oil
core 100% H2O
Kro
Krw
0%
100%
SW
SO
100%
0%
2006Tarek Ahmed &

Reserved.
127
5/6/2013
Relative Permeability Hysteresis

(Hysteresis describes the history of the saturation changes)
Drainage Process
Oil
core 100% H2O
Kro
Krw
Imbibition Process
H2 O
Swc
0%
100%
Sorw
Soc
Oil + residual H2O
100% SW
0% SO
Soc & Sorw !!!!!

128
128
5/6/2013
Key Points
(Krw)Soc
Swc
Sorw
Soc =20%
129
5/6/2013
Typical two-phase flow behavior.
slug
kro
krw
130
5/6/2013
Gas-oil relative permeability curves.
krg
krog
Sorg
Liquid Saturation, (So +

Swc), %
131
5/6/2013
Original Coreys Correlation

Applies ONLY to well-sorted homogenous rocks
Oil-Water System:
kro kro Swc
1 S w Sorw
1 S wc Sorw
no
krw
S S
krw Sorw w wc
1 S wc Sorw
nw
Gas-Oil System:
S g S gc
Swc
1
Lc
gc
k rg k rg
ng
k ro k ro Sgc
1 S g S Lc
gc
Lc
ngo
132
5/6/2013
Class Problem:
Using the analytical expressions as given by Corey, generate
and PLOT the relative permeability data. The following
information on the water-oil and gas-oil systems are available:
Swc = 0.25
Sorw = 0.35
Sgc = 0.05
Sorg = 0.23
(kro)Swc= 0.85
(krw)Sorw= 0.4
(kro)Sgc= 0.60
(krg)Swc= 0.95
1) Calculate and PLOT Krow and Krw assuming:

no=0.8, 1.0, and 1.5
nw = 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0
2) Calculate and PLOT Krog and Krg assuming:
ngo=1.0, 1.5, and 2.0
ng =0.7, 1.0, and 1.2
5/6/2013
133
5/6/2013
Accounting for Stratification

Stratification Factor m
kro kro Swc
krw
1 S w Sorw
S
wc
orw
S S
krw Sorw w wc
1 S wc Sorw
S g S gc
Swc
1 S Lc S gc
k rg k rg
k ro k ro Sgc
ng
1 S g S Lc
1 S gc S Lc
no
kro kro Swc m S w*
nw
krw krw Sorw m S w*
no
nw
m S
k rg krg
ngo
* ng
g
Swc
k ro k ro Sgc m S g*
ngo
134
5/6/2013
Relative Permeability Ratio

kro/krw
135
5/6/2013
kro
kr
w
10
k ro
k rw
kro
a ebSw
krw
0.1
Swc
Sw
136
5/6/2013
Relative Permeability Ratio kro/krw

kro
a ebSw
krw
137
5/6/2013
Class Problem:
A set relative permeability ratio for an oil-water
system is tabulated below; please plot the relative
permeability ratio on a semi-log paper and
determine the coefficients of the Equation equation
that fits the data
Sw
0.25
0.35
0.40
0.45
0.50
0.55
0.60
0.65
0.70
0.75
kro/krw
30.23 17.00 9.56
5.38
3.02
1.70
0.96
0.54
0.30
0.17
0.10
11/21/2011
0.30
138
5/6/2013
Three Phase Relative Permeability

Sg krg
So kro
Sw krw
kro
krw
Sw
krg
krog
Sg
krog
kro kro Swc row krw

krg krw krg
kro Swc
kro Swc
139
139
5/6/2013
Fundamentals of
Improved Oil Recovery
11/21/2011

Rights Reserved
140
5/6/2013
Considerations & Requirements

When
Planning Onshore or Offshore IOR Project
11/21/2011

Rights Reserved
141
5/6/2013
Considerations When Planning an

IOR Flood
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
11/21/2011
Purpose of the flood

Onshore or Offshore
Defining the Aquifer
Permeability Consideration, kx,ky, and kz
Optimum Time to Start the Flood

Rights Reserved
142
5/6/2013
Consideration #1: Purpose for Onshore or Offshore; same:
A. Maintaining the reservoir pressure

B. supplementing partial/strong natural water drive !!!
C. Displacing oil
Offshore; What do you know about the reservoir?
Oil
Aquifer
Oil
Aquifer
143
5/6/2013
Consideration #2: Offshore vs. Onshore Field Development

Onshore:
Discovery well is
tied back to the
nearest production
facilities and
produced at high
rate at continuous
basis
Oil Rate
Offshore:
Discovery well can
not be produced at
continuous basis
since the offshore
production facilities
are not in existence
Time
144
5/6/2013
Offshore Appraisal Stage

No Continuous Flow
Oil
Oil
Aquifer
Minimum information?
Aquifer
Major question deals with the aquifer

(strength, communication, etc)
145
5/6/2013
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/developments, 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
146
5/6/2013
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
147
5/6/2013
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
Oil
Aquifer
Aquifer
Aquifer
Basel Waterflood
Edge Waterflood
148
5/6/2013
FLOOD PATTERNS
5/6/2013

Rights Reserved
149
5/6/2013
Ky= 1000 md
Kx= 1 md
11/21/2011

Rights Reserved
150
5/6/2013
Flooding Patterns
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:
Kx; Ky & Kz Control the success of IOR Project

Direction of formation fractures
Availability of the injection fluid (gas or water)
Desired and anticipated flood life
Estimate RF; based on wettability, Sorw, Soi,..etc
Well spacing, wells productivity, and injectivity
151
5/6/2013
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 (function of location, h, k, .etc)
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)
152
5/6/2013
Leases are divided into square miles and quarter square miles
5280 ft
Well Spacing
40-acre for oil wells
160-320 ac for gas wells
16 wells per section (1 sq-mile) 2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved
153
5/6/2013
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
154
154
5/6/2013
1- Irregular Injection Patterns

Could be caused by:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
Very mature/old field (small independed Producers)

irregular surface or subsurface topology
inclined wells
faulting
localized variations in porosity or permeability
11/21/2011
155
5/6/2013
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
Producer
injector
156
156
5/6/2013
Characteristics of the Peripheral Flood:

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.
157
5/6/2013
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)
b)
c)
d)
e)
158
Direct line drive.

Staggered line drive.
Five spot.
Seven spot.
Nine spot.
158
5/6/2013
3- Regular Injection Patterns
Direct Line
Drive
5-Spot
Staggered Line Drive
Regular 4-Spot
Seven-Spot
Normal 9-Spot
Inverted 9-Spot
The patterns termed inverted have only one injection well per
pattern. This is the difference between normal and inverted well
arrangements.
159
5/6/2013
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 quare
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.
160
160
5/6/2013
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.
Gas injection Well
Producers
crestal injection
Water injection
Well
Basal Injection
161
5/6/2013
The Pattern I/P
5-Spot
7-Spot
I/P =1:1
I/P =2:1
Normal 9-Spot
I/P =3:1
A good practice to perform is to calculate average total fluid production

rate P and injection rate I per well at reservoir conditions, The
calculated Ratio I/P should be close to the one given by pattern
selected for the field; e.g.:
Five-Spot Pattern:
Seven-Spot:
Nine-Spot:
I/P =1:1
I/P=2:1
I/P=3:1
162
5/6/2013
Pattern Injection Rate:

A. Industry practice suggests that a waterflooded field will
reach its economic limit when 1.5 to 2.0 pore volumes are
injected.
B. Assuming a value of 2 PVI and an average waterflood
field life of 20 years, an average injection of 0.1 PVI/year
is obtained. Therefore, it is recommended to use a range
between 0.05 and 0.2 PVI/year and investigate those
patterns that fall out of the range.
C. Patterns with low PVI/year should be treated as an
opportunity pattern that require additional injection.
Patterns with greater than 0.2 PVI/year should be
considered for reduce injection
163
5/6/2013
4- Pattern Balancing
Balancing injection and production rates can
significantly enhance the profitability of a
waterflood project by:
Minimizing or migrating across pattern boundaries
Improving the capture of the mobilized oil
Reducing the volume of recycled water
Increasing sweep efficiency
Providing more opportunity to increase oil
recovery
In balanced patterns, important events such as fill-up or
water breakthrough for the various patterns should occur
at the same time.
164
5/6/2013
It should point out that the injection rate in each pattern

should be in proportion to the displaceable hydrocarbon
pore volume VD which is defined as:
VD = Vp (1SwcSor)
Where:
VD = displaceable hydrocarbon pore volume, bbl
VP = pore volume, bbl
The fraction of total field injection into an individual pattern is

then given by:
V
iw pattern D pattern iw field

VD field
Where:
(iw)pattern = injection rate in the pattern, bbl/day
(iw)field = total target field injection rate, bbl/day
(VD)field = total field pore volume, bbl
5/6/2013
165
5/6/2013
Class Problem:
An oil reservoir is being developed by six 5-spot patterns (A through F) as
shown below. The displaceable hydrocarbon pore volume VD is listed
below. The field injection rate is 10,000 bbl/day, determine the necessary
injection and production rates to maintain balanced 5-spot pattern in the
Well 2
Well 3
field.Well 1
B
Well 5
Well 4
C
Well 7
Well 8
VD, MMbbl
2.0
1.5
2.5
3.0
1.3
1.8
E
Well 10
Pattern
A
Well 6
B
C
D
E
F
Well 9
Well 11
Well 12
Reserved
166
5/6/2013
VD pattern
iw pattern
iw field
V
D field
Pattern VD, MMbbl
A
2
B
1.5
C
2.5
D
3
E
1.3
F
1.8
Field VD
12.1
% of Total VD iw , bbl/day
17
1653
12
1240
21
2066
25
2479
11
1074
15
1488
5/6/2013
167
5/6/2013
Distribution of the injection rate

Well 1
Well 2
Well 3
iw= 1653 bbl/day i = 1240 bbl/day

w
Well 4
Well 5
Well 6
iw= 2066 bbl/day iw= 2479 bbl/day

Well 7
Well 8
Well 9
Pattern
iw/4
413
310
517
620
269
372
iw= 1074 bbl/day iw= 1488 bbl/day

Well 10
Well 11
Well 12
168
5/6/2013
Production Rate Constraints

Pattern
Well 1 Well 2 Well 3 Well 4 Well 5 Well 6 Well 7 Well 8 Well 9 Well 10 Well 11 Well 12
413
413
413
413
310
310
310
310
517
517
517
517
620
620
620
620
269
269
269
269
372
372
372
372
Well Rate
413
723
310
930
1860
930
785
1777
992
269
640
372
5/6/2013
169
5/6/2013
FUNDAMENTALS OF
EOR

Rights Reserved
170
5/6/2013
EOR
Thermal
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
11/21/2011
Steam
In-situ Combustion
Huff-and-Puff
Hot Water
SAGD
Chemical
Miscible Flood
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
CO2
Lean Gas
LPG
N2
Air
Enriched Gas
Micellar-Polymer
2) ASP
3) Polymer
4) Others
1)
171
5/6/2013
Process
Crude Oil
Reservoir
N2 & Flue Gas
>35 API
<0.4 cp
High Cm
So: >40%
Formation: SS or carbonate with few fractures
K: Not Critical
D: >6000 ft
T: Not Critical
High Pressure Gas

Injection
>23 API
<3 cp
High Cm
So: >30%
Formation: SS or carbonate with min fractures
K: Not Critical
D: >4000 ft
T: Can have a significant effect on MMP
Miscible CO2
>22 API
<10 cp
High C5-C12
So: >20%
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%
h: Not Critical
K: >10md
D: <9000 ft
T: < 200 F
Polymer/H2O
>15 API
<100 cp
So: >50%
h: Not Critical
K: >10 md
D: <9000 ft
T: <200 F
172
5/6/2013
Planning EOR Projects

Evaluate production Data from the Primary/Secondary
Laboratory PVT/Core Investigation
o Slim Tube
o Swelling
o Core Flood, Simulator matching
o Flow Assurance Tests
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
173
5/6/2013
Flow Assurance Problems with

EOR By Gas Injection

Rights Reserved
174
5/6/2013
Asphaltenes-Resins Relationship
Resins
protective shield
175
5/6/2013
Upper Asphaltene
Phase Envelope
Pi, T
C
Solids present
Lower Asphaltene
Phase Envelope
176
176
5/6/2013
177
5/6/2013
178
5/6/2013
Digital Images of Asphaltene Appearance During Depressurization Captured

by Solid Detection System (SDS) and a High & Pressure Microscope (HPM)
Image 1 was recorded at initial pressure of

9187 psig. There are minute irregularities in
the visual cell glass window which are present
in the image
Image 3 was recorded at 5398 psig.

Asphaltenes flocculation was not
observed at 7250 psig. Asphaltenes
deposition was observed on the HPM
view cell window.
Image 2 was recorded at 8150 psig. There

are minute irregularities in the visual cell
glass window which are present in the
image.
Image 4 was recorded at 4563 psig. Asphaltic

deposition in the suspended fluid and on the
HPM view cell window has increased
179
5/6/2013
180
5/6/2013
181
5/6/2013
182
5/6/2013
SARA Analysis:
SARA (Saturate, Aromatic, Resin and Asphaltene) analysis is
widely used to identify the fractions of crude oil that affect the
asphaltene stability:
Saturates S
Asphaltenes A
Resins R and
Aromatics A
.
This classification system is useful because it identifies
the fractions of the oil that pertain to asphaltene stability
and thus should be useful in identifying oils with the
potential for asphaltene problems.
183
183
5/6/2013
SARA ANALYSIS
After; SPE Paper 146102, Yonrbayashi et al
184
5/6/2013
Table 6-1
Parameters
Reservoir Pressure pi
Reservoir Temperature
Flash Gas Oil Ratio
Bubblepoint Pressure pb at Tres
Density of Stock Tank Oil (STO)
Density of Reservoir Fluid at pb
Density of Reservoir Fluid at pi
OBM Contamination in STO
OBM Contamination in
Reservoir Fluid
Cylinder
Sample 1
Saturates
wt%
64.21
Units
psla
F
SCF/STB
psla
g/cc
g/cc
g/cc
% (w/w)
% (w/w)
Aromatics
wt%
28.83
Description
4540
152
1037
1250
0.791
0.702
0.731
0.845
0.717
Resins
wt%
6.33
Asphaltenes
wt%
0.63

185
185
5/6/2013
Components
Nitrogen
Carbon Dioxide
Hydrogen Sulfide
Methane
Ethane
Propane
I Butane
N Butane
I Pentane
N Pentane
pseudo C8H14
pseudo C7+
Total
MW
Mole %
C7+
C12+
C20+
Moler Mass
C7+
C12+
C20+
Density (g/cc)
C7+
C12+
C20+
Fluid at 60F
MOLE RATIO
Flashed
Liquid
Flashed
Gas
% mole
0.10
0.14
0.00
84.92
6.08
3.45
0.76
1.54
0.96
0.65
0.74
0.67
100
20.85
Reservoir
Fluid
98.21
71.29
35.80
0.67
0.00
28.15
20.09
10.09
297.27
362.94
515.90
100.31
165.43
293.9
362.94
515.90
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.04
0.09
1.65
98.21
100
293.42
0.899
0.920
0.959
0.898
0.2818
0.07
0.10
0.00
60.99
4.37
2.48
0.54
1.11
0.70
0.49
1.00
28.15
100
97.66
0.920
0.959
0.7182
186
5/6/2013
187
5/6/2013
188
5/6/2013
Phase 3: Screening for hydrocarbon solids

There are four commonly used procedures for
screening the crude oil for potential flow
assurance problem; these are:
1)
2)
3)
4)
de Boer Solubility Plot

SARA Colloidal Instability Index
Asphaltene-Resin Plot
Density Criteria
189
5/6/2013
1) de Boer Solubility Plot

The De Boer Plot is constructed from data of laboratory experiments and various
field experiences which divide into four regions:
o Region A with Potential of Severe problems
o Region B with High Risk Problems
o Region C with Moderate Risk Problems
o Region D with Small or No Risk Problems
A de Boer Plot shows the relationship between pressure difference of initial pressure
(Pi) and bubble-point pressure (Pb) on the y-axis and density of crude oil at initial
pressure condition on the x-axis
190
5/6/2013
de Boer Solubility Plot
191
5/6/2013
2) Colloidal Instability Index CII
saturates asphaltenes
CII
aromatics resins
Oils with a CCI below 0.7 are considered stable while
those of above 0.9 are considered very unstable.)
192
5/6/2013
SARA Colloidal Instability Index

CII
193
5/6/2013
3) Asphaltene-Resin Plot
194
5/6/2013
4) Density Criteria
Finally, an asphaltene stability index developed by Oilphase
Schlumberger as shown on the next slide. The illustration
suggests that if:
(oi ob) > 0.025; system is unstable
(oi ob) < 0.025; system is stable
Where:
oi = oil density at initial reservoir pressure, gm/cm3
ob = oil density at bubblepoint pressure, gm/cm3
195
5/6/2013
Stability
Unstable
-1
0.001
Stable
0.01
(oi ob)
0.1
Asphaltene Stability Index

196
196
5/6/2013
Class Problem:
Using the fluid data given in Table 6-1, determine if this fluid might develop an
asphaltene deposition problems by applying the four screening criteria
197
5/6/2013
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
198
5/6/2013
Types of Displacement
A. Immiscible
B. Partial Miscible
C. Miscible
First Contact Miscibility FCM
Multiple Contact Miscibility MCM
11/21/2011

Rights Reserved
199
5/6/2013
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
200
5/6/2013
Chemical EOR Methods Utilize:

Polymers
Surfactants
Alkaline agents
Combinations of such chemicals
ASP (Alkali-Surfactant-Polymer)
flooding
MP (Micellar-Polymer) flooding
201
5/6/2013
Chemical Floods CURRENT STATUS WORLDWIDE

Indonesia
Venezuela
USA
India
France
China
Total Number of Projects: 27

202
5/6/2013
Chemical Floods -
PRODUCTION WORLDWIDE
France
Indonesia
USA
China
Total oil production: 300,000 B/D

203
5/6/2013
Comments On EOR/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
204
5/6/2013
Applicability & Concerns

1. Adequate injectivity is required since lower mobility fluids (Polymer is
one of the main component) are unusually injected in chemical floods
2. If previously flooded, the chemical flood candidate should have
responded favorably by developing an oil bank
3. Strong water-drive reservoirs should be avoided because the potential
for low remaining oil saturations and possible diluting the slug
4. Gas cap reservoirs are ordinarily avoided since the mobilized oil might
re-saturated the gas cap
5. Formations with high clay contents are undesirable since clays
increase adsorption of the injected chemicals
6. Reservoir brines of moderate salinity high concentrations interact
unfavorably with the injected chemicals with:
a) lose their viscosity-building effect and
b) might effect the interfacial tension
11/21/2011
205
5/6/2013
Reasons for Failure:

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
206
5/6/2013
How to Plan an EOR Flood

1. Choose a process likely to succeed in a your reservoir
2. Start as Pilot Flood
3. Understand and evaluate the performance of the flood
using analytical expressions or qualitative simulation runs
4. Determine the reasons for success or failure of your pilot
flood and also from past projects of the selected process
5. Conduct a lab studies; including
Swelling Test
Slim-Tube Test
Core Flood
6. Field and Analog based research
207
207
5/6/2013
Chemical Flooding Evaluation Process

1. Compare Pilot results with core flood & numerical
predictions
2. Changes Simulation relative permeability from core?
3. Oil bank formation? If so, what size?
4. Mobility control?
5. Fluid injectivity?
6. Extent of areal and vertical sweep?
7. Oil saturations from post-flood cores and
pilot/simulation?
208
208
5/6/2013
COST OF CHEMICALS
As the oil prices rise, so does the cost of chemicals, but not in the
same proportion
Typical Costs:
Polymer - $3/lb
Surfactant
Crude oil
Caustic
Isopropanol
Micellar slug
- $1.20/lb
- $60/bbl
- $0.60/lb
- $20/gallon
- $25/bbl
Process Efficiency: volume of oil recovered per unit volume (or

mass) of chemical slug injected
209
209
5/6/2013
IOR SWEEP EFFICIENCIES
11/21/2011

Rights Reserved
210
5/6/2013
Why the Theoretical Approach of Predicting

the Performance of a IOR project is essential?
211
Recovery Factor
5/6/2013
Pore Volume of Injected

5/6/2013
212
5/6/2013
What is Sweep efficiency?

