Anda di halaman 1dari 141

Basic Waterflooding

&
Surveillance
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
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Course Content
I) Characterization of Reservoir Fluids
Understanding Fluid Laboratory Data
Quality Assurance of Fluid Data
II) Reservoir Characterization
Porosity and Permeability
Capillary Pressure, Fluid Distribution, and Understanding the Transition Zone
Zonation and Layering System
Two and Three Phase Relative Permeability & Concept of permeability Jail
Normalizing Relative permeability Data
Characterizing Vertical and Areal Heterogeneities
Calculation of Sweep Efficiencies
III) Waterflood Development & Surveillance
Stages of Oil Recovery
Factors to Consider When Planning a Waterflood
Introduction to Waterflood
Waterflood Surveillance
IV) Reservoir Simulation
Gridding and Construction a Simulation Model
Simulation Studies
Developing of the Nameless Field with Waterflooding-Team Project

Characterization of
Reservoir Fluids & Rocks
Reservoir Fluid and Rock Characterization is a Scientific
and Mathematical Discipline that Seeks to Define
Quantitatively the Input Data Needed to Perform Predictions
of Flow Through Porous Media and Subsequent Field
Development Plans
Understanding the Interaction Between the Reservoir
Fluids and Formation is Vital in Optimal Design and
Evaluating the Performance of Waterflooding Project .
First Step for Implementing a Successful Secondary
Recovery Process is the Proper Evaluation of the Reservoir
Rock and Fluid Properties
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Characterization and Classification


of
Reservoir Fluids

A Good Starting Point:


What is the Saturation Pressure ?!!
- Bubble Point
- Dew Point Pressure
Bubble of Gas

pb

pd

Liquid

Gas

Hg

Hg

Droplet of liquid

5
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Understanding the Critical point is


Essential
Liquid

PC
PC

C
Liquid+Gas

Liquid

Gas

Gas
TC

TC

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Bubblepoint
pressure curve
100% Liquid

P-T Diagram
C

Liquid+Gas

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Classification of Reservoirs
Oil Reservoirs
Gas Reservoirs
Near Critical

This Classification is Based on:


1- Initial Composition
2- Initial Pressure
3- Initial Temperature

8
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Types of Reservoirs
Oil reservoirs
Gas reservoirs
Near Critical

9
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Oil Reservoir

Gas Reservoir

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Oil Reservoirs

Undersaturated Oil Reservoir.


Saturated Oil Reservoir.
Gas-cap Reservoir.

11
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

1- undersaturated reservoir
2- saturated reservoir
3- Gas-Cap reservoir

1
2

Typical P-T diagram


2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Characterization of Crude Oils


Ordinary black oil
Low-shrinkage crude oil
High-shrinkage (volatile) crude oil
Near-critical crude oil

Key:
Liquid Shrinkage Curve
13
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

1- Ordinary Black Oil.

Figure 1-17. A typical p-T diagram for an ordinary black oil.

API gravity 15-40 API


GOR
200-700 scf/STB
14
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Liquid-shrinkage curve for black oil.


100%

Liquid Volume

Residual oil

0%

pb

Pressure

Liquid Shrinkage Curve


15
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

2- Low-shrinkage Oil.
Liquid

critical point

pressure

Liquid+Gas

A
G

85%

75%

Gas
F

Temperature
16
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

100%
E

Liquid Volume

Residual oil

0%

pb

Pressure
Oil-shrinkage curve for low-shrinkage oil..

17

Oil formation volume factor less than 1.2 bbl/STB


Gas-oil ratio less than 200 scf/STB
Oil gravity less than 35o API
Black or deeply colored
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

3- Volatile Crude Oil

18

A typical liquid-shrinkage curve for a Volatile crude oil

Liquid Volume

100%

Residual oil

0%

19

pb

Pressure
Oil formation volume factor greater than 1.5
bbl/STB
Gas-oil ratios between 2,000-3,000 scf/STB
Oil gravities between 45-55o API
Greenish to orange in color

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

4- Near-critical Crude Oil

20

10

A typical liquid-shrinkage curve for near-critical crude oil


100%

Liquid Volume

0%

Residual oil
Pressure

bubble-point pressure pb

Figure 1-24. A typical liquid-shrinkage curve for the near-critical crude oil.
21

Liquid shrinkage for crude oil systems


100%

Liquid Volume

0%
Pressure

bubble-point pressure pb

Figure 1-25. Liquid shrinkage for crude oil systems.


22

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

11

Gas Reservoirs
Dry Gas Reservoirs
Wet Gas Reservoirs
Retrograde Gas Reservoirs
Near-critical Gas-condensate Reservoirs

23
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

1- Dry Gas Reservoirs

24
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

12

2- Wet Gas Reservoirs

25
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

3- Retrograde Gas Reservoirs

26

13

A typical liquid dropout curve.

27
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Pressure
2-phase region

Temperature
200 STB/MMscf

100%
max. LDO

Condensate Yield
STB/MMscf

% of liquid

28

0 STB/MMscf
Pressure

14

4- Near-critical Gas-condensate Reservoirs

29
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Liquid dropout curve for a near-critical


gas-condensate system.

Liquid Volume

100%

3
1

0%
Pressure
Figure 1-29. Liquid-shrinkage (dropout) curve for a near-critical gas-condensate system.