Sweep Efficiency is a measure of how well the water has
contacted the oil zone:
a) areally EA
b) vertically EV
c) displaced the oil efficiently ED
What Causes Low Sweep Efficiency?
1. Gross heterogeneities in the rock matrix lead to low sweep

efficiencies.
2. Fractures, high-permeability streaks, and faults
3. If the viscosity of injected solvent is much less than the oil, the
solvent could begin to finger, or channel, through the reservoir.
This is referred to as viscous fingering and leads to significant
bypassing of residual oil and lower flooding efficiencies. This
bypassing of residual oil is an important issue in applying
enhanced oil recovery techniques as well as in waterflooding
11/21/2011
213
5/6/2013
Secondary & Tertiary Oil Recovery

Performance
Recovery Performance of an IOR Flood is based On:
I. Displacement Efficiency ED
II. Areal Sweep Efficiency EA
III.Vertical Sweep Efficiency EV
11/21/2011
214
5/6/2013
The displacement efficiency ED

This macroscopic displacement efficiency is a
measure of how well the displacing fluid mobilizes the
residual oil once the fluid has come in contact with the
oil.
It 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, ED will always be less than 1.0.
S oi S o
ED
S oi
215
5/6/2013
Displacement Efficiency ED
Soi
So
ED
S oi S o
S oi
Water Flood : So 35 40%

EOR Flood : So 5 10%
11/21/2011
216
5/6/2013
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:
ED
volumeof oil at startof flood remainingoil volume

volumeof oil at startof flood
ED
S oi S o

Bo Boi Bo
S oi
Boi
Pore Volume Soi Pore Volume So

Boi
Pore Volume Soi

Boi
Assuming constant Bo
in any displacement Process : ED
in Waterflood :
S oi S o
S oi
ED
(1 S wi ) (1 S w )
1 S wi
ED
S w S wi
1 S wi
217
5/6/2013
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 Bo 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 by waterflooding
3- Assume that an EOR project will begin at the end of the secondary
recovery process; calculate the displacement efficiency under miscible
displacement with an estimated Sorm of 10%;
11/21/2011
218
5/6/2013
Solution:
Step 1. Calculate initial water saturation:
S wi 1 0.7 0.3
Step 2. Calculate ED from
So
ED
S w S wi
1 S wi
0.65
0.35
0.071
0.60
0.40
0.142
0.55
0.45
0.214
0.50
0.50
0.286
Sor = 0.35
0.65
0.500 (maximum)
Step 3. Calculate ED from

11/21/2011
S w 1 So
ED
0.35 0.1
71.4%
0.35
219
5/6/2013
The areal sweep efficiency EA

is the fractional area of the pattern that is swept by the
displacing fluid. The major factors determining areal sweep are:
a)
b)
c)
d)
Fluid mobilities
Pattern type
Areal heterogeneity
Total volume of fluid injected
A
EA
T otalArea
Swept Area
A
A
220
5/6/2013
The vertical sweep efficiency EV
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)
b)
c)
d)
e)
Vertical heterogeneity
Degree of gravity segregation
Fluid mobilities
Total volume injection
Number of layers (very Critical)
EV
A
Cross Section Area
k1
Implicitly input in a form of a

number of Zonation or layering
system
k2
k3
AA
k4
221
5/6/2013
Volumetric Sweep Efficiency Evol
Swept
area
Swept
area
EA
11/21/2011
EV
Evol = EA EV
222
5/6/2013
Residual Oil
Displacement Sweep Efficiency
Areal Sweep Efficiency
Vertical Sweep Efficiency

223
5/6/2013
Oil Recovery Equations for Any

IOR Process
Cumulative Oil Production:
NP = Ns EA EV ED
Recovery Factor:
RF=(NP /Ns) = EA EV ED
Volumetric Sweep Efficiency:
Evol = EA EV
224
5/6/2013
All three efficiency factors (i.e., ED, EA, and EV)

are variables that increase during the flood and
reach maximum values at the economic limit of
the injection project.
11/21/2011
225
5/6/2013
Understanding Sweep Efficiencies

And Oil Recovery
Simple Equation:
then?
NP = Ns EA EV ED ; What is the problem
ED , E A , EV are functions of S s !!!
Swept area
Swept area
EA
EV

Reserved
226
5/6/2013
POLYMER FLOOD

Rights Reserved
227
5/6/2013
What is Polymer Flood?

A. Polymer flooding is viewed as an Improved Waterflooding
Technique since it does not typically recover or reduce
residual oil that has been trapped in pore spaces and
isolated by water. However, polymer flooding can produce
additional oil as COMPARED with obtained from
waterflooding by:
improving the sweep efficiency and
increasing the volume of reservoir that is contacted by
the injected fluid.
B. Polymers are usually added to the water in concentrations
ranging from 250 to 2000 parts per million (ppm).
11/21/2011
228
5/6/2013
Suitability of Reservoir For Polymer Injection
Process
Polymer/H2O
Crude Oil
>15 API
<100 cp
Reservoir
So: >50%
h: Not Critical
K: >10 md
D: <9000 ft
T: <200 F
229
5/6/2013
EOR vs. Depth

EOR Method
Depth (feet)
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
Miscible LPG
Nitrogen and
Lean Gas
CO2
Miscible

Surfactant
Polymer
Polymer
Alkaline
Fireflood
Steam Drive
Good
Possible
Fair
Difficult
Not Feasible
230
5/6/2013
EOR vs. Viscosity

EOR Method

1.0
100
10,000
1,000,000
Miscible LPG
Nitrogen and
Lean Gas
CO2
Miscible
Surfactant
Polymer
Polymer
Alkaline
Fireflood
Steam Drive
Good
Possible
Fair
Difficult
Not Feasible
231
5/6/2013

Permeability (md)
EOR Method
10
100
1,000
Miscible LPG
Nitrogen and
Lean Gas
CO2
Miscible
100,000
Surfactant
Polymer
Polymer
Alkaline
Fireflood
Steam Drive
Good
Possible
Fair
Difficult
Not Feasible
232
5/6/2013
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.
displacing krp
displaced kro
11/21/2011
o

p
233
5/6/2013
Polymer flood is designed to improve sweep

efficiency by reducing the mobility ratio M as
defined by:
M
displacing krp
displaced kro
o

P
234
5/6/2013
Polymer Food Performance is Controlled by the

following Properties:
A. Polymer Viscosity
B. Permeability Reduction as expressed in Terms:
Residual Resistance Factor Rrf
Resistance Factor Rf

Rights Reserved
235
5/6/2013
a) Polymer Viscosity
11/21/2011

Rights Reserved
236
5/6/2013
displaced =kro/o
Crude Oil
Injected water
displacing = krw/w
Figure 6-17. Viscous fingering in water flood

11/21/2011
237
5/6/2013
Crude Oil
Crude Oil
Polymer Solution
Injected Water
M >> 1
Water flooding
M1
Polymer flooding
Figure 6-18. Comparison of viscous instability in water and polymer flood
238
5/6/2013
11/21/2011
239
5/6/2013
shear stress

shear rate
Shear Rate (Fluid Velocity)
app
Pressure difference (shear Stress)

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
240
5/6/2013
Polymer Viscosity is a Strong Function of Velocity
Apparent Viscosity
Oil
Polymer Solution
Water
Shear Rate (Flow velocity)
241
5/6/2013
Viscosity of the Polymer solution can be

controlled with addition of NacL
242
5/6/2013
P K C n
Power Law
243
5/6/2013
Polymer viscosity in the reservoir is described by the following expression:

1 n
2
9n3
P 0.017543K
[150k w (1 Sorw)]
n
( ) n 1
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
kw = permeability of water, md
sorw = residual oil saturation to water, fraction
v
= superficial fluid velocity, ft/day
11/21/2011
244
5/6/2013
Class problem
The viscometric and core flood data for a polymer flood are given below:
Core data:
kw = 17 md
= 0.188
Sorw = 0.32
Polymer solution data:
Polymer concentration = 200 PPm
Viscosity of brine = 0.84 cp
Viscosity of oil = 2.5 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
11/21/2011
245
5/6/2013
b) Permeability Reduction
11/21/2011

Rights Reserved
246
5/6/2013
The Permeability Reduction is essentially caused by the retention of polymer

molecules on the surface of the reservoir rock. This is due to a combination of:
Adsorption of polymer molecules to surface of sand grains
Entrapment of polymer molecules in the pore throat
Adsorption of
Polymer Molecules
Entrapment of
polymer molecules
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.
11/21/2011
247
5/6/2013
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.
11/21/2011
248
5/6/2013
Max adsorption
Max adsorption must be measured

in the lab in a core flood test
249
5/6/2013
Is the Process of Polymer Molecules Adsorption and Entrapment

Reversible?
The 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.
11/21/2011
250
5/6/2013
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:
11/21/2011
251
5/6/2013

Rrf 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.
Rrf
11/21/2011
w (before polymerinjection)
w (after polymerinjection)
252
5/6/2013
The resistance factor Rf 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.:
w k w / w
Rf
P k P / P
11/21/2011
253
5/6/2013
Modeling of Polymer Flood

Utilizes the following three functions:
1) Permeability Reduction Factor Rk
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 kP
b) Effective Permeability of the Chase Water kw
c) Effective Viscosity of the Polymer Solution Pe
d) Effective Viscosity of the Chase Water we
11/21/2011
254
5/6/2013
1- Permeability Reduction Factor Rk

S S S 0.016S P C w
Rk 1.0 ( Rrf 1.0 ) w P wc

1
S
A
orw
wc
P r
S P
k p
S P S w
k (k r ) S P S w

Rk
S w
k w
S P S w
k (k r ) S P S w

Rk
AP= Polymer adsorption ,ugm/gm;

C= Polymer concentration, ppm;
w= water density,lb/ft3;
Rrf = Residual Resistance Factor
11/21/2011
SP= Polymer saturation

= porosity
r= rock density, gm/cm3
255
5/6/2013
2- Viscosity Mixing Parameter
M P
w
&
4 log[0.78 0.22 ( M )1/ 4 ]

1
log(M )
3- Effective Viscosity
Rf
P w
Rrf
Pe 1P m
0.78
0.22
m
1/ 4
( P )1/ 4
( w )
&
Rf = Resistance Factor
Rrf = Residual Resistance Factor
we 1w m
256
5/6/2013
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.
11/21/2011
257
5/6/2013
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.
11/21/2011
258
5/6/2013
Chase Water
=1 cp
Polymer
Slug; =30
Graded Mobility Buffer
30
of Polymer
Slug
of
Batch #1
20
10
Viscosity
5.0
of
Batch #6
1.0 X
Chase
Water
Batch #
Figure 6-28. Grading the Mobility Buffer

259
5/6/2013
Polymer flooding as a Secondary Recover Process

Production
well
Injection
Well
Only Oil & Water

Are flowing
Only Oil is
flowing
Residual Oil
Oil Bank
Chase
Water
Buffer
Zone
Oil Bank
Polymer
Slug
Water Bank
Connate
water
260
5/6/2013
Polymer Performance
Polymer flooding can yield a significant increase in oil recovery as compared to
conventional water flooding techniques, as shown schematically below:
Oil Recovery
Water Flood
Time
11/21/2011
261
5/6/2013
Polymer Flood -
FIELD PERFORMANCE
Sanand Field, India
125
650
100
620
EOR OIL
75
Projected
590
50
560
25
530
0
1989
500
1991
1993
1995
262
5/6/2013
Polymer Grading (Courtenay, France)
263
5/6/2013
Polymer Flood Oil Production(Courtenay, France
264
5/6/2013
Polymer Flood FIELD

Project
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Taber Manville South

Pembina
Wilmington
East Colinga
Skull Creek South
Skull Creek Newcastle
Oerrel
Hankensbuettel
Owasco
Vernon
Northeast Hallsville
Hamm
Sage Spring Cr. Unit A
West Semlek
Stewart Ranch
Kummerfeld
Huntington Beach
North Stanley
Eliasville Caddo
North Burbank
PROJECTS
Flood Type Formation Polymer Rec., %OIP

Secondary
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
Tertiary
Tertiary
Tertiary
Sandstone
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
Carbonate
Sandstone
"
"
"
"
"
"
Carbonate
Carbonate
PAA
"
"
Biopolymer
PAA
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
2
0
0
0
8
10
23
13
7
30
13
9
1.2
5
8
6
4
1.1
1.8
2.5
265
5/6/2013
POLYMER FLOODING
Reason for Failures
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
Loss to rock by adsorption, entrapment, salt reactions

Loss of injectivity
Lack of control of in situ advance
High velocity shear (near wellbore
Often applied late in waterflood, making it largely ineffective
266
5/6/2013
Simulator
TA.exe
TAREK.exe
(this is the driver program)

(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)
267
2006Tarek Ahmed & AssociEtes, Ltd. All Rights Reserved
267
5/6/2013
STEPS TO RUN THE MODEL

Step 1:
Step 2:
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)
1) Click on: TA.exe

2) Select: Simulation Run
3) Open: TA.sim this file
contains wells info
11/21/2011

Rights Reserved
268
5/6/2013
Initialization File: TA.dat

!
!
3) Reservoir Model Grid Dimensions

**********************************
10 10 1
! x,y, and z blocks
!
!
4) x-direction Grid Block Lengths

*********************************
Each time you see

The Warning message;
you must enter some data
!
Warning Warning Warning
!
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
! Please, enter below the x-direction grid dimension (length)
! for each grid block. 10 values MUST BE entered :
! *************************************************
10*300
You enter the data
!
!
5) y-direction Grid Block Lengths

*********************************
!
!
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
! Please, enter below the y-direction grid dimension (length)
! *************************************************
You enter the data
10*300
269
5/6/2013
Open the Following Files with EXCEL to Make Plots

(e.g. GasRec.dat, FieldQg.dat,etc)
File Name
--------------------1- Summary.dat
2- DailyQ.dat
3- OilRec.dat
4- GasRec.dat
5- FieldQg.dat
6- WellQw.dat
7- GasQ.dat
8- WellQg.dat
9- Pmap.dat
10- Sgmap.dat
11- Swmap.dat
270
Contents
--------------------------------------------> History Matching info.& Well data
> Field Daily Flow Rates
> Field Oil Recovery Factor
> Field Gas Recovery Factor
> Field Monthly Flow Rates
> Well Monthly Water Flow Rates
> Field Total Daily Gas Flow Rate
> Monthly Gas Flow Rates/well
> Pressure Map
> Gas Saturation Map
> Water Saturation Map
270
5/6/2013
Modeling a Polymer Flood

Compare with Waterflood
Grid dimensions=
Reservoir dimensions=
# of wells=
Depth to top=
Start date=
Total Thickness =
Soi=
Simulation time=
10 x 10 x 1
X=300 ft, Y=300 ft, Z=20 ft
2 wells
5000 ft
Jan 1, 1990
20 ft
0.80
10000 days
271
5/6/2013
Initial Pressure =3000 psia

30o API
Temperature 150 oF
Gas gravity=0.65
Sor = 0.30
Sgc = 0.02
Swc = 0.20
GOR=200 scf/STB
Model will calculate Pb
Pressure at 5020 ft =3000 psi
Minimum Pwf = 300 psi
Layer 1
Kx, md
20
Ky, md
20
Kz, md
1.
0.20
h, ft
20
Z, ft
20
272
5/6/2013
10
1
2
Layer 1
Kx, md
20
Ky, md
20
Kz, md
1.
0.20
h, ft
20
Z, ft
20
10
273
5/6/2013
Polymer Properties
3.00
200.0
0.7000
10.000
2.400
2.1600
0.3000
! Polymer viscosity
! Polymer concentration ppm
! Polymer mixing parameter
! Polymer adsorption; ugm/gm
! Rock density, gm/cc
! Residual Resistance Factor
! Residual oil saturation
9.700
0.770000
! Power-Law K
! Power-Law n
Injection Rate = 300 bbl/day
11/21/2011
274
5/6/2013
Surfactant Slug and Micellar

Solution Flood

Reserved
275
5/6/2013
Mixing of Fluids by Dispersion

During Miscible Slug Injection
5/6/2013
276
5/6/2013
The effluent solvent concentration profile from producer after breakthrough shows the
S-Shape outline , as shown below. This S-Shape profile resulting from the mixing that
occurs between solvent and oil with the following sequence:
a) At first, solvent is produced at low concentration followed by;
b) A steeply rising concentration, and finally
c) A period where the effluent concentration gradually approaching injected
concentration
solvent
concentration
B.T
Time
277
5/6/2013
solvent
concentration
B.T
Time
The above three sequence of events suggest that a Transitions

Zone of solvent-oil has been created by mixing of the solvent
and oil. The transition zone separating 100% solvent from
100% oil.
278
5/6/2013
Transition Zone
100% Solvent
Transition Zone
100 % Oil
5/6/2013
279
5/6/2013
Mixing of Fluid During Miscible Flooding:
There are two types of mixing between the injected

solvent and contacted oil that could occur during the
displacement process contributed to the development
of the transitions zone . These two types of mixing
are defined as:
Longitudinal Mixing
Transference Mixing
280
5/6/2013
Mixing of Solvent and oil by longitudinal
100% Solvent
Longitudinal dispersion
100 % Oil
Mixing in the direction of the flow is called Longitudinal Dispersion

281
5/6/2013
Longitudinal & transverse dispersion in

Multilayered System
High perm
layer
100 % Solvent
Longitudinal dispersion
Transition Zone
Transverse dispersion
Low perm
layer
100 %Oil
Mixing Perpendicular to the direction of flow is called Transverse Dispersion

282
5/6/2013
Impact of the Mixing:

Longitudinal and transverse dispersion can impact the miscible
displacement extremely. In the solvent-slug process, the slug is
diluted by mixing to such extent that generated mixture could lie
within the two-phase region (NOT THE SINGLE MISCIBLE
REGION) . When this happen, the displacement is no longer
miscible
283
5/6/2013
Significance of Longitudinal & Transverse Dispersion:

In most miscible displacements not stabilized by gravity, transverse dispersion
plays a much more important role than longitudinal dispersion. This is because
in most displacements solvent fingers penetrate into the oil and exposes a large
surface area along sides of the fingers over which transverse dispersion occur.
In contrast, longitudinal dispersion occurs over a much smaller area of solvent-oil
interference at finger tips. Solvent contained in the exposed fingers can be diluted
below miscible composition by transverse dispersion.
284
5/6/2013
Role of Longitudinal Dispersion:

Longitudinal dispersion assumes a more important role when miscible flood is a
gravity-stable in a dipping reservoir. When less dense solvent displaces oil down dip
below a critical displacement rate, gravity acts to keep solvent and oil segregated
and prevents extension of solvent fingers into oil.
The following expression approximates the mixing that would occur from longitudinal
dispersion in a gravity-stable displacement vertically downward in the formation. The
solution describes the concentration profile created by longitudinal dispersion for
one-dimensional flow system.
2
1
e R
C erfc( R)
G 0.5 G 3
2
2
erfc ( R) 1 erf ( R)
2 Kt
x vt
&
G
x vt
2 Kt
Where:
C= Concentration
K= Longitudinal dispersion coefficient, ft2/day
v=velocity; i/A, ft/day
x=distance from injection end, ft
t= time, days
R
285
5/6/2013
erf(R)
R
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
erf(R)
0.0000000000
0.5204998778
0.8427007929
0.9661051465
0.9953222650
erf(R)
erf(R)
R
erf (R)
2.5 0.9995930480
3.0 0.9999779095
3.5 0.9999992569
4.0 0.9999999846
4.5 0.9999999998
286
5/6/2013
Critical Injection Rate

For a stable miscible displacement by solvent injection; the
critical injection fluid velocity is given by:
s
vc 2.7415 o
k sin( )
o s
With Critical injection rate:
(iinj ) c
Avc 2.7415A k
Bg
Bg
Where:
(iinj)
vc
k
Bg
o s
sin( )
s
o
Sin ()
= injection rate, scf/day

= critical velocity, ft/day
= permeability, Darcy
= gas FVF, bbl/scf
= density, gm/cm3
= cross-sectional area, ft2
287
5/6/2013
Class problem:
The following are given for a line-drive pattern under consideration for miscible gas
injection by CO2:
Distance between injection and production well=600 ft
Distance between injectors=300 ft
GOReconomic= 30,000 scf/STB
Thickness = 10 ft
Bg= 0.0005154 bbl/scf
CO2= 0.02 cp
CO2= 0.65 gm/cm3
Dip angle= 45o

Bof= 1.40 bbl/scf
O= 2 cp
o= 0.90 gm/cm3
BgCO2= 0.0005154 bbl/scf

k = 3 Darcy
Calculate Critical gas velocity and rate
288
5/6/2013
Flow Regimes in Miscible Displacement