30
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

15

Near Critical Systems


critical point

critical point

31

32

16

On GOC
pressure

depth
GOC

pd = pb= pr

Figure 1-35. Determination of GOC from Pressure


gradients
33

GOC

17

Depth Pressure Temperature Phase Sat Point Molecular Fluid Dens


ft
psia
F
psia
Weight
lb/ft
7500 3727.52
169.27 Gas
3303.38
23.8
15.381
7600 3738.31
175.17 Gas
3392.63
24.3
15.567
7620 3740.48
176.35 Gas
3410.86
24.4
15.612
7650 3743.74
178.12 Gas
3438.55
24.6
15.684
7750 3754.78
184.02 Gas
3534.33
25.2
15.979
7786
3758.8
186.14 Gas
3570.23
25.4
16.109
7800 3760.37
186.97 Gas
3584.44
25.5
16.164
7850 3766.03
189.92 Gas
3636.67
25.9
16.385
7900 3771.78
192.87 Gas
3691.56
26.4
16.65
7930 3775.28
194.64 Gas
3726.19
26.7
16.837
7954
3778.1
196.06 Gas
3755.08
27
17.007
7960 3778.81
196.41 Gas
3762.49
27
17.052
7970
3780
197 Gas
3775.03
27.2
17.131
7972 3780.24
197.12 Gas
3777.57
27.2
17.148
7974.4 3780.52
197.26 Gas GOC 3780.57
27.2
17.167
7974.4 3780.52
197.26 Oil
3780.51
61.3
39.095
7980 3782.16
197.59 Oil
3772.82
61.7
39.239
8000 3787.64
198.77 Oil
3750.63
62.7
39.654
8080 3809.99
203.49 Oil
3673.85
66.2
40.999
8100
3815.7
204.67 Oil
3656.89
67
41.278

pd

GOR STO Oil Dens


Scf/stb
lb/ft
47382.8
58.616
40288.5
58.618
38991.5
58.621
37111.6
58.627
31337.5
58.667
29425.2
58.688
28701.7
58.697
26193.1
58.738
23783.9
58.789
22372.1
58.828
21251.9
58.863
20972.5
58.873
20506.2
58.889
20412.9
58.893
20303.2
58.897
2440.2
64.821
2414.7
64.86
2340.9
64.972
2111.6
65.326
2065.6
65.398

pr
Pi>>>>Pb !!!!!!!!

Gas Cap
GOC

pb
Oil Rim

36

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

18

On Near-critical Reservoirs

37

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Temperature

Depth

Gas Cap

Critical Region

Oil Rim

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

19

Pi>>>>Pb !!!!!!!!
Gas Cap

Critical Mixture

Oil Rim

39
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Fundamental of PVT Properties


A Short Review

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

20

ON Gas Solubility Rs & Bo


pb = 2000 psi

Oil
1.6 bbl

p = 1200 psi

p = 800 psi

p = 400 psi

200 scf

400 scf

700 scf

Oil
1.4 bbl

Oil
1.3 bbl

Oil
1.1 bbl

p = 14.7 psi

1000 scf

Oil
1 STB

41
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Under-saturated Oil Properties


1.2048

Rs g
1.4 10 X

18.2

X = 0.0125 API 0.00091(T-460)

Rs
Bo

pb
0
co 1.705x10

pressure

0.69357 0.1885
Rsb
g
API 0.3272 T 4600.6729 P 0.5906

Bo 0.9759 0.000120 R s

0.5

1.25 T 460

1.2

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

21

Crude Oil Viscosity


od

1.8 10 7 360

0.32
API 1.53 T 260

A 10

8.33
0.42 (
API

od
Rs

)
ob
pb
0

a = 10.715 (Rs + 100)-0.515


b = 5.44 (Rs + 150)-0.338

ob a od b

1.6
0.56
o ob 0.001( p pb ) [ 0.024 ob
0.038 ob
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Class Problem:
Generate and plot the PVT for a 40.7 OAPI crude oil system is characterized by a
bubble point pressure of 2620 psia a reservoir temperature of 220 OF. The average
specific gravity of solution gas is 0.855.
1.2048

Rs g
1.4 10 X

18.2

X = 0.0125 API 0.00091(T-460)


1.2

g 0.5

Bo 0.9759 0.000120 R s 1.25 T 460


o

0.69357 0.1885
co 1.705x107 Rsb
g
API 0.3272 T 4600.6729 P 0.5906

od

1.8 10 7 360

0.32
API 1.53 T 260

ob a od b

A 10

0.42 (

8.33
API

a = 10.715 (Rs + 100)-0.515


b = 5.44 (Rs + 150)-0.338

1.6
0.56
o ob 0.001( p pb ) [ 0.024 ob
0.038 ob

22

PVT Conventional & Special


Laboratory Experiments
Constant Composition Expansion CCE
Differential Expansion DE
Separator Test
Constant Volume Depletion Test CVD
Swelling Test
Minimum Miscibility Test MMP
Core Flood
Flow Assurance Tests

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Constant Composition Expansion Test


CCE

Pb
Co

PVT above Pb
Bt

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

23

CCE
P>>Pb

P>Pb

P<Pb

P=Pb

P<<Pb

Gas

Vt

oil

Vt

oil

oil
Vsat= Vt

Y
Vrel

Vt

Gas

oil

oil

p sat p
p Vrel 1

Vt

sat
Vrel

Vt
Vsat

48

24

Y=a+bP

Vrel 1

p sat p
p a bp

49

Class Problem
The best straight fit of the Y-function as a function of pressure for the Big-Butte
oil system is given by:
where:

Y = a + bp
a = 1.0981 ,

b = 0.000591

Smooth the recorded relative volume data of Table 4-3.


Pressure

50

1936
1930
1928
1923
1918
1911
1878
1808
1709
1600
1467
1313
1161
1035
782
600
437

Measured VreL
1.0625
1.1018
1.1611
1.2504
1.3696
1.5020
1.9283
2.4960
3.4464

25

Solution:

Vrel 1
Pressure

1936
1930
1928
1923
1918
1911
1878
1808
1709
1600
1467
1313
1161
1035
782
600
437

p sat p
p a bp

Measured VreL

Smoothed VreL
Equation 4109

1.0625
1.1018
1.1611
1.2504
1.3696
1.5020
1.9283
2.4960
3.4464

1.0014
1.0018
1.0030
1.0042
1.0058
1.0139
1.0324
1.0630
1.1028
1.1626
1.2532
1.3741
1.5091
1.9458
2.5328
3.5290

51

What is the Bubble-Point Pressure?

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

26

Variable Bubble-point Pressures !!!

Gas
Oil

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved

8/13/2011

S gt Pore Volume
S o Pore Volume

RS
Bo
Bg

Rsnew
So Pore Volume
Bo

S gt Bo

RSnew RS

S o Bg

27

Important Equations
N

(porevolume) (1 S wi )
Boi

Pore Volume

So

N Boi
1 S wi

N N B
p

N Boi

1 S wi

N B

S o (1 S wi ) 1 P o
N Boi

Sg = 1 So - Swi

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved

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:
Thickness h = 25 ft
Porosity = 15%
Initial water saturation Swi = 20%
Initial pressure pi = 2377 psi
Results from the MBE in terms of cumulative oil production Np as a function of
reservoir pressure are given below:

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved

Pressure

Np

Psi

MMSTB

2377

2250

1.10

1950

1.76

1650

2.64

1350

3.3

28

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

Assume that the waterflood will commence when the reservoir


pressure declines to 1650 psi; find the pressure that is required to
dissolve the free gas.

Differential Expansion (Liberation) Test


DE
Amount of gas in solution as a function of pressure Rsd
The shrinkage in the oil volume as a function of pressure Bod
Density of the oil as a function of pressure o
Properties of the evolved gas including:
the composition of the liberated gas yi
the gas compressibility factor Z
the gas specific gravity

29

Gas Solubility Rs & Bo


pb = 2000 psi

p = 1200 psi

p = 800 psi

p = 400 psi

200 scf

400 scf

700 scf

Oil
1.4 bbl

Oil
1.3 bbl

Oil
1.6 bbl

p = 14.7 psi

1000 scf

Oil
1.1 bbl

Oil
1 STB

59
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

DE
P1=Pb

P2<Pb

P3

P2

P3

(Vg)sc
(Vg)p,T

oil
(Voil)p,T

Bod

Voil
VST

Vt

Voil

oil

Voil
oil
(Voil)p,T

Rsd

Gas
Gas
(Vg)p,T

Gas

Vb

(Vg)sc

Gas

Vt

oil

remaininggas in solution
VST

Bg

(Voil)p,T

oil

(Vg ) p ,T
(Vg ) sc

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

30

Bod

61

VL
Vsc

Btd = Bod + (Rsdb - Rsd) Bg

V p
Z
T

Tsc

Vsc p sc

p ZT
B g sc
Tsc p

Table 4-5 Differential Liberation Data

Bobd

Bod

62

31

Rsd

63

Rs & GOR

Same UNITS, i.e. scf/STB, BUT they are NOT the same !!!

total gas flow rate


oil flow are
free gas rate solution gas rate

oil flow rate

instantane ous GOR

instantane ous GOR

(Qg )free (Qg )solution (Qg )free Qo R s

Qo
Qo

Rs

(Qg )free
k B
Rs rg o o
Qo
kro g Bg

64

32

You can DO so many things if you have a plot of


GOR versus Time; it tells you a lot !!

GOR Rs

scf/STB

krg o Bo
kro g Bg

GOR

Rs = GOR

krg o Bo
kro g Bg

Sg = 0
Rs

pb
65

0
Pi

Sgc

Time
Pressure

GOR

Time
Observed

Rs

66

Laboratory

Pressure

33

Gas Solubility Rs & Bo


pb = 2000 psi

Oil
1.6 bbl

p = 1200 psi

p = 800 psi

p = 400 psi

200 scf

400 scf

700 scf

Oil
1.4 bbl

Oil
1.3 bbl

p = 14.7 psi

Oil
1.1 bbl

1000 scf

Oil
1 STB

Are these really Rs & Bo ???!!!