Flow experiments suggested that there are three possible
flow regimes that could occur during miscible flooding. These
flow regimes are controlled and defined by the viscous-gravity
ratio, as given by:
Rv / g
22563 i o
k h 2
Where:
i=injection rate, bbl/day
= difference in density, gm/cm3
k=Permeability md
h=thickness, ft
289
5/6/2013
Viscous Fingering Flow Regimes

Flow Regime I: Single Gravity Tongue
Low Values of RV/g
Solvent
Oil
Flow Regime II: Secondary Fingers from

Beneath the main gravity tongue
Solvent
Oil
Flow Regime III: Multiple tongues
Viscosity/Gravity Ratio
Solvent
Oil
Rv / g
22563 i o
k h 2
290
5/6/2013
Flow Regime I:
At low values of Rv/g below 200, the displacement is characterized
by single tongue overriding oil and is dominated gravity tonguing.
Flow Regime II:

This flow regime is characterized by the development of several
fingers beneath the main tongue. This behavior occurs when Rv/g
is between 200 and 6000.
Flow Regime III:
This regime is dominated by multiple viscous fingering and
occurs when Rv/g > 6000.
291
5/6/2013
Class Problem:
Calculate the viscosity-gravity ratio and determine the flow regime type for a
vaporizing gas drive flooding in a 40-acre pilot flood; assuming:
Injection rate i= 2000 bbl/day
Oil Viscosity = 0.4 cp
Thickness-=35 ft
=0.4 gm/cm3
Permeability= 75 md
292
5/6/2013
Class Problem:
Calculate the viscosity-gravity ratio and determine the flow regime type for a CO2
flooding in a 40-acre pilot flood; assuming:
Injection rate i= 500 bbl/day
Oil Viscosity = 1.3 cp
Thickness= 25 ft
=0.1 gm/cm3
Permeability= 4 md
293
5/6/2013
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
294
5/6/2013
Suitability of Reservoir For Chemical Flood

Process
Chemical (ASP;
micellar, etc)
Crude Oil
>20 API
<10 cp
ASP: organic
acid groups in
the oil are need
Reservoir
So: >35%
h: Not Critical
K: >10md
D: <9000 ft
T: < 200 F
295
5/6/2013
EOR vs. Depth

EOR Method
Depth (feet)
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
Miscible LPG
Nitrogen and
Lean Gas
CO2
Miscible

Surfactant
Polymer
Polymer
Alkaline
Fireflood
Steam Drive
Good
Possible
Fair
Difficult
Not Feasible
296
5/6/2013
EOR vs. Viscosity

EOR Method

1.0
100
10,000
1,000,000
Miscible LPG
Nitrogen and
Lean Gas
CO2
Miscible
Surfactant
Polymer
Polymer
Alkaline
Fireflood
Steam Drive
Good
Possible
Fair
Difficult
Not Feasible
297
5/6/2013

Permeability (md)
EOR Method
10
100
1,000
Miscible LPG
Nitrogen and
Lean Gas
CO2
Miscible
100,000
Surfactant
Polymer
Polymer
Alkaline
Fireflood
Steam Drive
Good
Possible
Fair
Difficult
Not Feasible
298
5/6/2013
SURFACTANTS
a) Soaps or Soap-like substances
b) Contains two parts:
1) head of the molecule is attracted to and soluble in water (
Called hydrophilic);
2) 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.
299
5/6/2013
How Does Surfactant Mechanism Work?:

a) The surfactant migrates to the interface between the oil and water
phases and helps make the two phases more miscible.
b) Interfacial tensions can be reduced from30 dyne/cm, found in typical
waterflooding applications, to 104 dyne/cm with the addition of as little
as 0.15.0 wt% surfactant to water oil systems. Soaps and detergents
used in the cleaning industry are surfactants. The same principles
involved in washing soiled linen or greasy hands are used in washing
residual oil off rock formations.
c) As the interfacial tension between an oil phase and a water phase is
reduced, the capacity of the aqueous phase to displace the trapped oil
phase from the pores of the rock matrix increases.
d) The reduction of interfacial tension results in a shifting of the Relative
permeability curves such that the oil will flow more readily at lower oil
saturations.
11/21/2011
300
5/6/2013
Issues with
Surfactant Flooding
A. Variations
Surfactant-Polymer Flood (SP)
Low Tension Polymer Flood (LTPF)
B.
C.
D.
E.
Adsorption on rock surface

Slug dissipation due to dispersion
Slug dilution by water
Formation of emulsions
Treatment and disposal problems
301
301
5/6/2013
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 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.
302
5/6/2013
303
5/6/2013
Production
well
Injection
Well
Oil & Water

Are flowing
Oil and Gas

are flowing
Gas
Chemical
Slug
Chase
Water
Buffer
Zone
Oil Bank
(Micellar,
Surfactant,
ASP)
Water Bank
Oil Bank
Connate
water
Figure 6-25. Chemical Flood as a Secondary Recovery Process
304
5/6/2013
Production
well
Injection
Well
Oil & Water

Are flowing
Oil Bank
Residual
Oil
Water Bank
Injected water
From
Water Flood
Chemical
Slug
Chase
Water
Buffer
Zone
(Micellar,
Surfactant,
ASP)
Only Water is
flowing
Figure 6-26. Chemical Flood as an EOR Process
305
5/6/2013
ALKALINE FLOODING
a) Process depends on mixing of alkali and oil
Oil must have acid components
Effect on displacement and sweep efficiencies?
b) Polymer slugs used in some cases
Polymer alkali reactions must be accounted for
c) Complex process to design
306
306
5/6/2013
ALKALINE-POLYMER FLOOD
David Field, Alberta
1000
100
Oil Cut
100
10
10
Oil Rate
Primary
1
Waterflood
Alkaline-Polymer
Flood
1
0.1
1969 1974 1979 1984 1989 1994 1999 2004
307
307
5/6/2013
Micellar Flood
When surfactants are mixed with crude oil that
exists above its critical saturation; i.e So>Soc, the
resulting mixture is called a Micellar Solution.
The micellar solution is made up of structures
called microemulsions, which are homogeneous,
transparent, and stable to phase separation.
308
5/6/2013
PERFORMANCE OF
MICELLAR FLOODING
A.
B.
C.
D.
Utilizes microemulsion and polymer buffer slugs

Miscible-type displacement
Successful in banking and producing residual oil
Process Limitations:
Chemical slugs are costly
Small well spacing required
High salinity, temperature and clay
Considerable delay in response
Emulsion production
309
309
5/6/2013
Ingredients of the Micellar Solution

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)
b)
c)
d)
e)
Surfactant
Hydrocarbon
Co-surfactant (alcohol)
Electrolyte
Water
4% to10%
4% to 80%
4%
1%
10% to 92%
Another variation of the surfactant slug process with various labeled as:
Micellar solutions Flood
MaraFlood
Micro emulsions Flood, etc.
310
5/6/2013
Injection Process
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.
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 reservoir 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.
311
5/6/2013
Electrolyte
11/21/2011
312
5/6/2013
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.
313
5/6/2013
100%
kro
krw
0%
k rw
Total Relative Mobility
w + o
k ro
Minimum Total Mobility
0%
Sw
100%
Figure 6-27. Total relative permeability vs. water saturation
314
5/6/2013
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.
315
5/6/2013
Chase Water
=1 cp
Chemical
Slug; =30
Graded Mobility Buffer
30
of Chemical
Slug
of
Batch #1
20
10
Viscosity
5.0
of
Batch #6
1.0 X
Chase
Water
Batch #
Figure 6-28. Grading the Mobility Buffer

316
5/6/2013
11/21/2011

Rights Reserved
317
5/6/2013
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
318
5/6/2013
30
X
X
10
X
X
Viscosity
X
X
Batch 6
7
Batch 5
5
Batch 3
Batch 4
4
Batch 2
Batch 1
1
Figure 6-29. Grading the Mobility Buffer for Example 6-5

319
5/6/2013
Micellar floods Core Flood TESTS

A MUST
100
Henry S
80
Henry E & Henry W
119-R
Wilkins
60
40
Dedrick
20
0
10
12
14
Micellar Slug Size, %PV
320
5/6/2013
Micellar flood
TYPICAL PERFORMANCE
10
1,000
Oil Cut
1
100
Oil Rate
10
Dec. 81 Dec. 82
Dec. 83
Dec. 84
Dec. 85
0.1
micellar
injection
321
5/6/2013
Micellar-Polymer Projects
Illinois basin
Project
Location
Size,
Acre
Pore
Volume, BBL *
Chemical
Cost, $
Incremental
Oil, BBL *
Incremental
Oil, Vp
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-120
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.
322
5/6/2013
Applications of Micellar Flood

o API
o Viscosity
o So
oK
oT
o Depth
o Formation
o Thickness
11/21/2011
>20o
<35 cp
>35 %
>10 md
<200oF
See temperature
SS
Not critical
323
5/6/2013
Micellar Oil Recovery

RF = ED (EA EV)
ED 90-100%
Issues and Concerns:
1)
2)
3)
4)
Costs
Adsorption
The difficulty of predicting Micellar flooding efficiencies
Laboratory studies bear little resemblance to the field
results because:
- improper scaling
- oversimplification of the reservoir
11/21/2011
324
5/6/2013
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
325
5/6/2013
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 Sor 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
326
5/6/2013
Alkaline-Surfactant-Polymer
ASP

Reserved
327
5/6/2013
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.
328
5/6/2013
What is Alkali?
When an alkaline solution is mixed with certain crude oils,
surfactant molecules are formed. When the formation of surfactant
molecules occurs in situ, the interfacial tension between the brine
and oil phases could be reduced. The reduction of interfacial
tension causes the microscopic displacement efficiency to
increase, which thereby increases oil recovery.
The two most common alkaline agents used for ASP flooding are:
1. Soda ash (Sodium Carbonate Na2CO3) and
2. Caustic soda (Sodium Hydroxide Noah).
329
5/6/2013
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
330
5/6/2013
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.
331
5/6/2013
ASP Performance
Several variations:
ASP
SAP
Injected as premixed slugs or in sequence
Field tests have been encouraging

Successful in banking and producing residual oil
Mechanisms not fully understood
332
5/6/2013
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; EA & EV
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.
333
5/6/2013
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 i
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.
334
5/6/2013
335
5/6/2013
For a Successful ASP Flood

1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
Core Flood is a MUST (Adsorption)

Fluid Composition for Identifying the Organic Acid Groups
Testing Reservoir Water For Proper Surfactant
Designing the Slug and Slug Volume
New Chemical Additives
Pilot Flood; We Need to Learn
Possibility of Using ASP as Secondary Recovery Process
Possibility of Using ASP (or any other EOR Process) as

Secondary Recovery Process; is gaining Momentum
336
5/6/2013
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
337
5/6/2013
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
338
5/6/2013
Field & Core Flood Tests

Reserved
339
5/6/2013
ASP vs. MICELLAR FLOOD Lab Results Mitsue Oil Core Floods
ASP Flood
Micellar Flood
100
Slug 5% Buffer 50%
80
92% OIP
Soi 32%
60
40
Oil Cut
20
Oil Cut,%; Cum. Recovery,% OIP
Oil Cut,%; Cum. Recovery,% OIP
100
80
Alkali 5%,Surfactant 10%,Polymer 60%

Soi 38%
80% OIP
60
40
Oil Cut
20
0
0
0
0.5
1.5
Pore Volumes Injected
2.5
0.5
1.5
2.5
Pore Volumes Injected
340
5/6/2013
Industry Experience With

ASP Flood
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)

341
5/6/2013
Tanner
Alkaline-Surfactant- Polymer Flood
Tanner Field
11/21/2011

Rights Reserved
342
5/6/2013
ASP Flood in the Tanner Field

Depth
Temperature
Pore Volume
Thickness
Average Porosity
Average Permeability
Oil API Gravity
Oil Viscosity
Water Viscosity
Mobility Ratio
8,750 ft
175 F
2,528 Mbbl
25 ft
20%
200 md
21
11 cp
0.45 cp
3.2
343
5/6/2013
Tanner Alkaline-Surfactant-Polymer Flood

Net Pay Isopach
ASP
Injection Well
11/21/2011

Reserved
344
5/6/2013
Tanner, Wyoming
Alkaline-Surfactant-Polymer Flood
Timeline History
Primary Production
Waterflood
Alkaline-Surfactant-Polymer Solution
Polymer Drive
Water Flush
11/21/2011
April 1991
October 1997
May 2000
June 2002
January 2005

Rights Reserved
345
5/6/2013
Tanner Alkaline-Surfactant-Polymer Flood Radial

Coreflood Comparison
Cumulative
(%OOIP)
Cumulative Oil
Oil Recovery
Recovery (%OOIP)
Oil
Cut
(Volume
%)
Oil Cut (Volume %)
100
100
Caustic Soda
90
90
NaOH-ORS-41HF-Alcoflood 1275A Flood
80
80
70
70
Na2CO3-Petronate EOR 2094

-Alcoflood 1275A Flood
60
60
50
50
Waterflood
Soda Ash
40
40
30
30
20
20
10
10
00
0.0
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
CumulativeProduced
Produced Fluids
Cumulative
Fluids(PV)
(PV)
5.0
5.0
346
5/6/2013

Injected Solution
1.0 wt% Caustic Soda
0.1 wt% active ORS-41HF
1000 mg/L Alcoflood 1275A
11/21/2011

Rights Reserved
347
5/6/2013
Total Field Performance

ASP Flood
100,000
Waterflood
Oil Cut
Alkaline-SurfactantPolymer Flood
% Oil Cut
ASP
May 2000
calculated
continued
waterflood
oil cut
10.0
10,000
Oil Production
Waterflood
calculated
continued
waterflood
oil rate
Primary
1.0
1991
Monthly Oil Production (bbls)
100.0
1,000
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
2007
Total Field Performance

348
5/6/2013
Well Performance
Tanner 24-30
100,000
Oil Cut
Waterflood
% Oil Cut
10.0
10,000
Oil Production
1.0
Primary
1,000
0.1
1991
100.0
100
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
2007
349
5/6/2013
Well Performance
Tanner 24-30
100,000
Oil Cut
Waterflood
% Oil Cut
10.0
calculated
continued
waterflood
oil cut
Oil Production
1.0
Primary
1,000
calculated
continued
waterflood
oil rate
0.1
1991
10,000
100.0
100
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
2007
350
5/6/2013
Tanner Alkaline-Surfactant-Polymer Flood Production

Compared to Eight Minnelusa Waterfloods
ASP as
100
Secondary Recovery
% Oil Cut
Tanner
arrows indicate
start of ASP
for Tanner
May 2000
10
Field Comparisons
Camridge
Total Tanner Field
Tanner 24-30
Tanner 22-31
Average Waterflood
1
0.00
11/21/2011
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
0.40
0.45
2006Tarek
Ahmed & Associates,
Ltd. All
Cumulative
Oil
Produced
After Injection
Begins (Vp)
0.50
Rights Reserved
351
5/6/2013

Recovery Summary through July 2005
Ultimate Oil Recovery
Primary and Waterflood
ASP Increment Recovery
65.0 %OOIP
48.0 %OOIP
17.0 %OOIP
Cost per Incremental Barrel

(Includes Chemical and Facilities) $4.49
352
5/6/2013
ASP PILOT Daqing, China

100
Oil Rate
50
Oil Cut
20
10
1993
11/21/2011
1994
1995
1996

Rights Reserved
353
5/6/2013

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
354
5/6/2013
Shell Marmul Chemical

Flood
Polymer development and
surfactant trials
355
5/6/2013
On-going ASP Pilot Flood in

the Viraj Oil Field- India
Pre-flush: 200 m3/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. 1st slug is
10%PV of 600ppm polymer solution; 2nd slug is
10%PV 400ppm, and 3rd slug is 10%PV of 200ppm
Chase water: 60%PV of chase water
356
5/6/2013
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
N2; Cantarell Field in The Gulf of Mexico. It has been
very Successful at Increasing Oil Recovery
11/21/2011

Rights Reserved
357
5/6/2013
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
358
5/6/2013
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
359
5/6/2013
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 adsorptionANTISORBTM1416
Tested in the Chihuido de la Sierra Negra field,
Argentina
11/21/2011

Rights Reserved
360
5/6/2013
ASP AND MP FIELD PROJECTS

ASP Floods
Started
Appln.
David, Alberta
1986 Tertiary
West Kiehl, Wyoming
1987
"
Gudong, China
1992
"
Cambridge, Wyoming
1993
"
Daqing, China
1994
"
Karamay, China
1996
"
Viraj, India
2002
"
Micellar Floods
Dedrick (IL)
1962 Secondary
Robinson, 119-R (IL)
1968 Tertiary
Benton (IL) Shell
1972
"
Robinson, 219-R (IL)
1974
"
North Burbank (OK)
1976
"
Robinson, M1 (IL)
1977
"
Bradford (PA)
1980
"
Salem Unit (IL)
1981
"
Louden (IL)
1977
"
Louden (IL)
1980
"
Chateaurenard, (France)
1983
"
Acre Rec., %OIP

252
*21
106
34.4
766
29.4
72
*26.8
8.4
23.9
766
*24
68
*24
2.5
40
160
113
90
407
47
200
40
80
2.5
*49.7
39
29
27
11
50
50
47
27
33
67
* %OOIP
361
5/6/2013
Advantages of ASP Flood

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
362
5/6/2013
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 Sor and
pattern size
4. Degradation of chemicals at high temperature.
6. Injectivity problem
7. Not well suited for carbonate reservoirs
363
5/6/2013
Miscible Gas Flood
364
5/6/2013
Suitability of Reservoir For Miscible Gas Injection

Process
Crude Oil
Reservoir
N2 & Flue Gas
>35 API
<0.4 cp
High Cm
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 Cm
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
365
5/6/2013
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.
366
5/6/2013
Impact of Remaining Residual Oil on Ultimate Recovery

Sor can be reduced to its lowest possible value with displacement efficiency
ED 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 = ED EA ED
They Key for a Sucessful EOR Project:

k
N o
c

ED
S oi S or
S oi
367
5/6/2013
Miscibility
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 CO2 and lean gas drive; alternatively is called high
pressure lean gas Injection, e.g. CO2, N2, Air,etc
II. Condensing rich gas drive, and
III. Combined vaporizing-condensing drive.
368
5/6/2013
First-Contact-Miscible FCM
Displacement

Rights Reserved
369
5/6/2013
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 firstcontact miscible displacement. Liquefied petroleum gas products (LPG) such as
ethane, propane, and butane are the common solvents that have been used for firstcontact 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.
Ethane
Propane
T, oF
P, psia
50
90
N-Butane
T, oF
P, psia
T, oF
P,psia
460
50
92
50
22
709
100
190
100
52
150
360
150
110
200
590
200
198
206
617
250
340
300
530
305
550
370
5/6/2013
Production
well
Injection
Well
Oil & Water

Are flowing
Oil Bank
Water Gas
Chase
Water Chase
Water Gas
Gas
LPG
Slug
Water Bank
Connate Water
Only Water is
flowing
Residual
Oil
Injected water
From
Water Flood
Figure 6-30. LPG Flood as an EOR Process
371
5/6/2013
Chase Gas is a PROBLEM !!!