67
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Separator Tests

68

34

69

Adjustment of differential data


to separator conditions --Why?
Rs and Bo obtained by differential liberation are not
the same as Rs and Bo obtained by flash liberation
Oil leaving reservoir is flashed to separator, therefore
Rs and Bo should be determined by a flash process
Flash liberation does not cover whole range of
interest, therefore differential data are corrected
Composite Liberation !
70

35

71

Rsfb

Bofb

72

36

Current adjustment method-Properties


At lower pressure formation volume factor Bo might read
a value less than 1
At lower pressure, the solution gas-oil ratio, Rs
extrapolates to negative values.

Current adjustment method does not honor density at


bubble point under reservoir conditions

73

Suggested Adjustment methods


Current Adjustment of Bo

B
od
B B
o
ofb B
odb
Current Adjustment of Rs

B
ofb
R R (R
R )
s
sfb
sdb
sd B
odb
74

37

Total Formation Volume Factor


Bt
Major use in MBE, Driving Indices,etc
from DE data:
Bt = (Bofb) (Vrel)
from CCE data:
Bt = (Btd) (Bofb) / Bodb
75

76

38

B
od
B B
o
ofb B
odb

77

B
ofb
R R (R
R )
s
sfb
sdb
sd B
odb

Rsdb
Rsfb

78

39

Adjusted Differential Liberation Data


No adjustment is needed

CCE

sat
Vrel

DE

79

80

Adjusted gas solubility versus pressure.

40

81

Adjusted oil formation volume factor vs. pressure.

Class Problem
The Constant-Composition Expansion test, differential
liberation test, and separator test for the Big-Butte
crude oil system are given next; generate and plot Bo,
Rs, Bt as a function of pressure
B
od
B B
o
ofb B
odb

B
ofb
R R (R R )
s
sfb
sdb sd B
odb

from DE data:
Bt = (Bofb) (Vrel)
from CCE data:
Bt = (Btd) (Bofb) / Bodb

82

41

42

IMPACT OF MODELING
LIQUID SHRINKAGE
FIELD EXPERIENCE
The Nameless Field

Modeling Strategy
Identifying Problems

Updateable and History Matching Data


Location of faults
Upscaling
Static Properties
etc

Fixed and Reliable Data


Surface Separation
Fluid Properties/EOS

43

Oil Shrinkage
Fixed and Reliable Data
Surface Separation
Fluid Properties/EOS

1st Stage
2nd Stage 3rd Stage

OOIP Y STB
Stock-Tank

Updateable and History Matching Data


- Location of faults
- Upscaling
- Static Properties
- etc

OOIP X bbl

Reservoir Characterization and


initialization

How Important is Oil Shrinkage


In Modeling?
Degree of shrinkage is a function of
separation conditions
0% Shrinkage

25% Shrinkage

50% Shrinkage

gas
gas

2 STB

1.5 STB

2 bbl

2 bbl

Bo = 1 bbl/STB

Bo = 1.333 bbl/STB

Big problem in
simulation
Rate constraint 100 STB/day

1 STB

2 bbl

Bo = 2 bbl/STB

100 bbl
133 bbl
200 bbl

44

The Nameless Field


Schematic of the
Central Processing Facilities
CPF
injection gas line

Stripper Column
(19 distillation trays)

80-250oc

55oc

1500 KPA

1st Stage

Oil Composition !!!


250oc

Stock-Tank

80oc 1300 KPA

2nd Stage

Boiler Furnace
(Tray-20) Gradual

changes in the
temperature in the flow line

Treatment of the Temperature Profile of the


Distillation Column in the FFM

Temperature profile is Described


by single value of 150oc

150oc
700 KPA

55oc 1500 KPA

1st Stage
80oc 1300 KPA

Stripper Column

Stock-Tank

(19 distillation trays)

2nd Stage

The study suggests that the current treatment of the


Column in the FFM overestimates the liquid shrinkage;
i.e. it underestimates STOIP and ST oil produced

45

Treatment of the Temperature Profile of the


Distillation Column

injection gas line

150oc
700 KPA

55oc 1500 KPA

1st

Stage

Temp profile is
Described
by single value of
150oc

Oil Composition !!!


80oc 1300 KPA

Stock-Tank

Stripper Column
(19 distillation trays)

2nd Stage

Summary of Results
Stage
1 Stage
2nd Stage
Stripper
Stripper
Stripper
Stripper
Stripper
Stripper
Stripper
Stripper
Stripper
Flow Line
Flow Line
Stock-Tank
st