Ethane
Propane
P, psia
T, oF
50
460
50
90
709
100
150
N-Butane
T, oF
P,psia
92
50
22
190
100
52
360
150
110
200
590
200
198
206
617
250
340
300
530
305
550
P, psia
LPG Slug
T, oF
problem
11/21/2011
372
5/6/2013
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.
11/21/2011
373
5/6/2013
Industry Experience
LPG Flood
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
37 %
33%
64%
1.5
0.75
0.6
RF
bbl oil/bbl
C3
374
5/6/2013
Applications
API
Viscosity
So
k
T
Depth
Formation
Thickness
11/21/2011
>23o
<10 cp
>30 %
>not critical if uniform
Must need exceed 206 oF for C3
>2500 ft, restricted be temperature
SS or carbonate
relatively thin
375
5/6/2013
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
376
5/6/2013
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
377
5/6/2013
Multiple-Contact-Miscible Displacement
MCM
378
5/6/2013
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 CO2 is included with the intermediate
components
Component 3:
is essentially the heptanes-plus fraction C7+ and is located on the lower
left corner of the plot.
379
5/6/2013
Each corner of the triangular plot

represents 100% of a given
pseudo-component, progressive
from 0% at the opposite side of
each corner to 100 % (usually with
incremental step size of 10%).
CO2+ N2+C1
100%
70%
20%
C7+
100%
0
C2-C6
100%
380
5/6/2013
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.
381
5/6/2013
The process of developing miscibility is as classified as

multiple contact miscible displacement. Because
mixtures in the reservoir miscible region remain as a
single phase:
A. the wettability of the rock and relative permeability
lose their significance since there is no interface
between fluids.
B. 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.
382
5/6/2013
Vaporizing (High pressure) lean gas

Injection
383
5/6/2013
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.
384
5/6/2013
Basic Concept of the

Vaporizing Gas Injection
G
G1
G2
G3
Multiple (Infinite) Contact Miscibility

385
5/6/2013
G
G1
G2
G3

Reserved
386
5/6/2013
High Pressure Lean Gas Injection

Methane, Nitrogen, Air, Flue Gas
The idea is to :
Manufacture a Cheap Miscible Slug
a lot of
water
Miscible zone formed by gas

becoming enriched with C2-Cn
L = f (Pinj, zi, yinj, Sstart, ..etc)
Gas
(C1, N2,..etc)
Connate Water
Oil
Bank
Sor
Water from
H2O flood
387
5/6/2013
Understanding and Use of the Triangular Diagram

CO2+ N2+C1
100%
90%
70%
y
0%
50%
A
C7+
100%
20%
70%
10%
90%
C2-C6
100%
Bubble-point Curve
388
5/6/2013
Identifying Type of Displacement

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
389
5/6/2013
CO2+ N2+C1
100%
y
Tie Line
z
C
x
C7+
100%
Oil B
D
C2-C6
100%
Figure 6-32. First and Multiple-Contact Miscible Regions
390
5/6/2013
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 P3. This
pressure is termed the minimum miscibility pressure MMP.
CO2+ N2+C1
100%
B
90%
P3>P2>P1
70%
P3
50%
P2 P
0%
C
20%
A
70%
C7+
100%
90%
10%
C2-C6
100%
391
5/6/2013
Nitrogen Injection
392
5/6/2013
11/21/2011
393
5/6/2013
Industry Experience
With Lean Gas
1. Block 31 Field: Crane County; Texas. Ultimate
RF 60%
2. Fairway Field, Texas: Ultimate RF 50%
3. Hawkins Field, Texas
11/21/2011

Rights Reserved
394
5/6/2013
Essential Laboratory Tests

For Any Types of Gas Injection
1.
2.
3.
4.
Flow Assurance Tests

Slim Tube Test
Swelling Tests (Very important to match)
PVT Tests (Differential, CCE,etc.)
395
5/6/2013
Advantages Of
Lean Gas Injection
1. Although it does not remove all Sor from the
contacted area; Sor 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
396
5/6/2013
Disadvantages Of
Lean Gas Injection
1. Crude oil characteristics must be ideal for
the process to work (rich in CM)
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
397
5/6/2013
Nitrogen/Air Injection
398
5/6/2013
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 oF 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 oF< T<
200 oF and consume all O2 to Generate flue gas.
D. Flue gas comprises of 10-14% CO2 and rest being N2
E. Does NOT suffer from ANY constraint on supply; as in the
case of CO2
Rights Reserved
399
5/6/2013
20%
air
Consumption of O2
Flue gas:
85% N2
13% CO2
2% CO
O2
air
N2 O2, CO2,
CO, Sor, H2O
N2
CO2
CO
C2-Cn ?
Oil
H2O
Oil
&
H2O
Bank
Original
Oil
&
H2O
Reaction Zone
400
5/6/2013
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:
Vaporize oil components
displace the oil at near miscible conditions
increase oil swelling
reduce oil viscosity
401
5/6/2013
GOM Experience- 3 BSTB

CO2, N2, Air !!!!
(MMP)Air, N2 = 7500 psi
Air, N2
200 Miles from Shore

CO2 Pipeline!!!
CO2
(MMP)CO2 = 3500 psi
402
5/6/2013
Industry Experience with

Air Injection
11/21/2011

Rights Reserved
403
5/6/2013
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
404
5/6/2013
GOM Experience- 3 BSTB

CO2, N2, Air !!!!
(MMP)Air, N2 = 7500 psi
Air, N2
200 Miles from Shore

CO2 Pipeline!!!
CO2
(MMP)CO2 = 3500 psi
405
5/6/2013
Pilot Air Injection

Handil Field, Indonesia TOTAL
o Air injection started 2005

o OOIP = 6 MMSTB
o RF by H2O = 26%
o Central processing facilities with a 3MMMscf capacity
o Laboratory data suggests:
Auto-ignition occurred at 275 oF
Stable front displacement at 518 oF
Flue gas: 13% CO2, 3% CO, and 84% N2
406
5/6/2013
Oil Recovery
BPs Thermal Model
Scenario
Total Time
Years
NP
MMSTB
RF
%
Cum GOR
Scf/STB
Depletion
35
15.43
9.14
H2O 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 H2O flood
7.5 years air injection
83.71
49.61
1509
Teriary air injection
After 5 years depletion and

10 years of H2O
20 years air injection
85.73
50.81
1882
11/21/2011
407
5/6/2013
Field
h,
m
Depth, ft
T, oC
Pinj
cp
K, md
Qo,
b/D/well
Air/oil ratio
scf/bbl
W. Hakberry
LA
10
3000-12000
94
27
0.9
300
Sloss
Nebraska
6200
94
3600
11
0.8
190
480
16900
Buffalo redriver unit

MPHU
9500
104
4400
17
0.5
600
12000
Buffalo
8500
102
4400
19
0.5
18
2500
10000
Madison CAPA
8600
99
4400
11
0.5
10
20000
Other Fields:
- North sea-Ekofisk; is being considered
- Handil Field, Indonesia, Started 2005
- Wilson basin- N&S Dakota. Started in 1979
- Romania and Russia
11/21/2011
408
5/6/2013
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%
409
5/6/2013
Rich Air Injection !!!

Rights Reserved
410
5/6/2013
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 N2 Generation Plants for
Offshore EOR
2. Rich Air contains 30% to 40% O2
3. The logic Arises from the Fact that whenever Nitrogen is
Manufactured; Waste gas, Rich in O2, is Produced
4. When Injected; the Generated Combustion Product Gas
is Richer in CO2
5. Can also be used in Heavy Oil and Low Permeability
Reservoirs
11/21/2011

Reserved
411
5/6/2013
Screening Air Injection

Prospects
o o < 10 cp
o > 15%
o No fracturing and NO FREE GAS or Gas Cap
o T > 140 oF
o K > 10 md
o h > 10 ft
o API > 35o
o So > 50%
11/21/2011

Rights Reserved
412
5/6/2013
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
413
5/6/2013
Disadvantages
1. Potential problems related to: corrosion,
oxygen production (safety)
2. At high temperature; potential of producing
H2S
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 N2) line.
11/21/2011

Rights Reserved
414
5/6/2013
Lean Gas
MMP Correlations
11/21/2011

Rights Reserved
415
5/6/2013
Correlation #1:
MMP = 9433 188x103 F + 1430x103 F2
With
Where
F = I/(MC7+ T2.5)
I = concentration of intermediates, MOL%
T = temperature, F
MC7+ = molecular weight of C7+
Correlation #2:
With:
Where:
11/21/2011
MMP = 5568 eR1 + 3641 cR2

R1 = 792.06 [C2 C5] / W
R2 = 2.158x106 [C1]5.632 / W
W = Mc7+ T0.25
T = temperature, F
C1 = mole fraction of methane
C2 C5 = mole fraction of C2 C5
416
5/6/2013
Correlation #3:
For API < 40:
MMP = 80.14 + 35.35 H + 0.76 H2
Where:
0.11
H M c07.88
/ [(C2 6 ) 0.64 (C1 ) 0.33 ]
T
For API > 40:

MMP = -648.5 + 2619.5 H 1347.6 H2
Where:
0.25
H M c07.48
(C2 C6 ) 0.12 (C1 ) 0.42 ]
T
11/21/2011
417
5/6/2013
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
418
5/6/2013
Class problem; Estimation with EOS:

by different types of gas injection; these are:
1. 100% C1
2. 100% N2
3. 80% C1 & 20% CO2
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 oF
Stock Tank: 0psig & 60 oF
11/21/2011
419
5/6/2013
Nameless Field
API=40.1 & T=247 oF
Pb= 1936 psig

1sr Stage Separator: 28psig & 130 oF
Stock Tank: 0psig & 60 oF
11/21/2011
420
5/6/2013
PVT from EOS

1. Driver Program:
2. Simulator:
3. Two files:
Butte.exe
Montana.exe
PVTall.dat
PVTall.out
11/21/2011

Rights Reserved
421
5/6/2013
PVAall.dat
With Notepad; open PVTall.dat to enter composition,etc:
&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
11/21/2011
422
5/6/2013
Separator Data
&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
423
5/6/2013
Injection Gas Composition for

Swelling & MMP Tests
!
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
424
5/6/2013
Rich Gas (Condensing) Gas

Injection

Rights Reserved
425
5/6/2013
CO2+ N2+C1
100%
G
0
C7+
100%
C2-C6
100%
426
5/6/2013
Swelling and Slim Tube

Tests
A MUST TESTS
2006Tarek Ahmed &

Reserved.
427
5/6/2013
Swelling Test
Injection gas
Psat
(Vsat)orig
Original Fluid
(gas or oil) @
saturation
Pressure Psat
Hg
Vt
(Psat)new
i.e. Pb or Pd
Original Fluid
+
Injection Gas
Hg
(Vsat)new
Original Fluid
+
Injection Gas
Hg
428
5/6/2013
Swelling Test
Injected
Gas
Swollen
Oil
Oil
(Vsat)new/(Vsat)original
CO2
C1
Psat
CO2
Scf/bbl
Swollen
Volume
C1
Scf/bbl
429
5/6/2013
New saturation pressure
5000
4800
4600
4400
4200
4000
3800
3600
3400
3200
3000
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
scf/bbl of Fluid
430
5/6/2013
relative volume vs. volume of gas injected

2.6
2.4
swelling ratio, (Vsat)new/(Vsat)orig
2.2
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
scf/bbl of Fluid
431
431
5/6/2013
Slim Tube Test
2006Tarek Ahmed &

Reserved.
432
5/6/2013
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 krm
11/21/2011

Rights Reserved
433
5/6/2013
1- Miscibility Function
P Pvap
MMP Pvap
if :
0 , immiscible; i.e. P Pvap
RF
0 1, Partial; i.e. Pvap P MMP
1, miscible; i.e. P MMP
immiscible
Partial miscible
Pvap
11/21/2011
miscible
MMP

Rights Reserved
434
5/6/2013
1- Miscibility Function
P Pvap
MMP Pvap
if :
P Pvap ;
0 , immiscible Displacemnet
Pvap P MMP
0 1, PartialMiscible Displacement
P MMP
1, Miscible Displacement.
11/21/2011
435
5/6/2013
2- Viscosity Mixing Parameter
M o
s
4 log[0.78 0.22 ( M )1/ 4 ]
1
log( M )
0.78
0.22
m
1/ 4
1/ 4
(
)
(
)
o
s
oe o1 m
&
se 1s m
436
5/6/2013
3- Miscible Phase Relative Permeability krm

S S
k rm o orm k row
1 S w S orm
Sg
k rg
1
S
w
orm
S S
(k ro ) eff (1 ) k ro o orm k rm
1 S w S orm
Sg
(k rg ) eff (1 ) k rg
k rm
1 S w S orm
11/21/2011
437
5/6/2013
CO2 Injection

Rights Reserved
438
5/6/2013
Physical Properties of
CO2

Rights Reserved
439
5/6/2013
Suitability of Reservoir For CO2 Injection

Process
Miscible
CO2
Crude Oil
>22 API
<10 cp
High C5-C12
Reservoir
So: >20%
K: Not Critical
D: MMP=f(D,T)
440
5/6/2013
441
5/6/2013
442
5/6/2013
You must account for the solubility of CO2 in the Water

(loss of volume )Problem During WAG Flood
443
5/6/2013
444
5/6/2013
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.
445
5/6/2013
Regardless of how CO2 is injected into the reservoir, oil displacement by CO2
injection relies on a number of mechanisms related to:
The phase behavior of CO2 crude oil mixtures
Reservoir temperature
Reservoir pressure
Crude oil composition
the dominant displacement characteristics for a given CO2 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
446
5/6/2013
Region 5
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
Region 1
447
5/6/2013
Low Pressure Applications Region I

At reservoir pressure below 1000 psia (Region I), the major effects of CO2 injection
on oil recovery appear due to the solubility of CO2 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
448
5/6/2013
Intermediate Pressure, High Temperature (>122F) Region II

The CO2 displacement process in this region exhibits:
a) oil swelling
b) viscosity reduction and increased injectivity
c) Vaporizing the crude oil.
Region II
449
5/6/2013
Intermediate Pressure, Low Temperature (<122F) Region III

The CO2 displacement process in this region exhibits:
a) extract the crudes heavy ends forming CO2 rich liquid mixtures
b) Multiple liquids exist in this region
450
5/6/2013
High Pressure Miscible Applications Region 4

At high reservoir pressures (>2000 to 3000 psia ) as represented by Region
4, CO2 may vaporize significant quantities of crude oil so rapidly that multiplecontact miscibility occurs in a very brief time period and over a very short
reservoir distance
Region 4
Miscible Displacement Region
451
5/6/2013
452
5/6/2013
Applications:
The CO2 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.
453
5/6/2013
Extensive Network of CO2 Pipelines in The U.S.
454
5/6/2013
455
5/6/2013
456
5/6/2013
457
5/6/2013
Injection Manifold
458
5/6/2013
<< Injection Well

Injection Pressure = 1400 psi
459
5/6/2013
Production Well >>

Back pressure held at
400 psi wells flow
without artificial lift
460
5/6/2013
Denver Unit Production / Injection History

CO2 miscible flood developed by Shell
461
5/6/2013
Advantages
1. CO2 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 CO2 is close to that of
crude oil and approaches that of water. This greatly minimizes the
effects of gravity override.
3. CO2 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 CO2 as it does with
the lean gas process.
11/21/2011
462
5/6/2013
Disadvantages
1) CO2 generally is not readily available.
2) Suffers from viscous fingering
3) Gravity override could be a problem
4) Possible Early Gas Breakthrough
5) CO2 with water forms carbonic acid which is highly
corrosive. Special metal alloys and coatings for facilities
are needed.
6) Where alternate injection of CO2 and water is to be used,
dual injection systems are required one for CO2 and the
other for water.
11/21/2011
463
5/6/2013
Estimation of CO2 MMP
464
5/6/2013
Based on Numerous
Laboratory & Field Data
A. Extraction/Vaporizing Hydrocarbon
Components from the Crude Oil by CO2
occurs when CO2 0.25-0.35 gm/cm3
B. Miscibility occurs when CO2 > 0.42 gm/cm3

Rights Reserved
465
5/6/2013
466
5/6/2013
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/cm3 from:
Ma
P
Z 0.42 (62.4) R T
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
467
5/6/2013
All Gas Properties are Correlated in Terms of:

1) specific gravity of the gas g:
gas
M a 0.5 0.75
air @ SC 28.96
2) Pseudo-critical Properties; ppc and Tpc:

2
T pc = 168 + 325 g - 12.5 g

p pc = 677 + 15.0 g - 37.5 2g
3) Pseudo-reduced Properties; ppr and Tpr:
Ppr =
p
T
& T pr =
Ppc
T pc
468
5/6/2013
2
p pc = 677 + 15.0 g - 37.5 g
T pc = 168 + 325 g - 12.5 g

2
469
5/6/2013
correction factor
Real Gas EOS

gas constant 10.73
pV = Z n R T
called number of moles
volume, ft3
pV = Z
m
Ma
RT
gas density
m p Ma
, lb / ft 3
V Z RT
gas gradient
g
144
, psi / ft
470
5/6/2013
471
5/6/2013
Approximation of Compressibility Factors
Z 1
0.274 p 2pr
0.8157T pr
10
3.53 p pr
0.9813T pr
10
472
5/6/2013
Class Problem:
A slim tube test on a crude oil sample with pure CO2
indicated an MMP of 3500 psia at 200 oF. Further
assessments of the field temperature suggested that the
temperature is better represented as 150oF. Estimate the
MMP at 150 oF
473
5/6/2013
1- Extrapolate Vapor Pressure (EVP) Method:

The method suggests that the vapor pressure curve of CO2 can be extrapolated
and equated with the minimum miscibility pressure to estimate the MMP for low
temperature reservoirs (T<120F); as given by:
2015
EVP 14.7 exp 10.91
255.372 0.5556T
Temperature T in F.
474
5/6/2013
2- Petroleum Recovery Institute PRI:

The PRI proposed equating the MMP with the vapor pressure of CO2 when
the system temperature below Tc of CO2. For temperatures greater than Tc;
they proposed the following expression:
MMP = 1071.82893 10b

With the coefficient b as defined by:
b = [2.772 (1519/T)]
where MMP is in psia and T in R.
475
5/6/2013
476
5/6/2013
3- Yellig and Metcalfe:

From their experimental study, the authors proposed a correlation for
predicating the CO2 MMPs that uses the temperature T as the only
correlating parameter. The proposed expression is given below:
MMP = 1833.7217 + 2.2518055T + 0.01800674T2 103949.93/T
If the bubble point pressure of the oil is greater than the predicted MMP,
then the CO2 MMP is set equal to the bubble point pressure.
477
5/6/2013
4- Alstons Correlation:
The author presented an empirically derived correlation for estimating the
MMPs for pure CO2 oil systems. Alston and co-workers used the
temperature, oil C5+ 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 T1.06 [Mc5+]1.78 [Xvol/Xint]0.156
Where:
Mc5+ = molecular weight of oil pentane and heavier fractions
Xint = mole fraction of intermediate oil components (C2 C4, CO2 and H2S)
Xvol = mole fraction of the volatile (C1 and N2) oil components
T = system temperature in F
478
5/6/2013
5- National Petroleum Council (NPC):

The NPC proposed an empirical correlation that provides rough estimates
of the pure CO2 MMPs. The correlation uses the API gravity and the
temperature as the correlating parameters as shown below:
Gravity
(API)
< 27
27 to 30
> 30
MMP
psi
4,000
3,000
1,200
Reservoir Temperature Correction

T
(F)
< 120
120 to 150
150 to 200
200 to 250
Additional Pressure
(psi)
0
+200
+350
+500
479
5/6/2013
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 TA
With:
A = 0.744206 + 0.0011038 MC5+ + 0.0015279 c1
Where:
T = Reservoir temperature, F
c1 = mole percentage of methane and nitrogen
480
5/6/2013
Class problem:
by CO2 gas injection. Estimate the MMP using:
a) all available correlations
b) PVT Simulator
11/21/2011
481
5/6/2013
Nameless Field
API=40.1 & T=247 oF
Pb= 1936 psig
11/21/2011
482
5/6/2013
CO2 Huff & Puff !!!
High So
Thick h
Soak Intervals 2-4 Weeks
High Injection Volume
Maximum of 3 Cycles
11/21/2011

Rights Reserved
483
5/6/2013
484
5/6/2013
Foam-Assisted WAG
an Old Technology
1. Despite the favorable characteristics of CO2; 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
485
5/6/2013
Screening Criteria
EOR
OAPI
Viscosity
cp
CO2
>22
<10
ASP
2035
<35
SO
%
Formation
Type
h
ft
k
md
Depth
ft
T,
OF
> 25
SS or
carbonat
e
NC
NC
>2500
NC
High %
of
C5 to C7
SS
NC
>50
<9000
80200
Some
organic
acids
>35
Compositio
n
486
5/6/2013
WAG Flood

Rights Reserved
487
5/6/2013
What is WAG?
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
488
5/6/2013
Classification of 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)
489
5/6/2013
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.
490
5/6/2013
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 nearmiscible.
491
5/6/2013
Miscible WAG with CO2
492
5/6/2013
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).

Production Well
Water
Two Injectors
Gas \or Steam)
Pilot WAG- Middle East

493
5/6/2013
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. Sor
494
5/6/2013
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)
495
5/6/2013
Displacement Mechanism
496
5/6/2013
1- Initial Reservoir Condition

Analogy to a set of Tanks connect by pipe.
Rock
Pores
Water
Pore Throat
497
5/6/2013
2- Oil Migration
Swi
Soi
498
5/6/2013
3- Waterflooding
Swi
Sw
Sorw
Soi
499
5/6/2013
4- Gas Displacement
Pinj > MMP
Swr
Swi
Sorm
Sw
Sorw
Sorm.
Miscible Front
500
5/6/2013
5- Waterflood
Sgr Sgt
501
5/6/2013
Optimum WAG Ratio

Optimum WAG ratio is defined as the Minimum Number
of Pore Volume Injected Required to Obtain The Maximum
Oil Recovery
502
5/6/2013
Optimum WAG Ratio WGR

injectedwater
f opt
WGR
injectedgas
1 f opt
1
f opt
f opt
C
Saturation
Optimum WAG Ratio in

Secondary Floods
Saturation
Optimum WAG Ratio in

Tertiary Floods
503
5/6/2013
CO2 Huff&Puff
Cyclic CO2 stimulation is a single-well operation that is developing as a method of

rapidly producing oil. It is similar in operation to the conventional cyclic or "huff-andpuff" steam injection process. CO2 is injected into a well drilled into an oil reservoir, the
well is shut-in for a time providing for a "soak period," then is opened, allowing the oil
and fluids to be produced. In this process the production of additional oil is
accomplished by some or all of the following mechanisms:
1. CO2 dissolves in the oil, reducing its viscosity and allowing the oil to flow more
easily toward a production well.
2. Increased oil-phase saturation due to CO2 dissolving in the oil and causing it to
swell.
3. Solution-gas drive achieved by the evolution of CO2 and natural gas from the oil
phase at the lower pressures occurring during production.
4. Hydrocarbon extraction by the supercritical CO2 gas. This process is also
applicable to viscous (heavy) oil reservoirs that have a high oil saturation and
temperatures or pressures that preclude miscibility between oil and CO2.
The most important operating parameters are volume of CO2 injected per cycle,
number of cycles, and degree of back pressure during production.
This process can be repeated several times, but efficiency decreases with the number
of cycles. Cyclic CO2 stimulation can be useful in recovering heavy oil in cases where
thermal methods are not feasible.
504
5/6/2013
Modeling of WAG
&
Miscible Gas Injection

Rights Reserved
505
5/6/2013
Miscible Gas Injection

Depth to top=
Grid dimensions=
Start date=
Total Thickness =
Soi=
Simulation time=
X=500 ft, Y=500 ft

8300 ft
7x7x3
Jan 1, 1990
100 ft
0.70
5000 days
506
5/6/2013
1. Initial Pressure =4000 psia

2. Swi=0.20
3. 45o API
4. Temperature 160 oF
5. Gas gravity=0.65
6. Sor = 0.35
7. Sgc = 0.05
8. Swc = 0.20
9. Sorm= 0.10
10. GOR=573 scf/STB
11. Model will calculate Pb
12. Pressure at 8400 ft =4000 psi
13. Pressure at 8300 ft =3980 psi
14. Minimum Pwf = 300 psi
507
5/6/2013
Layer 1
Layer 2
Layer 3
Kx, md
500
50
200
Ky, md
500
50
200
Kz, md
50
50
25
0.30
0.30
0.30
h, ft
20
30
50
Z, ft
20
30
50
Soi
0.80
0.80
0.08
y-direction (rows)
Wells Location:
Well Type
Column Row
Producer:
1
7
Injector
7
1
Layer
3
1
x-direction (columns) 7
1
2
3
508
5/6/2013
MMP
Pvap
gas
Sorm
Water Blocking
3200.00
1700.00
0.020
0.620
0.10000
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
509
5/6/2013
Thermal Recovery Process

Rights Reserved
510
5/6/2013
Thermal recovery Methods

Heat is applied to:
Reduce oil viscosity
Increase So and improve Kro
Create distillation and thermal cracking of
the oil
11/21/2011

Rights Reserved
511
5/6/2013
THERMAL RECOVERY
In general, thermal recovery techniques is
divided into three categories:
1)Cyclic steam stimulation

2)Steamflooding
3)In-situ combustion.
512
5/6/2013
Cyclic steam stimulation

The Cyclic Steam Stimulation method, also known as Huff-and-Puff, 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
Injection Stage:
In the initial stage, steam is injected into a well at a relatively high
injection rate for approximately one month.
Soaking Stage:
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.
Production Stage:
The well is then put on production until it reaches the economic flow
rate and at this point, the entire cycle is repeated.
513
5/6/2013
514
5/6/2013
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.
Stimulating the well by the Huff-and-Puff process significantly improves oil
rate by three 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.
515
5/6/2013
Estimation of the Oil Rate

o
[ ln(r / r ) S
]
e w
cold
cold
(q )
(q )
o hot
o cold ( )
[ ln(rhot / r ) S
] ( )
[ln(r / rhot ) S
]
w
hot
o cold
e
cold
o hot
rhot
5.615Ginj
h 1 ( S or ) steam S wi
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.
516
5/6/2013
Steam flooding
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 X of 80%. The majority of the steam drive field
applications are typically conducted jointly with the Huff-andPuff 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.
517
5/6/2013
Steam Flood Important Mechanisms:

In steam flooding, high-temperature steam is injected into a reservoir to heat
the oil resulting in several benefits, including:
a) oil expansion
b) becoming less viscous and
c) partially vaporized to form an in-situ miscible slug,
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.
518
5/6/2013
Steam flooding Process:

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:
a) the selected flooding pattern
b) pattern size, and
c) reservoir characteristics.
The Steam flood project typically proceeds through four phases of
development; these are:
1)
2)
3)
4)
Reservoir screening
Pilot tests
Fieldwide implementation; and
Reservoir management
519
5/6/2013
Large scale steam injection in California
520
5/6/2013
521
5/6/2013
As steam moves through the reservoir between the injector and producer, it creates
five regions each with the associated temperature and oil saturation profiles:
Ts
Temperature
Steam
Zone
Solvent
Bank
Steam
Zone
Solvent
Bank
Hot
water Bank
Cold
Oil Bank
Original Reservoir Tr
Fluid Zone
80
So, %
Sor X
0
X Soi
Hot
water Bank
Cold
Oil Bank
Original Reservoir
Fluid Zone
Distance from injection well to producing well
522
5/6/2013
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.
Ts
Temperature
Steam Solvent
Zone Bank
Hot
water Bank
Cold
Oil Bank
Tr
Original Reservoir
Fluid Zone
523
5/6/2013
Hot Condensate Zone Regions B&C

The hot condensate zone can be divided into:
a) a solvent bank B and
b) 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.
Ts
Temperature
Steam Solvent
Zone Bank
Hot
water Bank
Cold
Oil Bank
Tr
Original Reservoir
Fluid Zone
524
5/6/2013
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.
Ts
Temperature
Steam Solvent
Hot water Bank Cold Oil Bank
Zone Bank
Tr
Original Reservoir
Fluid Zone
E
525
5/6/2013
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
Ts
Temperature
Steam Solvent
Zone Bank
Hot
water Bank
Cold
Oil Bank
Tr
Original Reservoir
Fluid Zone
E
526
5/6/2013
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)
2)
3)
4)
5)
viscosity reduction and

thermal expansion and swelling of the oil
Steam distillation
Solution Gas drive
Miscible displacement
527
5/6/2013
Figure 6-5 illustrates the contribution of each mechanism to the overall recovery by
steamflooding of heavy oil.
80
Oil Recovery, %
Viscosity Reduction
20
Waterflood at reservoir
Temperature
0
200
300
400
Temperature, OF
Figure 6-5. Contribution of steamflooding mechanisms to oil recovery
528
5/6/2013
1) Viscosity Reduction
The decrease in oil viscosity with increasing temperature is perhaps the
most important driving mechanism for recovering heavy oils. The net
result of increasing temperature is the improvement in the mobility ratio
M, as defined previously by:
K rw o
K ro wo
With lower viscosity, the displacement and areal sweep efficiencies are
improved considerably. As the oil displaced from the high temperature
region to an area where the temperature may be considerably lower, the
oil viscosity increases again and as a result, the rate of advance oil flow
is reduced. Consequently, a large amount of oil accumulates to form an
oil bank. This bank, often observed when steamflooding heavy oils, is
responsible for high oil-production rates and low water-oil ratios prior to
heat breakthrough at the producing well.
529
5/6/2013
2) Thermal Expansion
Oil recovery that depends highly on:
Initial oil saturation
Type of the crude oil
Temperature of the heated zone
Thermal expansion is, therefore, an important recovery

mechanism in the hot condensate region. As the oil expands
with increasing temperature, its saturation increases and the oil
becomes more mobile. The amount of expansion depends on
the composition of the oil. Because the ability of the oil to
expand is greater for light oil than heavy oils, the thermal
expansion is probably more effective in recovering light oils. In
general, the recovery contribution from the thermal expansion
ranges between 5 10%.
530
5/6/2013
3) Steam Distillation
Steam distillation is the main recovery mechanism in the steam
zone. The distillation process involves the vaporization of the
light components in the crude oil to form a mixture of steam and
condensable hydrocarbon vapors. Some of the hydrocarbon
vapors will condense along with the steam and mix with the
residual oil trapped by the advancing hot condensate region
ahead of the steam zone. This mixing will create a solvent bank
behind the hot condensation front. The distillation of the crude
oil bypassed by the advancing hot condensation zone can result
in very low ultimate residual oil saturations in the steam-swept
zone. In principle, residual oil saturations can be essentially zero
where the original crude oil has been mixed with large volumes
of hydrocarbon condensate.
531
5/6/2013
4) Solution Gas Drive

With increasing temperatures, solution gas is liberated from
the oil. The liberated solution gas expands proportionally with
the pressure decline gradient between the injector and
producer. This expansion in the gas phase provides
additional driving forces that contribute to the oil recovery
process. In addition, CO2 can be generated during in the
injection process from either the high temperature reaction
with the formation containing CO2 or from the oil that contains
CO2. If large quantities of CO2 are liberated, it can contribute
to an additional oil recovery due its ability to reduce the
viscosity of the oil as the liberated gas expands and contacts
more of the original oil in place.
532
5/6/2013
5) Miscible Displacement
In the hot condensate zone, the solvent bank generated
by the steam zone extracts additional oil from the
formation to form an oil-phase miscible drive.
Essentially, the steam zone manufactures a miscibleoil slug that can displace the oil it contacts with 100%
displacement efficiency. The additional oil recovery due
to this miscible displacement ranges between 3-5% of
the original oil in place.
533
5/6/2013
Guideline
.The main advantage of steam injection over other EOR methods is that
steamflooding can be applied to a wide variety of reservoirs. However, there

are two limiting factors that must be evaluated before consider steamflooding
in a specific reservoir, these are:
I.
II.
The total reservoir depth should be less than 5,000 ft. This depth
limitation is imposed by the critical pressure of steam (3,202 psia).
The reservoir net pay should be greater than 25 ft.
The above listed limitations should be considered when evaluating a reservoir

for steamflooding in order to reduce the heat loss to the base and cap rock of
the pay.
In general, the following guideline summarizes the required screening criteria
for steam injection:
Oil viscosity < 3,000 cp
Depth < 5000 ft
API gravity < 30
Permeability > 300 md
534
5/6/2013
Thermal Properties of Fluids

The design of steam flood projects requires clear
understanding of the physical and thermal properties of the
steam, reservoir fluids and solids. These properties are
essential in performing the following two steamflooding
calculations:
1. Estimating heat losses in order to properly compute the
capacities steam generating equipment
2. Evaluating the physical oil recovery displacement
mechanisms by both steam and hot water
535
5/6/2013
1- Enthalpy or Sensible Heat:

When one pound of water at an initial temperature Ti is heated at a constant
pressure Ps, it will attain a maximum temperature Ts, called the saturation
temperature, before it is converted into steam. The amount of heat absorbed by
the water hw is called enthalpy or water sensible heat and is given by the
following relationship:
hw= Cw (Ts Ti)

Where:
Cw = specific heat of water, Btu / Lb -
Ts = saturation temperature,
Ti = initial water temperature,
hw = heat content of the saturated water (enthalpy of saturated water), Btu /Lb
536
5/6/2013
2- Latent Heat:
If the one lb of saturated water at Ts is further heated at the same saturation
pressure Ps, it will continue to absorb heat without a change in temperature until it is
totally converted to steam. The amount of additional heat that is required to convert
the water to steam (vapor) is called the enthalpy of vaporization or latent heat of
steam LV, with total heat content hs as given by:
hs = hw + X LV
Where:
hs = steam heat content or enthalpy, Btu/Lb
LV = latent heat, Btu/Lb
X = Steam quality
Further heating of the steam to a temperature Tsup above Ts; while maintaining the
pressure at Ps, converts the steam from saturated to superheated steam. The heat
content (enthalpy) hsup of the superheated steam is given by:
hsup = hs + Cs (Tsup Ts)

Where:
Cs = average specific heat of steam in the temperature range of Ts to Tsup
537
5/6/2013
Standard steam tables are available that list steam properties;

when not available, the following expressions can be used to
obtain estimates of steam properties:
Ts = 115.1 Ps0.225
hw = 91 Ps0.2574
LV = 1318 Ps-0.08774
hs = 1119 Ps0.01267
Other important steam property is steam viscosity. For steam at

pressure below 1500 psia, the following linear relationship
expresses the steam viscosity steam as a function of
temperature:
steam = 0.0088 + 2.112x10-5 (T -492)
538
5/6/2013
Class Problem:
Estimate the enthalpy of 80% quality steam at 1000 psia.
539
5/6/2013
Estimation of the Viscosity of Oil & Water:

The change in the temperature that is taking place in the reservoir during
steamflooding has a substantial impact on the reservoir fluid properties. One
of the most important fluid properties that are strongly temperature
dependent is the oil and water viscosities. The importance of the viscosity is
due to the fact that the flow of a given fluid in a porous media is inversely
proportional to its viscosity. The considerable drop-in heavy oil viscosities at
elevated temperatures make this parameter particularly significant in a
steamflood. Oil and water viscosity can be estimated from
9 5T
o 220.15 x10
3.556
log( API )z
with
z [12.5428 x log( 5T / 9)] 45.7874
2.185
2
0
.
04012
(
T
460
)
0
.
0000051535
(
T
460
)
540
5/6/2013
Specific heat:
Another important property that is an integral part of oil recovery calculations by
steam injection is the specific heat in BTU/lb-oF. The specific heat C is defined
as the ratio of the amount of heat required to raise the temperature of a unit
mass of a substance by one unit of temperature to the amount of heat required
to raise the temperature of a similar mass of a reference material, usually water,
by the same amount. The specific heat of the saturated water and crude oil can
be approximated by the following expressions:
Cw =1.3287 -0.000605 T +1.79 (10-6) (T-460)2
0.022913 56.9666x106 (T 460)
Co
Where :
Cw = Water specific heat, BTU/lb-oF

Co = Oil specific heat, BTU/lb-oF
T = Temperature, oR
= density of oil in lb/ft3
541
5/6/2013
Fundamentals of Heat Transfer during the Steam Injection:

Heat transfer is the movement of thermal energy from one position to another.
Heat flow always occurs from a higher-temperature region to a lowertemperature region as described by the second-law of thermodynamics.
There are three distinct modes of heat transfer, these are:
a) Conduction :transfer of thermal energy between objects (e.g. Cap and
Base Rock) in direct physical contact.
b) Convection: transfer of energy between an object (usually a fluid) and
surroundings (e.g. Steam and Crude Oil) by fluid motion.
c) Radiation: transfer of energy from/or to a body by the emission of
absorption of electromagnetic radiation. Radiation heat transfer in a
reservoir during steam injection is not significant because there is
insufficient void space for the electromagnetic radiation to propagate.
542
5/6/2013
Conduction
Thermal conduction is responsible for heat losses to the overburden and underburden
strata, as shown below. Only conduction heat flux occures through the cap and base
rocks, perpendicular to the injected steam
OVERBURDEN
Conduction
Convection Conduction
Steam
Hot
Condensate
Conduction
Cold
Condensate
Reservoir
Fluids
UNDERBURDEN
543
5/6/2013
Conduction heat transfer is described by the following expression:
q heat A
Where:
dT
dx
qheat = rate of heat transfer in the x-direction, BTU/hr

= thermal conductivity, BTU/hr-ft-
A = area normal to the x-direction, ft2
T = temperature,
x = length along the direction of heat transfer, ft
The thermal conductivity measures the ability of a solid to transmit one BTU of
thermal energy in one-hour through an area of 1 ft2, if a temperature difference of 1 is
imposed across a thickness of 1 ft. Thermal conductivity of a porous rock increases
with increase in:
Rock density
Liquid saturation
Pressure
Saturating liquid thermal conductivity
While it decreases with an increase in:
Temperature
Porosity
544
5/6/2013
Listed below are selected values for thermal conductivities of various dry and
saturated rocks
Rock
(a) Dry Rocks

Sandstone
Silty Sand
Siltstone
Shale
Limestone
Sand (Fine)
Sand
(Coarse)
(a) WaterSaturated
Sandstone
Silty Sand
Siltstone
Shale
Limestone
Sand (Fine)
Sand
(Coarse)
Density
Specific Heat
BTU/lb-
Thermal
Conductivity
BTU/hr-ft-
Thermal
Diffusivity
Ft2/hr
lb/ft3
130
119
120
145
137
102
0.183
0.202
0.204
0.194
0.202
0.183
0.507
0.400
0.396
0.603
0.983
0.362
0.0213
0.0167
0.0162
0.0216
0.0355
0.0194
109
0.183
0.322
0.0161
142
132
132
149
149
126
0.252
0.288
0.276
0.213
0.266
0.339
1.592
1.500
1.510
0.975
2.050
1.590
0.0445
0.0394
0.0414
0.0307
0.0517
0.0372
130
0.315
1.775
0.0433
545
5/6/2013
a relationship to estimate the thermal conductivity of water-saturated rocks is given by:
6.36 [exp(0.6 r 0.6 S w )

(0.556T 255.3)0.55
Where:
r = dry rock density, gm/cm3
Sw = water saturation, fraction
T = temperature,
In thermal recovery calculations, the value of r is in the range of 1.0-1.4 Btu/hrft-oF.
546
5/6/2013
Thermal Diffusivity D:
The rate at which the thermal front propagates through the formation by conduction
is governed by thermal diffusivity D. The thermal diffusivity is defined as the
ratio of thermal conductivity R to the volumetric heat capacity of the rock and
can be approximated by the following expression:
R
r Cr
Where:
R = rock thermal conductivity, BTU/hr-ft-
D = thermal diffusivity, ft2/hr
r = rock density, lb/ft3
Cr = specific heat of the rock, BTU/lbm-
In most thermal recovery calculations, the value of D is about 0.04ft2/hr.
547
5/6/2013
Volumetric Heat Capacity M:

The volumetric heat capacity of the saturated formation M is given by:
M (So o C0 Sw w Cw ) (1 ) r Cr
The product (r Cr) is the volumetric heat capacity of the rock; i.e. overburden.
Where:
M = volumetric heat capacity of the formation, Btu/ft3-
= Density at reservoir temperature, lb/ft3
C = Specific heat, BTU/lb-
S = Saturation, fraction
The subscripts o,w, and r refer to oil, water, and rock matrix, respectively. It should be
pointed out the heat capacity of the rock matrix, i.e. (1 ) r Cr, accounts for about
75% of the total heat capacity, i.e. 75% of the heat injected into the formation is
used for heating rock matrix.
548
5/6/2013
Prediction of Steamflood Performance

Thermal recovery processes such as cyclic and continuous steam injection involve
heat and mass transport that can be described mathematically by a set of differential
equations. These mathematical expressions can be solved by means of numerical
simulation. The numerical simulation offers numerous advantages, including:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
Ability to incorporate irregular injection patterns

Taking into account the reservoir heterogeneity
Imposing individual well constraints
Changes in hydrocarbon base behavior
Model the multi-displacement mechanism processes taking place
Numerical simulation, however, requires extensive reservoir data and lengthy

calculations and specialized thermal software. Analytical models that yield acceptable
results and serve as simple computational tool for practicing engineers are thus
desirable.
549
5/6/2013
Marx and Langenheim Model:

The earliest model to be applied to steamflooding was that of Marx and
Langenheim for predicting the growth of the steam zone in the reservoir
during steam injection into a single well. Marx and Langenheim M-L applied
the following assumptions in developing the model:
a) Steam penetrates a single layer of uniform thickness
b) Heat losses are normal to the boundaries of the steam zone (i.e. at the
cap rock and base rock)
c) Temperature of the heated zone remains at steam temperature Ts
and falls to reservoir temperature immediately outside the heated zone
550
5/6/2013
Ho
OVERBURDEN
Heat Loss
Ho
Tr
TS
Heated Zone
Cold Reservoir
Steam
Heat Loss
UNDERBURDEN
Figure 6-7. Marx and Langenheim Conceptual Model
551
5/6/2013
Ts
Marx-Langenheim
Temperature Profile
Temperature
Actual Temperature
Distribution
TR
Radial distance from injection well
Marx and Langenheim Temperature Profile
552
5/6/2013
Heat Injection Rate:

Marx and Langenheim heating model is based on the assumption that the
injection of hot fluid into a well is at constant heat rate Ho and constant
temperature Ts, as shown conceptually in Figure 6-7. The authors proposed
the following expression for calculated the heat injection rate:
5.615 w Qinj
H o
24
[hs Cw (Tr 32)]
Where:
Qinj = Feed-water rate into the steam generator, bbl/day
Ho = Heat injection rate, Btu/hr
Tr = Reservoir temperature, oF
w = Water density, lb/ft3
hs = steam heat content or enthalpy, Btu/lb
Cw = Water Specific heat, Btu/lb-oF
553
5/6/2013
Class problem:
The feed cold-water rate into a generator is 1000 bbl/day. The
outlet steam pressure, temperature and quality are 1271 psia,
575 oF, and 0.73; respectively. Other pertinent reservoir and
fluid properties are given below:
Cw = 1.08 Btu/lb-oF
w = 62.4 lb/ft3
Tr = 120 oF
Calculate the heat injection rate in Btu/hr.
554
5/6/2013
Heated Zone Areal Extent:

Marx and Langenheim applied the heat balance on a single
horizontal layer with uniform and constant properties to estimate
the areal extent and propagation of the heated zone As(t) as a
function of time t, to give:
Ho M h D
As (t )
G (t D )
2
(4) 43,560 (R ) T
With the function G(tD) as defined by:
G(t D ) et D erfc( t D ) 2
tD
The dimensionless time tD is defined by the expression:
4 ( ) 2
R
tD
t
2 2
M
h
D
555
5/6/2013
Where:
A(t) = cumulative heated area at time t, acres
erfc(x) = complementary error function
Ho = constant heat injection rate, BTU/hr
R = thermal conductivity of the cap and base rock, BTU/hr-ft-
h = reservoir thickness, ft
t = time, hrs
T = difference between steam zone temperature and reservoir temperature,
oF
D = overburden and underburden thermal diffusivity, ft2/hr, as defined by:

D R
r Cr
Overburden
M = reservoir (formation) volumetric heat capacity, BTU/ft3-, as given by
M (So o C0 S w w Cw ) (1 ) r Cr
556
5/6/2013
Values of G, etD erfc

, and erfc tD as a function of the dimensionless time are
listed columns 3 through 5, respectively, in Table 6-1.
(1)
tD
0.0
0.01
0.0144
0.0225
0.04
0.0625
0.09
0.16
0.25
0.36
0.49
0.64
0.81
1.00
1.44
2.25
4.00
6.25
9.00
16.00
25.00
36.00
49.00
64.00
81.00
100.00
(2)
Eh
1.0000
0.9290
0.9167
0.8959
0.8765
0.8399
0.8123
0.7634
0.7195
0.6801
0.6445
0.6122
0.5828
0.5560
0.5087
0.4507
0.3780
0.3251
0.2849
0.2282
0.1901
0.1629
0.1424
0.1265
0.1138
0.1034
(3)
G
0
0.0093
0.0132
0.0202
0.0347
0.0524
0.0731
0.1221
0.1799
0.2488
0.3158
0.3918
0.4721
0.5560
0.7326
0.7783
1.5122
2.0318
2.5641
3.6505
4.7526
5.8630
6.9784
8.9070
9.2177
10.3399
(4)
(5)
etD erfc
erfc tD
1.0000
1.0000
0.8965
0.9887
0.8778
0.9837
0.8509
0.9746
0.8090
0.9549
0.7704
0.9295
0.7346
0.8987
0.6708
0.8210
0.6157
0.7237
0.5678
0.6107
0.5259
0.4883
0.4891
0.3654
0.4565
0.2520
0.4275
0.1573
0.3785
0.0417
0.3216
0.0015
0.2554
0.0000
0.2108
0.1790
0.1370
0.1107
0.0928
0.0798
0.0700
0.0623
0.0561
557
5/6/2013
The following mathematical expression to approximate etD erfc
et D erfc t D 0.254829592 y 0.284496736 y 2 1.42143741 y 3

1.453152027 y 4 1.061405429 y 5
1
1 0.3275911 t D
Several important derivatives of Marx and Langenheim heating model

include the following steamflood performance relationships:
a) Oil rate
b) Instantaneous Steam-Oil-Ratio SOR
c) Total Heat Injected Hinj:
d) Total Rate of Heat Lost to the Adjacent Formations
e) Total Remaining Heat in the Reservoir Hr
f) Reservoir Heat Efficiency Eh
558
5/6/2013
a) Oil Flow Rate qo

Assuming that all the movable oil is displaced in the heated area, the oil
displacement flow rate is given by:
H ( Soi Sor ) t D
(e erfc t D )
qod 4.275 o
M
Where:
qod = Displaced oil rate in bbl/day
Soi= Initial oil saturation
Sor= Residual oil saturation
Ho= Heat injection rate, Btu/hr
559
5/6/2013
b) Instantaneous Steam-Oil-Ratio SOR

The SOR is given by the ratio of the steam injection rate (cold water
equivalent) to that of the displaced oil rate; i.e
SOR
isteam
qod
c) Total Heat Injected Hinj:

Hinj = Ho t
Hinj = Total heat injected, Btu
t = Total injection time, hr
d) Total Rate of Heat Lost to the Adjacent Formations HLost

The rate of heat lost in Btu/hr is given by the expression
Hlost H o (1 et D erfc tD )
560
5/6/2013
e) Total Remaining Heat in the Reservoir Hr

The heat remaining in the heated zone in Btu is given by:
H o M 2 h2 D
Hr
G (t D )
2
4
(
)
R
f) Reservoir Heat Efficiency Eh
Marx and Langenheim defined the reservoir thermal (heat) efficiency as the
ratio of heat remaining in the reservoir to the total heat injected at time t, i.e.:
Eh
H r G (t D )
H o t tD
Or equivalently as:
Eh
1 tD
t
[e erfc( t D ) 2 D 1]
tD
Values of the reservoir heat efficiency Eh are conveniently listed in Table 6-1
561
5/6/2013
Steam Zone Volume:

It should be pointed out that the volume of the steam zone Vs is related to
the fraction of the injected heat present in the steam zone, i.e. Eh, by:
H o t Eh
Vs
t Eh
43
,
560
M
With the steam zone area as:
As (t )
Vs
h

The cumulative oil produced NP can then be calculated from the following relationship:
N P 7758
hn
( S oi S or ) Vs
ht
562
5/6/2013
Where:
NP = Cumulative oil production, bbl
hn = Net thickness, ft
ht = Total thickness-ft
Vs = Volume of the steam zone as a function of time, acre-ft
Ho = Heat injection rate, Btu/hr
t
= Time, hr
Eh = Thermal efficiency of the steam zone at time t
As(t) = Areal Extent of the steam zone at time t, acres
h
= Thickness, ft
M = The reservoir volumetric heat capacity, Btu/ft3-
563
5/6/2013
Oil Rate Correction:

Field results indicate that the oil flow rate qod as calculated from the Marx
and Langenheim expressions is generally overestimate steam flood
performances as compared with observed field production data. To bring
results into agreement with observed field data, the parameter is included
in steamflood performance equations, to give:
qo (qod )
The parameter is called Capture Efficiency and represents of the fraction of oil
displaced from the steam zone. The capture efficiency lies between 0.66 and 1. In
some cases, a value of greater than 1 suggests that more oil is produced than
displaced from the steam zone. This is possible if significant gravity drainage
forces influence and contribute to the production of the oil from outside the steam
zone. The parameter is usually set at 0.7.
The capture efficiency is a product of three dimensionless elements, which each
varies from a value of 0.0 to a value of 1. The capture efficiency is defined by:
AcD VoD VPD

564
5/6/2013
AcD VoD VPD

Where:
AcD = Dimensionless steam zone area
VoD = Volume of displaced oil produced, dimensionless
VPD = Fraction of pore volume filled with steam
This dimensionless steam zone area parameter AcD is designed to account for the
dependence of early oil production rates on the pattern size and the domination of
initial oil viscosity.
2
As (t )
AcD
1/ 2
A[0.11 ln( oi / 100)]
The VPD parameter describes the reservoir fill-up process that accounts for an
additional response delay to steam injection due the initial gas saturation.
5.615 (Vs )inj

V pD
43560
A
h
565
5/6/2013
The VoD parameter is introduced to signifies that the oil displacement/production is

increasingly controlled by the oil remaining in the reservoir pattern at anytime during
the steam injection process.
VoD 1
7758 Soi Vs
N
Where:
A = Total reservoir (pilot) area, acres
N= Initial oil in place, bbl
Sg = Initial gas saturation
hn = Net thickness, ft
(Vs )inj = Cumulative volume of the steam injected, bbl
Vs = Volume of the steam zone as a function of time, acre-ft
566
5/6/2013
Oil Rate
VpD
VOD
AcD
Dimensionless Parameters
1.0
Time
Figure 6-11. Graphical illustration of the capture parameters
567
5/6/2013
Class problem
Using the data and results from last class problem with a constant heat injection
rate of 16.78 MMBtu/hr, estimate the oil recovery performance using Marx and
Langenheim method. The following addition data is available:
o = 50.0 lb/ft3
r = 167.0 lb/ft3
w = 61.0 lb/ft3
Soi = 0.60
Sor = 0.10
Sw = 0.40
Co = 0.50 Btu/lb-oF
Cw = 1.08 Btu/lb-oF
Cr = 0.21 Btu/lb-oF
Tr = 120 oF
Ts = 575 oF
= 0.25
h= 40 ft
Thermal diffusivity of base and rock D = 0.029 ft2/hr Btu/lb-oF
Rock thermal conductivity R = 1.50BTU/hr-ft-
568
5/6/2013
Mandl and Volek Method:

Mandl and Volek introduced the concept of the critical time tc which
identifies the time beyond which the zone downstream from the advancing
hot condensation front is heated by a hot water moving through the
condensation front. Prior to the critical time tc, all the heat in the reservoir
is within the steam zone and performance results can be obtained by
applying Marx and Langenheim method. The authors propose that when
t>tc, the heated area is given by:
As (t )
Ho M h D
(4) 43,560 ( R ) 2 T
{G(t ) [
D
t D t cD
(Ehv
[t D (t cD ) 3 ] e tD erfc t D
3
t D t cD
3 tD
)]}
The parameter Ehv represents the fraction of heat injected in latent form and is given by:
Ehv
1
X LV
1
Cw T
569
5/6/2013
Critical Time Calculations:

The following steps summarize the procedure for calculating the critical time tc:
Step 1: Calculate the fraction of heat injected in latent form
1
X LV
1
C w T
Step 2: Calculate the critical complementary error function
Ehv
etcD erfc t cD 1 Ehv

Step 3: Enter Table 6-1 with the value of etcD erfc t cD and read the corresponding
value of tcD
Step 4: Calculate the critical time
M 2 h2 D
tc
t
2 cD
4
(
)
R
570
5/6/2013
Figure (6-10) show a graph of the thermal efficiency of the steam zone Eh as
a function of the dimensionless time tD and Ehv. The upper curve; i.e.
Ehv=1.0, follows Marx and Langenheim thermal efficiency as represented
mathematically by
Eh
1 tD
t
[e erfc( t D ) 2 D 1]
tD
or the tabulated values listed in column 2 of Table 6-1. Marx and Langenheim
heat efficiency is used as described previously in recovery calculations when
the time t is less that the critical time tc. After the critical time, the heat
efficiency of the steam zone would follow the curve corresponding to
Ehv as given by
Ehv
1
X LV
1
Cw T
571
5/6/2013
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
Eh
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0.01
0.1
tD
10
100
Figure 6-10. Fraction of heat injected remaining in the steam zone
572
5/6/2013
Class Problem:
Using the data and results from Example 6-2, calculate the critical time
573
5/6/2013
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
Production
well
Steam
injection
well
574
5/6/2013
Steam Chamber
Figure 6-12. Schematic illustration of the SAGD concept

575
5/6/2013
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.
576
5/6/2013
Formation Top
Heated oil
Flows to well
Heated oil
Flows to well
Steam flows into

Interface and condenses
Steam Chamber
Injection Well
Production Well
The steam chamber expansion process and associated drainage flow are
shown schematically in Figure 6-13.
Figure 6-13. Schematic illustration of the SAGD mechanism
577
5/6/2013
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
578
5/6/2013
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
579
5/6/2013
Forward Combustion
Figure 6-14. In situ combustion Process. (Courtesy Bartlesville Energy Technology Center , DOE)
580
5/6/2013
Production well
Air
Coke
Burned
Region
Burning Front
Steam &Light
Hydrocarbons
Hot Water
Oil Bank
Combustion
Temperature
Steam
Plateau
Temperature
Water
Temperature
Reservoir
Temperature
Burned zone
Distance
Figure 6-15. In situ combustion Temperature Zones

581
5/6/2013
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.
582
5/6/2013
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 CO2. 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.
583
5/6/2013
Toe-to-Heel Air Injection (THAI)

THAI combines a vertical air injection well with a horizontal production well.
For the first three months, steam is injected in the vertical well to heat the
horizontal well and condition the reservoir around the vertical well. After the
first three months, compressed air is injected in the vertical well and
combustion is initiated. The combination of high pressure air and high
temperature is usually adequate to self-ignite the formation, but in some
cases operators have lowered electrical heaters or propane torches
downhole to generate extremely hot, limited-volume areas around the well
bore. When compressed air is added, initiation of combustion is immediate.
The combustion raises temperatures to approximately 400 to 600C (750 to
1,100F). The combustion front moves from the toe end of the horizontal
well to the heel end. It sweeps the oil to the collection well, ultimately
capturing up to 80% of the original oil in place
584
5/6/2013
Illustration below shows a group of THAI well pairs.

A big advantage of THAI orientation is that the
liquefied bitumen needs to travel only a short
distance before reaching the production well.
Schematic of THAI combustion process
585
5/6/2013
SWEEP EFFICIENCIES
11/21/2011

Rights Reserved
586
5/6/2013
What is Sweep efficiency?

Sweep Efficiency is a measure of how well the water has
contacted the oil zone:
a) areally EA
b) vertically EV
c) displaced the oil efficiently ED
What Causes Low Sweep Efficiency?
1. Gross heterogeneities in the rock matrix lead to low sweep

efficiencies.
2. Fractures, high-permeability streaks, and faults
3. If the viscosity of injected solvent is much less than the oil, the
solvent could begin to finger, or channel, through the reservoir.
This is referred to as viscous fingering and leads to significant
bypassing of residual oil and lower flooding efficiencies. This
bypassing of residual oil is an important issue in applying
enhanced oil recovery techniques as well as in waterflooding
11/21/2011
587
5/6/2013
Secondary & Tertiary Oil Recovery

Performance
Recovery Performance of an IOR Flood is based On:
11/21/2011
588
5/6/2013
The displacement efficiency ED

This macroscopic displacement efficiency is a
measure of how well the displacing fluid mobilizes the
residual oil once the fluid has come in contact with the
oil.
It 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, ED will always be less than 1.0.
S oi S o
ED
S oi
589
5/6/2013
Displacement Efficiency ED
Soi
So
ED
S oi S o
S oi
Water Flood : So 35 40%

EOR Flood : So 5 10%
11/21/2011
590
5/6/2013
The areal sweep efficiency EA

is the fractional area of the pattern that is swept by the
displacing fluid. The major factors determining areal sweep are:
a)
b)
c)
d)
Fluid mobilities
Pattern type
Areal heterogeneity
Total volume of fluid injected
A
EA
T otalArea
Swept Area
A
A
591
5/6/2013
The vertical sweep efficiency EV
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)
b)
c)
d)
e)
Vertical heterogeneity
Degree of gravity segregation
Fluid mobilities
Total volume injection
Number of layers (very Critical)
EV
A
Cross Section Area
k1
Implicitly input in a form of a

number of Zonation or layering
system
k2
k3
AA
k4
592
5/6/2013
Volumetric Sweep Efficiency Evol
Swept
area
Swept
area
EA
11/21/2011
EV
Evol = EA EV
593
5/6/2013
Residual Oil
Displacement Sweep Efficiency
Areal Sweep Efficiency
Vertical Sweep Efficiency

594
5/6/2013
Oil Recovery Equations for Any

IOR Process
NP = Ns EA EV ED
Recovery Factor:
RF=(NP /Ns) = EA EV ED
Volumetric Sweep Efficiency:
Evol = EA EV
595
5/6/2013
All three efficiency factors (i.e., ED, EA, and EV)

are variables that increase during the flood and
reach maximum values at the economic limit of
the injection project.
11/21/2011
596
5/6/2013
Understanding Sweep Efficiencies

And Oil Recovery
Simple Equation:
then?
NP = Ns EA EV ED ; What is the problem
ED , E A , EV are functions of S s !!!
Swept area
Swept area
EA
EV

Reserved
597
5/6/2013
Estimation of
Sweep Efficiencies
598
5/6/2013
I. DISPLACEMENT EFFICIENCY
11/21/2011

Rights Reserved
599
5/6/2013
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:
ED
volumeof oil at startof flood remainingoil volume

volumeof oil at startof flood
ED
S oi S o

Bo Boi Bo
S oi
Boi
Pore Volume Soi Pore Volume So

Boi
Pore Volume Soi

Boi
Assuming constant Bo
in any displacement Process : ED
in Waterflood :
S oi S o
S oi
ED
(1 S wi ) (1 S w )
1 S wi
ED
S w S wi
1 S wi
600
5/6/2013
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 Bo 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 by waterflooding
3- Assume that an EOR project will begin at the end of the secondary
recovery process; calculate the displacement efficiency under miscible
displacement with an estimated Sorm of 10%;
11/21/2011
601
5/6/2013
Last example shows that ED 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:
ED
S w S wi
1 S wi
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.
2.
11/21/2011
Fractional flow equation

Frontal advance equation
602
5/6/2013
Fractional flow equation

Based on:
1) Water Cut fw and Solvent Cut fs
2) Darcys Equation

Rights Reserved
603
5/6/2013
Water and Oil Cut
qw
qw
fw
qw qo qt
f o 1 f w
11/21/2011
604
5/6/2013
Darcys Equation
Ak p
x
Ak
q x
p
q
p1
p2
Ak
qL
q
11/21/2011
Ak
P2
p1
( p2 p1 )
A k ( p1 p2 )
L
605
5/6/2013
Darcys Equation & Water Cut
Ak p
sin
Oil Flow :
Water Flow :
11/21/2011
qo o
po

g o sin
A ko
x
qw w
pw

g w sin
A kw
x
606
5/6/2013
Developing the Fractional Flow Equation:

Step 1:
qw w qo ow po pw
g w o sin
A kw
A ko
Step 2:
Capillary Pressure : pc po pw
pc po pw
x
x
x
Step 3:
qw f w qt
and
qo 1 f w qt
k A p
1 o c g sin
o qt x
fw
k
1 o w
k w o
11/21/2011
607
5/6/2013
Water, Gas, or Solvent Injection:

0.001127 k k ro A pc
0
.
433
sin
x
o iD
fD
k
1 ro D
k rD o
the density difference = (D o) in g/cm3

The effect capillary pressure is usually neglected because
the capillary pressure gradient is generally small and thus,
0.001127k k ro A
0.433 w o sin
1
i
o w
fw
k ro w
1
k rw o
11/21/2011
608
5/6/2013
For a system with a dip angle = 0; then

fw
kro
k ro w
k rw o
The shape of the fw vs. Sw

curve is characteristically Sshaped
fw
11/21/2011
fw

1 w a e b S w
o
609
5/6/2013
Class Problem:
Given the following data is available for a linear-reservoir system:
Oil viscosity o
Water viscosity w
Dip angle
Connate water saturation Swc
Initial water saturation Swi
Residual oil saturation Sor
= 2.0 cp
= 1.0 cp
= 0
= 20%
= 20%
= 15%
Using the set of laboratory generated relative permeability ratio as

shown below; plot the water cut curve as a function of water
saturation
Sw
0.25
0.35
0.40
0.45
0.50
0.55
0.60
0.65
0.70
0.75
kro/krw
30.23 17.00 9.56
5.38
3.02
1.70
0.96
0.54
0.30
0.17
0.10
11/21/2011
0.30
610
5/6/2013
Oil Cut:
fo = 1 fw
The above expression indicates that during the displacement of oil by
waterflood, an increase in fw at any point in the reservoir will cause a
proportional decrease in fo and oil mobility. Therefore, the objective is to
select the proper injection scheme that could possibly reduce the water
fractional flow.
reason
fw
Sw
611
5/6/2013
Water & Oil viscosities

Wettability
Injection rate iw
Updip or downdip injection
1 G
k
1 ro w
k rw o
We need to increase G!
fw
reason
1.
2.
3.
4.
0.001127k k ro A
0.433 w o sin
1
i
o
w
fw
k ro w
1
k rw o
Sw
612
5/6/2013
We want to reduce fw
fw
Sw
0.001127k k ro A
0.433 w o sin
1
i
o w
fw
k
1 ro w
k rw o
We only can control:
1. Injection rate
2. Viscosity of the displacing fluid
3. Inject at the top of the bottom of the formation
613
5/6/2013
1- Effect of Water Viscosity

0.001127k k ro A
0.433 w o sin
1
i
o w
fw
k ro w
1
k rw o
w = 0.5 cp
w = 1 cp
w = 2 cp
w = 5 cp
w = 10 cp
Objective is to reduce fw
614
5/6/2013
2- Effect of Oil Viscosity of fw

0.001127k k ro A
0.433 w o sin
1
o iw
fw
k ro w
1
Objective
k rw o
is to reduce
fw
11/21/2011
615
5/6/2013
3- Effect of Wettability
Objective is to reduce fw
11/21/2011
616
5/6/2013
4- Combined Effect of Wettability and Oil Viscosity

0.001127k k ro A
0.433 w o sin
1
o iw
fw
k ro w
1
k rw o
617
5/6/2013
5- Effect of Dip Angle & Injection Rate

0.001127k k ro A
0.433 w o sin
1
i
o w
fw
k ro w
1
k rw o
sin
1 X
iw
fw
1 Y
Sin() > 0
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()/iw] will always remain positive, which leads to a
decrease (downward shift) in the fw curve.
b) Injection Rate:
The fractional flow equation also reveals that a lower water-injection
rate iw is desirable since the nominator {1 [X sin()/iw]} will decrease
with a lower injection rate iw, resulting in an overall downward shift in the
fw curve.
618
5/6/2013
c) 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()/iw] will always remain negative and,
therefore, the numerator of fractional flow equation will be 1+[X sin()/iw], i.e.:
0.001127 k kro A
0.433 w o sin
1
i
o
w
fw
kro w
1
krw o
sin
1 X
iw
fw
1 Y
Sin() < 0
d) Injection Rate:
which causes an increase (upward shift) in the fw 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.
619
5/6/2013
Sin() > 0
sin
1 X
iw
fw
1 Y
620
5/6/2013
Water Cut fw >1 !!!!! How and Why?
621
5/6/2013
Water Cut fw >1 !!!!!!!! How?