P_r88
T
P

Case 1-a
T
P

Case 1-b
T
P

Case 2
T P

55 1500
80 1300
150 700

55
78
80
85
90
95
100
110
120
140

55
80
80
85
90
95
100
110
120
130

55
80
78
85
95
100
110
115
120
130
135

1500
1300
700
700
700
700
700
700
700
700

1500
1300
700
700
700
700
700
700
700
700

1500
1300
700
700
700
700
700
700
700
700
700

150 700 150 700


48 101.3 48 101.3
15.5 101.3 15.5 101.3 15.5 101.3 15.5 101.3

Case 3-2
P

55
80
78
85
95
100
110
115
120
130
135
150
48
15.5

Case 5
T

Case 6
P

Case 7
P

Case 8
P

1500
1300
700
700
700
700
700
700
700
700
700
700
101.3
101.3

55 1500
80 1300
80 700
83 700
90 700
95 700
100 700
110 700
120 700
130 700

65 1500
80 1300
78 700
83 700
90 700
95 700
100 700
110 700
120 700
130 700

55 1500
80 1300
80 700
130 700

55 1500
80 1300
78 700
83 700
130 700

15.5 101.3

15.5 101.3

15.5 101.3

15.5 101.3

OIIP, KSTM3

322,849.6

328,258.9

328,165.5

336,788.5

328,503.6

337,773.1

337,725.5

334,992.5

335,290.3

Cum Oil, KSTM3


% increase in cum oil
Recovery Factor

188,167.0
58.28%

191,334
1.68
58.30

190,874
1.42
58.16

196,250.0
4.30
58.27%

191,487
1.76
58.29%

196,960
4.67
58.30

196,972
4.68
58.32

195,539
3.92
58.37

195,778
4.04
58.39

Increase in OIIP 4-9 MM STm3

46

Laboratory Analysis of Gas Condensate Systems


In the laboratory, a standard analysis on a gas-condensate
sample consists of:
1. Recombination and analysis of separator samples
2. Measuring the pressure-volume relationship, i.e.,
constant Composition Expansion Test.
3. Constant-Volume Depletion Test (CVD)

93

1- Recombination of Separator Samples

94

Hydrocarbon Analyses of Separator Products and


Calculated Wellstream

47

Constant-Composition Test
Measures:

Dewpoint Pressure

Two-Phase Compressibility Factor Z2-phase

% of LDO
p
Z Zd
p
V rel
d

95

Table 4-10
Pressure-Volume Relations of Reservoir Fluid at 262 F
(Constant-Composition Expansion)

1.043

96

48

QC & QA Evaluation Techniques

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Consistency Criteria for Composition


The Hoffman Plot
Component

xi
%

yi
%

zi
%

CO2

5.04

8.82

8.60

N2

0.08

0.77

0.73

C1

15.71

74.92

71.44

C2

6.26

8.64

8.50

C3

8.33

4.50

4.73

i-C4

2.33

0.61

0.71

n-C4

4.84

0.97

1.20

i-C5

2.81

0.24

0.39

n-C5

3.09

0.22

0.39

C6s

5.11

0.12

0.41

C7s

8.31

0.10

0.58

C8s

11.46

0.07

0.74

C9s

7.53

0.02

0.46

C10+

19.10

0.00

1.12

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

49

Hydrocarbon Analysis of Reservoir Fluid Sample

99

Hoffman Plots

Ki

yi
xi

P (1 / Tbi ) (1 / T )
Fi log( ci )

14.7 (1 / Tbi ) (1 / Tci )


N2
C1
CO2
C2
iC4

Log Ki

0
-3

C3

nC4
nC5

Fi

iC5

xi
%

yi
%

K=y/x

CO2

5.04

8.82

1.7500

N2

0.08

0.77

C1
C2
C3
i-C4
n-C4
i-C5
n-C5
C6s
C7s
C8s
C9s
C10+

15.71
6.26
8.33
2.33
4.84
2.81
3.09
5.11
8.31
11.46
7.53
19.1

74.92
8.64
4.5
0.61
0.97
0.24
0.22
0.12
0.1
0.07
0.02
0

9.6250
4.7689
1.3802
0.5402
0.2618
0.2004
0.0854
0.0712
0.0235
0.0120
0.0061
0.0027
0.0000

Compone
nt

EOS
Lab

+3

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

50

Hoffman Plots

Ki

yi
xi

(1 / Tbi ) (1 / T )
P
Fi log( ci )

14.7 (1 / Tbi ) (1 / Tci )

DISCARD
N2
CO2 C1
C2
C3

Log Ki

nC4
nC5

0
-3

Fi

iC4

iC5

+3

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

An Example of the Hoffman Plot


Component

Ki= yi/xi

xi

yi

zi

CO2

3.65

1.29

2.46

0.353

N2

5.74

0.2

2.95

0.035

C1

10.01

57.48

33.94

5.742

C2

5.34

15.84

10.63

2.966

C3

3.64

14.04

8.88

3.857

Ki

i-C4

2.76

2.15

2.45

0.779

n-C4

2.76

5.3

4.04

1.92

i-C5

2.23

1.29

1.76

0.578

n-C5

2.23

1.44

1.83

0.646

C6s

1.86

0.74

1.3

0.398

C7s

1.6

0.2

0.89

0.125

C8s

1.41

0.03

0.71

0.021

C9s

1.25

0.62

C10s

50.81

25.2

yi
xi

P (1 / Tbi ) (1 / T )
Fi log( ci )

14.7 (1 / Tbi ) (1 / Tci )

DISCARD

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

51

Identifying the Outliers


Saturation pressure vs. depth
C1 mole% vs. depth
C7+ mole% vs. depth
MC7+ vs. depth

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

103

Saturation Pressure

X
True Vertical Depth

X
X

X Outlier (removed) data

Figure 2-11. Measured Saturation Pressure versus Depth


104
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

52

Mol % of Methane

True Vertical Depth

X Outlier (removed) data

Figure 2-12. Measured Methane Content versus Depth


105
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Mol% of Heptanes-Plus Fraction

True Vertical Depth

X
X
X

106

X Outlier (removed) data

Figure 2-14. Measured Mol % of C7+ versus Depth


2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

53

Molecular weight of Heptanes-Plus Fraction

True Vertical Depth

X
X

X Outlier (removed) data

Figure 2-13. Measured C7+ Molecular Weight versus Depth

107

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Oil Isothermal Compressibility Coefficient


Co

P < Pb

Rs

Bo
R
Bg s
p
p

Bo

P > Pb
P

pb !!!