Counter Flow IN THE RESERVOIR
0.001127k k ro A
0.433 w o sin
1
o iw
fw
k ro w
1
k rw o
Sin() < 0
Sin() < 0
sin
1 X
iw
fw
1 Y
C
1
iw
fw
1 Y
11/21/2011
if
iw is low
(C/iw) > Y
fw > 1

Rights Reserved
622
5/6/2013
Miscible Fractional Flow Equation

NC=
krs
kro
krs = Ss
kro = 1 - Ss
Ss
623
5/6/2013
krs = Ss & kro = 1 - Ss

o
S
s s
fs
1 S s o 1
s
k rs
fs
qs
s
qs qo k rs k ro
1

M o
s
Notice:
No Inflection Point
fs
0
0
Ss
624
5/6/2013

o
S
s s
fs
1 S s o 1
s
k rs
fs
qs
s
qs qo k rs k ro
For complete and instantaneous; s = o implying that:
fs = Ss;
That was NOT supported by experimental data. The more realistic approach is
to replace the viscosity ratio o/ s by an Effective Viscosity Ratio E as given
by:
E 0.78 0.22 o
1/ 4
fs
E Ss
1 S s E 1
625
5/6/2013
fs
E Ss
1 S s E 1
Ss
Solving for Ss:
fg
E f g ( E 1)
With:
E 0.78 0.22 o
1/ 4
626
5/6/2013
Class problem:
injection by CO2:
Thickness = 10 ft
Bg= 0.0005154 bbl/scf
CO2= 0.02 cp
CO2= 0.65 gm/cm3
Dip angle= 0o
Bof= 1.40 bbl/scf
O= 2.0 cp
o= 0.90 gm/cm3

k = 3 Darcy
1) Mobility Ratio
2) Construct the fractional flow
627
5/6/2013
Solution:
4
1/ 4
o
E 0.78 0.22 E 4.74
fg
E Sg
1 S g E 1
fg
8.87E-05
0.204566
0.346956
0.444128
0.515857
0.571605
0.616542
0.685253
0.735973
0.775393
0.855754
0.89921
0.916344
0.931289
0.966771
0.976316
0.985007
Sg
fg
E f g ( E 1)
Sg
1.87E-05
0.051464
0.10079
0.144246
0.183534
0.219663
0.25329
0.314747
0.370308
0.421402
0.555872
0.653044
0.697968
0.740893
0.859904
0.896874
0.932705
628
5/6/2013
Frontal Advance Theory

&
Shock Wave Front

Rights Reserved
629
5/6/2013
Frontal Advance Theory

The fractional flow equation is used to determine the
solvent cut fs or water cut fw at any point in the reservoir,
assuming that the solvent saturation at the point is known.
The question, however, is how to determine the solvent
saturation at this particular point.
The answer is to use the frontal advance equation. The

frontal advance equation is designed to determine the
injection fluid saturation profile in the reservoir at any give
time during the injection process.
11/21/2011
630
5/6/2013
Waterflood Frontal Advance Equation
5.615iw t df w
5.615Winj df w

x Sw
dS A dS
A
w Sw
w Sw
5/6/2013
631
5/6/2013
Shock Wave Front

Experimental core waterflood data confirmed that
there is a distinct front, or shock front, at which
the water saturation abruptly increases from Swc
to Swf. Behind the flood front; there is a gradual
increase in saturations from Swf up to the
maximum value of 1-Sor. Therefore, the
saturation Swf is called the water saturation at
the front or alternatively as the water saturation
of the stabilized zone.
11/21/2011
632
5/6/2013
5.615 iw t df w
A
dS
w Sw
x Sw
Distance between wells =L

Oil
1-Sor
Non-Stabilized
Zone
Sw
t1
Oil
tn
t2
Swf
Stabilized
Zone
xf
Swc
xf
xf
xf
Shock-Wave Front With a Constant Saturation Swf
633
5/6/2013
Water Saturation at the Front:

Welge showed that by drawing a straight line
from Swc tangent to the fractional flow curve, the
saturation value at the tangent point is
equivalent to that at the front Swf. The
coordinate of the point of tangency represents
also the value of the water cut at the leading
edge of the water front fwf. Theory was
supported by experimental core flood data
5/6/2013
634
5/6/2013
Water Saturation Swf at the Front from the

Start of Injection Until Breakthrough
Important to Remember:
fwf is the water cut at the
front (Leading Edge)
fwf
fw
Swf is the water saturation
at the front (Leading Edge)
5/6/2013
635
5/6/2013
Establishing Water Saturation Profile
5.615iw t df w

x Sw
A dSw Sw
or :
5.615Winj df w

x Sw
A dSw Sw
11/21/2011
636
5/6/2013
How far any water saturation Sw has travelled AFTER t days of injection?
5.615 iw t df w

A dS w Sw
x Sw
Assuming No Free Gas

1-Sor
Oil
Sw
Oil
Water
Swf
Swc
11/21/2011
637
5/6/2013
5.615 iw t df w
A
dS
w Sw
x Sw

Oil
1-Sor
Sw
t1
t2
Oil
tn
Swf
Swc
xf
xf
xf
xf
Water saturation profile as a function of time and

distance
638
5/6/2013
Time to Breakthrough tBT

xf = L
1-Sor
Oil
tBT
Swf
xf = L
639
5/6/2013
fwf is the water cut at the
fwf
fw
Swf is the water saturation
at the front (Leading Edge)
5/6/2013
640
5/6/2013
NOTICE
When constructing the water saturation
profile, it should be noted that there is
no water saturation with a value less
than Swf exists behind the water the
leading edge of the water bank.
11/21/2011
641
5/6/2013
How do you calculate (dfw/dSw) at ANY Sw?

5.615 iw t df w
A
dS
w Sw
x Sw
fw
df w
dS
w
Sw
Sw
642
5/6/2013
A Better Way of Calculating (dfw/dSw) at ANY Sw
k ro
a eb Sw
k rw
fw
k ro w
k rw o
fw
1

1 w a e b S w
o

w a b e bSw
o
df w

2
dS
w Sw w bSw
a e
1
o
11/21/2011
643
5/6/2013

w a b ebSw
o
df w

2
dS
w Sw w bSw
a e
1
o
644
5/6/2013
The derivative of (dfw/dSw)Sw can then be used in the Frontal

Advance Equation to give:

w a b e bSw
o
df w

dS
w Sw w bSw
a e
1
o
5.615iw t df w

dS
w Sw
x Sw

w a b e bSw
o
5.615iw t
( x) Sw
w bSw
a e
1
11/21/2011
645
5/6/2013
Water Saturation Profile

From the above discussion, the water saturation profile at any given
time t1 can be easily developed as follows:
Step 1. Construct the fractional flow curve, i.e. fw vs. Sw.
Step 2. Draw a straight-line tangent from Swi to the curve.

Step 3. Identify the point of tangency and read off the values of Swf
and fwf.
Step 4. Calculate the distance of the leading edge (front) of the water
front from the injection well by applying:

bS
w a b e wf
o
5.615 iw t
( x) Swf
2
w
b S wf
a e
1
11/21/2011
646
5/6/2013
Step 5. Select several values for water saturation Sw

greater than Swf and Calculate the distance from
the injection well to each selected saturation
by applying:
w
o
5.615iw t
( x) Sw
w
1
o
a b e bSw
a e bSw
Step 6. Establish the water saturation profile after t1, days

by plotting results obtained in step 5.
11/21/2011
647
5/6/2013
Step 7. Select a new time t2 and repeat steps 4 through 6 to

generate a family of water saturation profiles as shown
schematically below

w a b e bSw
5.615iw t
o
( x) Sw
2
A w
bSw
a e
1
1-Sor
Sw
Swf
Swc
t2
tn
t1
Swc
Water saturation profile as a function of time and distance

11/21/2011
648
5/6/2013
Time to Breakthrough:
Time to breakthrough tBT is identified as the time when
the leading edge (front) of the injected water arrives at the
production well; i.e. when xf =L, or:
5.615 iw t BT
L ( x) Swf
A
AL
t BT
5
.
615
i
w

bS
w a b e wf
o
2
w
b S wf
a e
1
w
b S wf
a
e

bS
w a b e wf
o
Remember, b is
negative
649
5/6/2013
Understanding the Frontal Advance

Theory & its Applications
11/21/2011

Rights Reserved
650
5/6/2013
Average Water Saturation at B.T
11/21/2011
651
5/6/2013
5.615Winj df w
5.615 iw t df w

x Sw

A dS w Sw A dS w Sw
5.615 iw t BT
L
A
WiBT ( P.V )
df w
5.615WiBT

dS w Swf A
df w

dS w Swf
1
df w
dS
w Swf
652
5/6/2013
Average Water Saturation at B.T

let us exam the following important expression:
WiBT ( P.V )
1
df w
dS w Swf
If the tangent to the fractional flow curve is extrapolated to fw = 1 with a

corresponding water saturation of Sw*, then the slope of the tangent can be
calculated numerically as:
df w
1 0
*
dS w Swf S w S wi
Combining the above two expressions,
gives:
WiBT P.V S w* S wi P.V QiBT
Or:
WiBT P.V S wBT S wi P.V QiBT

11/21/2011
653
5/6/2013
Before & At Breakthrough

It should be noted that the average water saturation in the swept area
would remain constant with an average SwBT until breakthrough occurs. At
the time of breakthrough, the flood front saturation Swf reaches the producing
well and the water cut increases suddenly from zero to fwf. At breakthrough,
Swf and fwf are designated as SwBT and fwBT.
Average water saturation
11/21/2011
654
5/6/2013
One more time, Key Definitions

Average water Saturation
at B.T
fwf is the water cut
at the front (Leading
Edge)
S wBT
w bSwf
1 a e
o
S wi
w
bS
a b e wf
Swf is the water saturation at the
11/21/2011
655
5/6/2013
There are three important points that must be considered when

determining average water saturation at SwBT 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 wBT
w bSwf
a e
1
S wi
w
bS
a b e wf
o
Swf
11/21/2011

Reserved
656
5/6/2013
Point 2.The cumulative water injected at B.T is based on the frontal advance
theory which assumes that the water displacement process is
performed in a LINEAR RESERVOIR SYSTEM. To account for the
deviation from the linear system; the Areal Sweep Efficiency EA
and Vertical Sweep Efficiency EV must be accounted or, as:
WiBT P.V S wBT S wi E ABT EVBT
WiBT P.V QiBT E ABT EVBT

Point 3. Pore-volume injected at BT:
QiBT
11/21/2011
E A EV
df w
dS
w Swf
657
5/6/2013
Summary
1- P.V Injected at B.T
2- Time to B.T:
3- Cum. Water Injected at B.T:
11/21/2011
QiBT
WiBT
1
P.V
df w
dSw Swf
AL
t BT
5.615 iw
bS
a e wf
1
o
w
b S wf
a b e

o
WiBT iw t BT
P.V
df w
dSw Swf
( P.V ) QiBT
658
5/6/2013
Class Problem:
Given the following data is available for a linear-reservoir system:
Sw
0.25
0.30
0.35
0.40
0.45
0.50
0.55
0.60
0.65
0.70
0.75
kro/krw
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 Bo

Water formation volume factor Bw
Formation thickness h
Cross-sectional area A
Porosity
Injection rate iw
Distance between producer and injector L
Oil viscosity o
Water viscosity w
Dip angle
Connate water saturation Swc
Initial water saturation Swi
Residual oil saturation Sor
= 1.25 bbl/STB
= 1.02 bbl/STB
= 20 ft
= 26,400 ft.
= 25%
= 900 bbl/day
= 600 ft.
= 2.0 cp
= 1.0 cp
= 0
= 20%
= 20%
= 20%
659
5/6/2013
1. Calculate and plot the water saturation profile after 60, 100, 120, 200, 240
days.
2. Time and water profile at breakthrough
3. Assume several elapsed time after breakthrough (e.g. 500, 550, and
Calculate and plot water saturation profile after breakthrough
4. calculate total pore volumes of water injected at B.T
5. calculate cumulative water injected at breakthrough
11/21/2011
660
5/6/2013
Important Relationships:
1) Reservoir fwr Reservoir WORr Relationship:

(
f wr
qw
)
qo
qw
q w qo ( q w ) 1
qo
f wr
WOR r
WOR r 1
WOR r
1
1
1
f wr
f wr
1 f wr
2) Reservoir fwr Surface WORs

Relationship
(
f wr
5/6/2013
Qw
) Bw
Qo
qw
Qw Bw
Q
qw qo Qw Bw Qo Bo
( w ) Bw Bo
Qo
f wr
Bw WOR s
Bw WOR s Bo
WOR s
Bo
Bo f wr
1
Bw (
1) Bw (1 f wr )
f wr
661
5/6/2013
3) Reservoir WORr Surface WORs Relationship:

Qw
) Bw
qw Qw Bw
Qo
WOR r
qo Qo Bo
Bo
(
WOR r WOR s (
Bw
)
Bo
WOR s WOR r (
Bo
)
Bw
4) Surface fws Surface WORs Relationship:

f ws
Q
( w)
Qw
Qo
Qw Qo ( Qw ) 1
Qo
f ws
WOR s
WOR s 1
5) Surface fws Reservoir fw Relationship:

f ws
5/6/2013
Bo
1
Bw
1 Bo
f wr
662
5/6/2013
Performance 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 Sw2 and fw2,
respectively.
2
663
5/6/2013
Proposed Methodology for Performance after B.T:

when the water saturation at the producing well reaches any
assumed value Sw2 after breakthrough, the fractional flow curve
can be used to determine:
Producing water cut fw2
Average water saturation in the reservoir
Cumulative water injected in pore volumes, i.e. Qi
5/6/2013
664
5/6/2013
Saturation around wellbore at the Production well

Sw2
Avg Sw in the
Swept Area
665
5/6/2013
Water Cut and Cumulative Water Injected After B.T:

Step 1: Assume a value of Sw2 greater than Swf and draw a tangent to fw
curve. the point of tangency corresponds to the well producing
water cut fw2, as expressed in bbl/bbl.
Step 2: The saturation at which the tangent intersects fw = 1 is the average
water saturation Sw2 in the swept area. Mathematically, the average
water saturation is determined from:
S w2 S w2
Or:
S w2
1 f w2
df w
dSw Sw2

(1 f w 2 ) 1 w a e bSw 2
o
S w2
w
a b e bSw 2
o
Remember; b is
negative
666
5/6/2013
Step 3: The reciprocal of the slope of the tangent is defined as the cumulative
pore volumes of water injected Qi at the time when the water
saturation reaches Sw2 at the producing well, or:
Qi
1
df w
dS
w Sw2
w bSw 2
a e
1
Qi
w
a b e bSw 2
Remember, the b
is negative
Step 4: The cumulative water injected when the water saturation at the
producing reaches Sw2 is given by:
Winj P.V (S w2 S wi ) E A EV Bw WP
11/21/2011
667
5/6/2013
Step 5: For a constant injection rate iw , the total time t to inject

Winj barrels of water is given by:
11/21/2011
Winj
iw
668
5/6/2013
For Spreadsheet Calculations & Working Equations

f w2
1
w b Sw2
ae
o
Winj P.V (S w2 S wi ) E A EV BwWP
Winj
11/21/2011
( P.V ) E A EV ( S w 2 S wi )
S wBT
S w2
bS
a e wf
1
o
S wi
w
bS
a b e wf
(1 f w 2 ) 1 w a e bSw 2
o
S w2
w
a b e bSw 2
o
1
1 w

a b e bSw 2 o
a b e bSw 2
a e bSw2
Bw WP
669
5/6/2013
Immiscible Displacement Efficiency

&
Oil Recovery Calculations
5/6/2013

Rights Reserved
670
5/6/2013

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, Qo
Water production rate, Qw
Surface wateroil ratio, WORs
Cumulative oil production, Np
Recovery factor, RF
Cumulative water production, W p
Cumulative water injected, W inj
Water-injection pressure, pinj (discussed later )
Water-injection rate, iw (discussed later in the chapter)
5/6/2013
671
5/6/2013
In general, oil recovery calculations are divided into two parts:

(1) before breakthrough calculations and
(2) after breakthrough calculations.
Regardless of the stage of the waterflood, i.e., before or after
breakthrough, the cumulative oil production is given previously
by:
N N E E E
p
When Sgi = 0, the displacement efficiency ED is given previously by:

ED
S w S wi
1 S wi
At breakthrough, the ED can be calculated by determining the average

water saturation at breakthrough:
EDBT
5/6/2013
S wBT S wi
1 S wi
672
5/6/2013
Before breakthrough occurs, the oil recovery calculations are

simple when assuming that no free gas exists at the start of
the flood, i.e. Sgi = 0. The cumulative oil production is simply
equal to the volume of water injected and no water production
during this phase (Wp = 0 and Qw = 0).
Oil recovery calculations after breakthrough are based on
determining ED at various assumed values of water saturations
at the producing well. Assuming ; Sgi =0 ,EA ,EV = 100%; the
specific steps of performing complete oil recovery calculations
are composed of three stages:
Data preparation
Recovery performance to breakthrough
Recovery performance after breakthrough
5/6/2013
673
5/6/2013
DO NOT PANIC; below is ONLY a SUMMARY

Sw2
SwBT
fw2
fwBT
(dfw/dSw)
(1 Sor)
1.0
f w2
1
w bSw 2
a e
1
o
Bo
1
Bw
1
f
w2
ED
EDBT
Np
NPBT
Qi
QiBT
Winj
WiBT
t
tBT
Wp
0
WORs
Qo
Qw
w
) a b eb Sw 2
df
o
( w )
dSw [1 ( w ) a e b S w 2 ]2
o
(
NP = Ns ED EA EV Qi
WOR s
SwBT
S w2
1
df w
dSw S w 2
Qo
S w2 S w2
ED
S w2 S wi
1 S wi
w2
Winj P.V Qi
iw
Bo Bw WOR s
1 f w2
df w
dS
w S
Wp
Winj S w2 S wi P.V E A EV
Bw
Winj
iw
Qw Qo WOR s
674
5/6/2013
Stage 1: Data Preparation

Step 1. Express the relative permeability data as relative permeability
ratio kro/krw 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,
kro/krw vs. Sw, 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
k ro
a e bSw
k rw
5/6/2013
675
5/6/2013
Step 3. Calculate and plot the fractional flow curve fw, allowing for
gravity effects if necessary, but neglecting the capillary
pressure gradient.
Step 4. Select several values of water saturations between Swf and (1Sor) and determine the slope (dfw/dSw) 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:
w
) a b eb Sw 2
df
o
( w )
dSw [1 ( w ) a e b S w 2 ]2
o
(
5/6/2013
676
5/6/2013
Stage 2: Recovery Performance to Breakthrough

Step 1. Draw tangent to the fractional flow curve as originated from Swi
and determine:
Point of tangency with the coordinate (Swf, fwf) and slope of the
line
Average water saturation at breakthrough by extending the
tangent line to fw = 1.0, or by applying:
S wBT
w bSwf
a e
1
S wi
w
bS
a b e wf
o
Step 2. Calculate pore volumes of water injected at breakthrough by using
QiBT
5/6/2013
1
df
( w ) Swf
dS w
( S wBT S wi )
QiBT
bS
a e wf
1
o

w
bS
a b e wf
o
677
5/6/2013
Step 3. Assuming EA and EV are 100%, calculate cumulative water

injected at breakthrough by applying:
WiBT P.V QiBT
WiBT P.V S wBT S wi
WP = 0
Step 4. Calculate the displacement efficiency at breakthrough by applying

E DBT
S wBT S wi
1 S wi
Step 5. Calculate cumulative oil production at breakthrough from
p BT
N S EDBT
Step 6. Assuming a constant water injection rate, calculate time to

breakthrough from :
t BT
5/6/2013
WiBT
iw
678
5/6/2013
Step 7. Select several values of injection time less than the

breakthrough time, i.e. t tBT and set:
Winj
= iw t
Qo
= iw/Bo
WOR
=0
Wp
=0
Np
iw t Winj
Bo
Bo
Step 8. Calculate the surface water-oil ratio WORs exactly at breakthrough by

using:
Bo
WOR s
1
Bw
1
f wf
It should be pointed out that ALL calculations abve are based

on the assumption that Sgi =0, EA and EV are 100%.
5/6/2013
679
5/6/2013
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. Sw2, and determining the corresponding
average reservoir water saturation for each Sw2.
Step 1. Select 6 to 8 different values of Sw2 (i.e. Sw at the producing
well) between SwBT and (1 Sor) and determine (dfw2/dSw2)
values corresponding to these Sw2 points.
w
) a b eb Sw 2
df
o
( w )
dSw [1 ( w ) a e b S w 2 ]2
o
(
Step 2. For each selected value of Sw2, calculate the corresponding

reservoir water cut and average water saturation from:
f w2
5/6/2013
1

1 w a e bSw 2
o
S w2 S w2
1 f w2
df w
dS
w
w2
680
5/6/2013
Step 3. Calculate the displacement efficiency ED for each selected

value of Sw2.
ED
S w2 S wi
1 S wi
Step 4. Calculate cumulative oil production Np for each selected value

of Sw2 from:
NP = Ns ED EA EV
Step 5. Determine pore volumes of water injected Qi for each
selected value of Sw2 from
Qi
5/6/2013
1
df w
dSw S w 2
681
5/6/2013
Step 6. Calculate cumulative water injected for each selected value

of Sw2 by applying
Winj P.V Qi
Notice that EA and EV are set equal to 100%
Step 7. Assuming a constant water injection rate iw, calculate the
time t to inject Winj barrels of water by applying
5/6/2013
Winj
iw
682
5/6/2013
Step 8. Calculate cumulative water production WP 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:
Wp
5/6/2013
Bw
683
5/6/2013
Step 9. Calculate the surface water-oil ratio WORs that corresponds to

each value of fw2 (as determined in step 2) from Equation
Bo
WOR s
1
Bw
1
f w2
Step 10. Calculate the oil and water flow rates from the following
derived
relationships:
iw Qo Bo Qw Bw
Introducing the surface water-oil ratio into the above expression, gives:
iw Qo Bo Qo WOR s Bw
Solving for Qo and Qw gives:
Qo
5/6/2013
iw
Bo Bw WOR s
Qw Qo WOR s
684
5/6/2013
Step 11. Above calculations as described in Step 1 through 10 can be

organized in the following tabulated form:
Sw2
Swf= SwBT
fw2
fwBT
(dfw/dSw)
SwBT
ED
EDBT
Np
NPBT
Qi
QiBT
Winj
WiBT
t
tBT
Wp
0
WORs
Qo
Qw
(1 Sor)
1.0
f w2
1
w bSw 2
a e
1
o
S w2
w
) a b eb Sw 2
df
o
( w )
dSw [1 ( w ) a e b S w 2 ]2
o
(
NP = Ns ED EA EVQi dfw
dSw S w 2
WOR s
Bo
1
Bw
1
f w2
Qo
S w2 S w2
ED
S w2 S wi
1 S wi
w2
Winj P.V Qi
iw
Bo Bw WOR s
1 f w2
df w
dS
w S
Wp
Bw
Winj
iw
Qw Qo WOR s
685
5/6/2013
Class Problem
The data of previous class problem is reproduced here for convenience:
Sw
kro/kro
Bo
Swi
iw
Ns
EV
0.25 0.30 0.35

30.23 17.00 9.56
= 2.0 cp
= 1.25 bbl/STB
= 25%
= 20%
= 900 bbl/day
= 496,449 STB
= 100%
0.40
5.38
0.45
3.02
0.50
1.70
0.55
0.96
0.60
0.54
0.65
0.30
0.70
0.17
0.75
0.10
= 1.0 cp
Bw = 1.02 bbl/STB
h
= 20 ft
Sor = 20%
(P.V) = 775,779 bbl
EA = 100%
Predict the waterflood performance to abandonment at a WORs of 45 STB/STB
5/6/2013
686
5/6/2013
Miscible Displacement Efficiency

&
5/6/2013

Rights Reserved
687
5/6/2013

o
S
s s
fs
1 S s o 1
s
k rs
fs
qs
s
qs qo k rs k ro
Notice:
No Inflection Point
fs
0
0
Ss
688
5/6/2013

o
S
s s
fs
1 S s o 1
s
k rs
fs
qs
s
qs qo k rs k ro
For complete and instantaneous; s = o implying that:
fs = Ss;
That was NOT supported by experimental data. The more realistic approach is
to replace the viscosity ratio o/ s by an Effective Viscosity Ratio E as given
by:
E 0.78 0.22 o
1/ 4
fs
E Ss
1 S s E 1
689
5/6/2013
Koval integrated the fraction flow equation to determine the Displacement

Efficiency as a function of solvent pore volume injected Qi after breakthrough;
to give:
fs
E Ss
1 S s E 1
2 ( E Qi )1/ 2 (1 Qi )
ED
E 1
The fractional flow equation as a function Qi is expressed as:

1/ 2
E
E
Q
fs i
E 1
With Pore-Volume injected at B.T :
QiBT
AGAIN :
E 0.78 0.22 o
1/ 4
1
E
690
5/6/2013
Mobility Ratio Under Miscible Displacement
o
s
Surface Gas Cut:
fg
qg
q g qo
Bg GOR
Bg GOR Bo
691
5/6/2013
Areal Sweep Efficiency at Breakthrough
E ABT 0.54602036
0.03170817 0.30222997
0.00509693M
M
eM
If M >100, EABT 40%

11/21/2011
692
5/6/2013
Areal Sweep Efficiency After Breakthrough
E A E ABT 0.633 log (

E A E ABT 0.2749 ln (
11/21/2011
Qinj
QiBT
Qinj
QiBT
693
5/6/2013
Summary of Working Equations:
E 0.78 0.22 o
f s as a function of Ss :
f s as a function of Qi :
E Ss
fs
1 S s E 1
E
E
Qi
fs
E 1
ED
1/ 4
Ss
fg
E f g ( E 1)
1/ 2
2 ( E Qi )1/ 2 (1 Qi )
E 1
QiBT
1
E
694
5/6/2013
Gravity Override Tonguing

The most important two factors in determining vertical sweep efficiency are:
1) Vertical Heterogeneity
2) Gravity Override
For a stable miscible displacement by gas injection; the
critical injection fluid velocity is given by:
s
vc 2.7415 o
k sin( )
s
o
With Critical injection rate:
(iinj ) c
Avc 2.7415A k
Bg
Bg
Where:
(iinj)
vc
k
Bg
o s
sin( )
o s
Sin ()
= injection rate, scf/day

= critical velocity, ft/day
= permeability, Darcy
= gas FVF, bbl/scf
= density, gm/cm3
= cross-sectional area, ft2
695
5/6/2013
Class problem:
injection by CO2:
Thickness = 10 ft
Bg= 0.0005154 bbl/scf
CO2= 0.02 cp
CO2= 0.65 gm/cm3
Dip angle= 45o

Bof= 1.40 bbl/scf
O= 2 cp
o= 0.90 gm/cm3

k = 3 Darcy
1)
2)
3)
4)
Critical gas velocity and rate

Mobility Ratio
Construct the fractional flow
Calculate ED as a function of pore volume injected. Label BT and economic limit
points
5) Area Sweep Efficiency as a function of PV injected
696
5/6/2013
Accounting for Areal and Vertical Sweep

Efficiencies:
Reservoir heterogeneity has more influence than any
other factor on the performance of an IOR project. The
most important two types of heterogeneity affecting
sweep efficiencies (EV and EA) are:
A. The Reservoir Areal Heterogeneity.
B. The Reservoir Vertical Heterogeneity
697
5/6/2013
II. AREAL SWEEP EFFICIENCY
5/6/2013
698
5/6/2013
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 kx & ky
5. Porosity, permeability, and net thickness variations
Determination of The areal distribution of reservoir properties are
difficult to estimate since methods of defining heterogeneity are
indirect
699
5/6/2013
Mobility Ratio M
M
w
o
M
11/21/2011
displacingFluid w
displacedFluid o
k rw S
wBT
k ro S
wi
k rw S
k ro S
wBT
wi
o
w

Rights Reserved
700
5/6/2013
11/21/2011

Rights Reserved
701
5/6/2013
Effect of M on Performance
702
5/6/2013
o & w Effect on
Conformance and Sweep Efficiency
Production
well
Production
well
Swi
Sw
Polymer Flooding
With favorable M
Sw
Swi
Injection
well
M
5/6/2013
displacingFluid k rw S wBT o
displacedFluid k ro S wi w
Injection
well
key
703
5/6/2013
displaced =kro/o
Crude Oil
Soi & Swi
Sw
Sw
Injected water
displacing = krw/w
( k rw / w ) S w
( k ro / o ) Swi
k
M rw
k ro
Soi & Swi
Figure 6-17. Viscous fingering in water flood

11/21/2011
704
5/6/2013
Crude Oil
Crude Oil
Polymer Solution
Injected Water
M >> 1
Water flooding
M1
Polymer flooding
Figure 6-18. Comparison of viscous instability in water and polymer flood
705
5/6/2013
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:
EA
11/21/2011
Winj
P.V S wBT S wi
706
5/6/2013
Phase 2: Areal Sweep Efficiency at Breakthrough
E ABT 0.54602036
11/21/2011
0.03170817 0.30222997
0.00509693M
M
eM
707
5/6/2013
Phase 3: Areal Sweep Efficiency After Breakthrough
E A E ABT 0.633 log (

E A E ABT 0.2749 ln (
11/21/2011
Winj
WiBT
Winj
WiBT
708
5/6/2013
11/21/2011

Rights Reserved
709
5/6/2013
EA
1
1 A
A a1 ln M a2 a3 f w a4 lnM a5 a6
Coefficient
a1
a2
a3
a4
a5
a6
11/21/2011
COEFFICIENTS IN AREAL SWEEP

EFFICIENCY CORRELATIONS
Five-Spot
Direct Line
-0.2062
-0.3014
-0.0712
-0.1568
-0.511
-0.9402
0.3048
0.3714
0.123
-0.0865
0.4394
0.8805
Staggered Line
-0.2077
-0.1059
-0.3526
0.2608
0.2444
0.3158
710
5/6/2013
III. VERTICAL SWEEP EFFICIENCY

EV
11/21/2011
711
5/6/2013
Dykstra-Parsons D&P Permeability Variation

Dykstra and Parsons (1950) introduced the concept of the permeability variation
V, which is designed to describe the degree of heterogeneity within the
reservoir. The value of this uniformity coefficient ranges between zero for a
completely homogeneous system and one for a completely heterogeneous
system.
5/6/2013
k50 k84.1
k50
712
5/6/2013
Step 1.
Step 2.
Arrange the core samples in decreasing permeability sequence, i.e. descending

order.
For each sample, calculate the percentage of thickness with permeability
greater than this sample.
Step 3
Using a Log-probability graph paper, plot permeability values on the log

scale and the % of thickness on the probability scale.
Step 4
Draw the best straight line through the points
Step 5.
Read the corresponding permeability values at 84.1% and 50% of thickness. these
two values are designated as k84.1 and k50.
Step 6.
The Dykstra and Parsons permeability variation is defined by the following

expression:
k 50 k 84.1
k 50
It should be noted that if all the permeabilities are equal, the numerator of the
above equation would be zero, and the V would also be zero. This would
be the case for a completely homogeneous system. The Dykstra and
Parsons method is commonly referred to as a Permeability Ordering
Technique
713
5/6/2013
714
714
5/6/2013
Class Problem:
The following conventional core analysis data are available from three wells.
Depth
ft
Well #1
k
md
5389-5391
--5393
-5395
-5397
-5399
-5401
-5403
-5405
-5406
-5409
166
435
147
196
254
105
158
153
128
172
Well #2
Depth
k
ft
md
Porosit
y
%
17.4
5397-5398.5
18.0
-539.95
16.7
-5402
17.4
-5404.5
19.2
-5407
16.8
-5409
16.8
-5411
15.9
-5413
17.6
-5415
17.2
-5417
72
100
49
90
91
44
62
49
49
83
porosi
ty
%
15.7
15.6
15.2
15.4
16.1
14.1
15.6
14.9
14.8
15.2
Dept
ft
Well #3
k
md
5401-5403
-5405
-5407
-5409
-5411
-5413
-5415
-5417
-5419
28
40
20
32
35
27
27
9
30
poros
ity
%
14.0
13.7
12.2
13.6
14.2
12.6
12.3
10.6
14.1
715
5/6/2013
Ev is based on Permeability Variation
11/21/2011

Rights Reserved
716
5/6/2013
Minimum Number of Layers

Based on a computer study, Craig (1971) outlined some guidelines for
selecting the minimum number of layers needed to predict the performance
of a reservoir under waterflooding operation. The author simulated
the performance of a waterflood five-spot pattern that is composed of 100
layers with permeability variations ranging from 0.4 to 0.8. The minimum
number of layers required to match results of the 100-layer model was
determined as a function of mobility ratio M and permeability variation V.
717
5/6/2013
718
5/6/2013
Impact of V on Recovery Factor

V=0.90
V=0.80
V=0.7
0
11/21/2011
719
5/6/2013
Simulator
TA.exe
manual)
TAREK.exe
(this is the driver program your
(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)
2006Tarek Ahmed & AssociEtes, Ltd. All Rights Reserved
720
5/6/2013
STEPS TO RUN THE MODEL

Step 1:
Step 2:
1) Click on: TA.exe

2) Select: Initialization
Run
3) Open: TA.dat with
Notepad and Enter
Missing Reservoir Data
1) Click on: TA.exe

2) Select: Simulation Run
3) Open: TA.sim this file
contains wells info
11/21/2011

Rights Reserved
721
5/6/2013
Initialization File: TA.dat

!
!
3) Reservoir Model Grid Dimensions

**********************************
10 10 1
! x,y, and z blocks
!
!
4) x-direction Grid Block Lengths

*********************************
Each time you see

The Warning message;
you must enter some data
!
!
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
! Please, enter below the x-direction grid dimension (length)
! *************************************************
10*300
You enter the data
!
!
5) y-direction Grid Block Lengths

*********************************
!
!
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
! Please, enter below the y-direction grid dimension (length)
! *************************************************
You enter the data
10*300
722
5/6/2013
Open the Following Files with EXCEL to Make Plots

(e.g. GasRec.dat, FieldQg.dat,etc)
File Name
--------------------1- Summary.dat
2- DailyQ.dat
3- OilRec.dat
4- GasRec.dat
5- FieldQg.dat
6- WellQw.dat
7- GasQ.dat
8- WellQg.dat
9- Pmap.dat
10- Sgmap.dat
11- Swmap.dat
Contents
--------------------------------------------> History Matching info.& Well data
> Field Daily Flow Rates
> Field Oil Recovery Factor
> Field Gas Recovery Factor
> Field Monthly Flow Rates
> Well Monthly Water Flow Rates
> Field Total Daily Gas Flow Rate
> Monthly Gas Flow Rates/well
> Pressure Map
> Gas Saturation Map
> Water Saturation Map
723
5/6/2013
The Big Texas Oil Field

Depletion Study
Total area=
Initial # of wells=
Depth to top=
Grid dimensions=
Start date=
Total Thickness =
Soi=
Simulation time=
1290 acres
X=300 ft, Y=300 ft, Z=20 ft
8
5000 ft
25 x 25 x 5
Jan 1, 1990
100 ft
0.70
30 years
724
5/6/2013
Initial Pressure =4500 psia

35o API
Temperature 150 oF
Gas gravity=0.65
Sor = 0.35
Sgc = 0.02
Swc = 0.30
Sorm= 0.05
GOR=500 scf/STB
Model will calculate Pb
Minimum Pwf = 300 psi
725
5/6/2013
Layer 1
Layer 2
Layer 3
Layer 4
Layer 5
Kx, md
Ky, md
30
10
Kz, md
0.4
0.6
0.5
0.2
0.15
0.14
0.15
0.13
0.12
h, ft
20
20
20
20
20
Z, ft
20
20
20
20
20
y-direction (rows)
x-direction (columns)
25
1
25
726
5/6/2013
Objectives:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Determine the optimum pattern

Field performance for 30 years
Analyze Performance of each layer
Optimum to start the flood
Plot:
A. GOR/well
B. Qo/well
C. Recovery Factor
727

Participants EOR COURSE 2013 PDF

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Participants EOR COURSE 2013 PDF

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

5/6/2013

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All

Introduction and Review of Basic Reservoir Engineering

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved

Stages of Field Development

Secondary Oil Recovery:

Tertiary (Enhanced) Oil Recovery:

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved

Segmented Stages of Oil Recovery

Improved Oil Recovery

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved

Stages of Oil Recovery

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved

ROIP= Remaining Oil in Place

Target for different crude oil systems

Assume OOIP=100 STB

Over 46% of oil remaining, can you do better??

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved

TARGET OF REMAINING OIL

Total Residual Oil =

Target Setting for Recovery Factors:

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved

IOR Assessment & Approach

Tertiary Recovery Objectives

For Thermal Techniques

Forms of Thermal Techniques

Forms of Chemical Tertiary Recovery

First Step for

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All

Best Waterflood Reservoir Candidate

Oil Recovery Range

Solution Gas drive

Size of the Gas-Cap

Size and Strength

Dip Angle & Qo

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved

N2 & Flue Gas

High Pressure Gas

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved

EOR vs. Depth

Deep enough for required pressure

Deep enough for required pressure

Deep enough for required pressure

EOR vs. Viscosity

Oil Viscosity (centipoise at reservoir conditions)

EOR vs. Permeability

Not critical if uniform

Not critical if uniform

High enough for good injection

CHEMICAL EOR HOLDS

Chemical methods are attractive:

Rapidly increasing energy demand and high oil prices,

Reasons for EOR Failures

oil water gas

oil chemical gas

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All

A. Controlling Parameters For Secondary Recovery Process

a) Mobility Ratio M & Mobility Control; = k/

Mobility (How fast) of displacing fluid

Mobility Ratio M, Question is: how to reduce it? < 1 !!!

w is the only practical way of decreasing M

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved

Effect of Mobility Ratio on Sweep Efficiency