0.00

Log(Bod/Bodb)

-0.005

Instantaneous Co :
Co = A/p

-0.010
-0.015

0.00

Cumulative Co :
Co = A ln(pi / p)/(pi p)
Log(p/pb)
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

54

Consistency Criteria for Differential Liberation Test Data

PVT Data From the MBE:

P&T

Rsd & Bod

Bod

Psc & Tsc

62.4 o 0.0136Rsd g

62.4 o same as o !!!!?

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

55

Recombination of Separator Samples

Density =42.42 lb/ft3

111

P
Gas

zi, nt

yi, nv
T
Oil

xi, nL
MBE:
zi nt = yi nv + xi, nL
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

56

Material Balance Tests

zi nt xi nL yi nv
yi nt nL xi
( )
zi nv nv zi

yi/zi

Calculate GOR:

GOR

Slope = - nL/nv

xi/zi

(379.4) (5.615) o
( MW ) ( slope)
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Consistency Criteria for Flash Data


Sample 1: Condensate System
Component

xi
%

yi
%

zi
%

CO2

5.04

8.82

8.60

N2

0.08

0.77

0.73

C1

15.71

74.92

71.44

C2

6.26

8.64

8.50

C3

8.33

4.50

4.73

i-C4

2.33

0.61

0.71

n-C4

4.84

0.97

1.20

i-C5

2.81

0.24

0.39

n-C5

3.09

0.22

0.39

C6s

5.11

0.12

0.41

C7s

8.31

0.10

0.58

C8s

11.46

0.07

0.74

C9s

7.53

0.02

0.46

C10+

19.10

0.00

1.12

Measured Data:
Liquid density
= 44.94 lb/ft3
Liquid MW
= 92.13
Gas Gravity
= 0.7702
GOR (scf/sep bbl) = 16616.8

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

57

Class problem
Given Measured Data:
Liquid density
= 44.94 lb/ft3
Liquid MW
= 92.13
Gas Gravity
= 0.7702
GOR (scf/sep bbl) = 16616.8

Calculate GOR

Component

xi
%

yi
%

CO2

5.04

8.82

8.6

N2

0.08

0.77

0.73

C1

15.71

74.92

71.44

C2

6.26

8.64

8.5

C3

8.33

4.5

4.73
0.71

zi
%

i-C4

2.33

0.61

n-C4

4.84

0.97

1.2

i-C5

2.81

0.24

0.39

n-C5

3.09

0.22

0.39

C6s

5.11

0.12

0.41

C7s

8.31

0.1

0.58

C8s

11.46

0.07

0.74

C9s

7.53

0.02

0.46

C10+

19.1

1.12
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Class Problem 2: Crude Oil System


Component

xi
%

yi
%

zi
%

CO2

3.65

1.29

2.46

N2

5.74

0.20

2.95

C1

10.01

57.48

33.94

C2

5.34

15.84

10.63

C3

3.64

14.04

8.88

i-C4

2.76

2.15

2.45

n-C4

2.76

5.30

4.04

i-C5

2.23

1.29

1.76

n-C5

2.23

1.44

1.83

C6s

1.86

0.74

1.30

C7s

1.60

0.20

0.89

C8s

1.41

0.03

0.71

C9s

1.25

0.00

0.62

C10s

55.52

0.00

27.54

Measured Data:
Liquid density
= 44.73 lb/ft3
Liquid MW
= 160.7
Gas Gravity
= 0.966
GOR (scf/sep bbl) = 572

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

58

Reservoir Characterization

Rock Properties
There are basically two main categories of core analysis tests that are performed
on core samples physical properties of reservoir rocks, these are:
A. Routine core analysis Tests
Porosity
Permeability
Saturation
B. Special tests
Overburden pressure
Capillary pressure
Relative permeability
Wettability
Surface and interfacial tension

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

59

Porosity
Space Between grains

Permeability
Ease to flow Between grains

Low
Pressure

High
Pressure

Reservoir Rock

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Oil getting left behind


EOR target

Trapping mechanisms:
(1) Surface tension traps oil drops
(2) Less viscous water short circuits more viscous oil

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

60

Sources of Error
As shown below, there are several factors that must be considered as possible
sources of error in determining rock properties. These factors are:
1. Core sample may not be representative of the reservoir rock because of
reservoir heterogeneity.
2. Core recovery may be incomplete.
3. Permeability of the core may be altered when it is cut, or when it is
cleaned and dried in preparation for analysis. This problem is likely to occur
when the rock contains reactive clays.
4. Sampling process may be biased. There is a temptation to select the best
parts of the core for analysis.

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Differentiate between:
Averaging Reservoir Properties
Upscaling

61

1- Porosity
The porosity of a rock is a measure of the storage capacity (pore
volume) that is capable of holding fluids.

Pore volume
Bulk volume
effective

absolute

a=

Bulk volume Grain volume


Bulk volume

Interconnected pore volume


Bulk volume

PV = 43,560 (A h)

ft3

PV = 7,758 (A h)

bbl.

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Arithmaticaverage :

i 1

n
n

( h )
i

T hickness- weighted average :

i 1
n

(h )
i

i 1

Areal - weighted average:

Ai )

i 1
n

( A )
i

i 1
n

Volumetric - weighted average:

Ai hi )

i 1
n

( A h )
i

i 1

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

62

2- Rock Compressibility
A reservoir thousands of feet underground is subjected to an overburden
pressure caused by the weight of the overlying formations. Depth of the
formation is the most important consideration, and a typical value of overburden
pressure is approximately one psi per foot of depth.

The weight of the overburden simply applies a compressive force to the


reservoir. The pressure in the rock pore spaces does not normally
approach the overburden pressure. A typical pore pressure, commonly
referred to as the reservoir pressure, is approximately 0.5 psi per foot
of depth.

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

The pressure difference between overburden and internal pore pressure is


referred to as the effective overburden pressure. During pressure
depletion operations, the internal pore pressure decreases and, therefore,
the effective overburden pressure increases. This increase causes the
following effects:
1.
2.

Bulk volume of the reservoir rock is reduced.


Sand grains within the pore spaces expand.

These two volume changes tend to reduce the pore space and, therefore, the
porosity of the rock.

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

63

Types of Rock Compressibility

Rock-Matrix Compressibility

cr
cr = -

1 Vr

V r p T

Vr= volume of Solids

Rock-Bulk Compressibility

Pore Compressibility

cB

cP or cf

cB = -

1 V B

V B p T

VB= Bulk Volume

cP c f =

1 V P

VP p T

VP= Pore Volume

cB 0

cr 0

cP (reservoir) = 1/2 cP (laboratory)


2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

cf =

1 VP 1 VP

VP p VP p

VP c f VP p
Example:
Calculate the reduction in the pore volume of a reservoir due to a pressure drop of
10 psi. The reservoir original pore volume is one million barrels with an estimated
formation compressibility of 10x10-6 psi-1

VP c f VP p
V p = (10x10- 6 ) (1x106 ) (10)= 100 bbl
Hall's Correlation :
1.782
c f 0.428 106

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

64

1
cf =
p

1
c f p ( )

= o eC f (P - Po )

cf

po

e x 1 x

)
o

c f ( p po ) ln(

x2 x3
...
2! 3!

o [1 c f ( p po ) ]

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Example
Given the following data:
cf = 10x 10-6
original pressure = 5000 psi
original porosity = 18%
current pressure = 4500 psi

Calculate the porosity at 4500 psi.

o [1 c f ( p po ) ]
0.18[1 (10x106 ) (4500 5000) ] 0.179

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

65

3- Saturation
Saturation is defined as that fraction, or percent, of the pore volume
occupied by a particular fluid (oil, gas, or water). This property is
expressed mathematically by the following relationship.

fluid saturation=

So =

volume of oil
pore volume

& Sg=

totalvolumeof thefluid
pore volume

volume of gas
pore volume

& Sw=

volume of water
pore volume

Sg + So + Sw = 1.0
Question: Soc or Sor are they the same?????
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

a) Critical saturation, Soc, Sgc, Swc


b) Residual oil saturation and Trapped gas saturation, Sorw, Sorg, Sgt
. How about trapped gas saturation? WAG?
c) Movable oil saturation, Som & Sorm
Som = 1- Swc- Soc
Sorm is the Residual Oil Saturation to Miscible Flood; usually <0.10

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

66

Averaging the Saturation


n

hS
i

( S o ) avg

oi

i=1
n

i=1

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Averaging the Saturation


Averaging Reservoir/Core Data

Averaging Core Data

So=

i hi S o

So =

&

i=1
n

i hi

i hi S w i

&

i=1

Sw =

i hi

i=1

i hi

Ai hi S wi

Ai hi

i=1

i hi S g

i=1
n

i=1

Sg=

Ai hi

i=1

i=1

Sw =

Ai hi S oi

i=1
n

&

i=1

Sg=

Ai hi S g i

i=1
n

Ai hi

i=1

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

67

Class Problem
Using the following data core samples; Calculate
Average porosity
Average oil and connate water saturation

Sample
1
2
3
4
5
6

hi , ft , %
1.0 10
1.5 12
1.0 11
2.0 13
2.1 14
1.1 10

So , % Swc , %
75
25
77
23
79
21
74
26
78
22
75
25

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

4- Permeability
Permeability is a property of the porous medium that measures the capacity
and ability of the formation to transmit fluids.

1 dp
dL
k dp
v= dL
v -

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

68

Absolute Permeability k
Absolute permeability is a property of the porous medium that

measures the capacity and ability of the formation to transmit


fluids.
kx, ky , and kz !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
P2

P1

q
L

A ( p1 p2 )
q

A ( p1 p2 )
q k

Permeability Tensor
K xx

K yx

K zx

K xy
K yy
K zy

K xz

K yz

K zz

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

69

P2

P1

q
L

Liquid

Gas

A p
qk(
)
L

k=

k A ( p12 - p 22 )
Q gsc =
2 g L

qL
A p

k=

2 g L Q gsc
A ( p12 - p 22 )

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Klinkenberg Effect
kgas > kliquid

WHY?

140
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

70

Effect of gas pressure on measured permeability for various gases.

1 1
0
pm

k g = k L + (b k L)[

1
]
pm

IF one measurement with air:

6.9 k 0.64
L + pm k L - pm k g = 0
141
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Class Problem:
A brine is used to measure the absolute permeability of a core plug. The rock
sample is 4 cm long and 3 cm2 in cross section. The brine has a viscosity of
1.0 cp and is flowing a constant rate of 0.5 cm3/sec under a 2.0 atm pressure
differential. Calculate the absolute permeability.

Class Problem:
Rework the above example assuming that an oil of 2.0 cp is used to
measure the permeability. Under the same differential pressure, the flow
rate is 0.25 cm3/sec.

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

71

Averaging Permeability

143

hj

(k h )
i

i 1
n

(h )
i

i 1

Li

( L )
i

i 1

[( L /( k )]
i

i 1

k avg = ( k 1 k 2 k 3 ... k n )n

72

Parallel Layers

(k h )
i

T hickness- weighted average: k

i 1
n

( h )
i

i 1

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Class Problem:
Given the following permeability data from a core analysis
report, calculate the average permeability of the reservoir.

Depth, ft

Permeability, md

3998-02
4002-04
4004-06
4006-08
4008-10

200
130
170
180
140

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

73

Parallel Layers

(k w h )
i

wighted average: k

i 1
n

( w h )
i

i 1

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Series beds

( L / A )
i

Harmonicaverage :

i 1

[( L /( A k )]
i

i 1

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

74

Radial Zones

k avg =

l n ( re / r w )
l n ( r j / r j -1 )
[
]
k
j
j=1
n

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Class Problem
A hydrocarbon reservoir is characterized by five distinct formation segments that
are connecting in series. Each segment has the same formation thickness.
The length and permeability of each section of the five-bed reservoir are given
below:

Length, ft
150
200
300
500
200

Permeability, md
80
50
30
20
10

Calculate the average permeability of the reservoir by assuming:


Linear flow system
Radial flow system, assuming wellbore radius = 0.25 ft
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

75

Heterogeneous Systems
n

[ hi ln(ki ]

k exp i 1 n

hi

i 1

Geometric average:

1
n n

k avg = ( k 1 k 2 k 3 ... k )

If hi is constant:

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Class Problem:
Given the following core data, please calculate the geometric average permeability.

Sample
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

hi, ft
1.0
1.0
0.5
1.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
1.0
1.5
0.5

ki, md
10
30
100
40
80
70
15
50
35
20

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

76

Absolute Permeability Correlations


1- Timur equation

k = 8.58102

4.4
2

S wc

2- Morris and Biggs

For an oil reservoir:

k = 62.5(

3
S wc

)2

For a gas reservoir:

k = 2.5(

3
S wc

)2

3- Kozenys equation

k=

153

m
S wi

2
)
1

Cementation Factor m
m= 1.3 for unconsolidated rocks and Limestone
m= 1.4-1.5 for VERY slightly cemented sands
m= 1.6-1.7 for slightly cemented sands
m= 1.8-1.9 for highly consolidated sands with <15%
m= 2.0-2.2 for low sands; dolomite and chlak

Class problem:
Estimate the absolute permeability of an oil zone that is characterized with a
connate water saturation of 25% and an average porosity of 15%

77

UPSCALING (Averaging !!!!)

well2

Fine-Scale 173-Layer System


well1

Permeability

78

Coarse Scale 19-Layer System

well2

well1

Permeability

19Layers Coarse System vs. 173 Layers Fine System


TAGI Formation- Oil Rate
Coarse-Scale, RC/cell

Coarse-Scale, RC/Layer

Fine-Scale

250

What is causing this difference ?

OIL PRODUCTION RATE (STM3 / DAY)

200

150
Fine-Scale

Variable RC/cell or by layer


Identical performance for
32 years

100

50

1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 11000 12000 13000 14000

79

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

5- Wettability
Wettability is defined as the tendency of one fluid to spread on or adhere to a
solid surface in the presence of other immiscible fluids.

Oil

Water

Water Wet

Oil Wet

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

80

Wettability
The tendency of a liquid to spread over the surface of a solid is an indication of the
wetting characteristics of the liquid for the solid.
This spreading tendency can be expressed more conveniently by measuring the
angle of contact at the liquid-solid surface. Contact Angle .
mercury retains a spherical shape
oil droplet develops an approximately hemispherical shape
water tends to spread over the glass surface.

The performance of a waterflood is controlled


to a large extend by the wettability.
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

81

6- Surface and Interfacial Tension


Forces acting on the interface between two immiscible
fluids:
surface tension
Interfacial tension.

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

82

7- Capillary Pressure
When two immiscible fluids are in contact, a discontinuity in pressure exists
between the two fluids. The pressure difference between these two fluids across
the interface is called the Capillary Pressure and is referred to by pc.
pc = pressure on the non-wetting pressure of the wetting phase

pcwo = po -pw
pcgo = pg- po
pcgw = pg- pw

Oil

Pc

If all the three phases are continuous, then


pcgw = pcgo + pcgo
Water
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

83

h=
Oil

2 (cos ) ow
g r ( w o)
gm/cm3

pc =

pc

2 ow ( cos )
r

Pc = (

h
) ( w o )
144
lb/ft3

Pc

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Porous Plate

84

Porous Plate
Most accurate

Others:
1- Centrifuge Technique
2- Mercury Injection

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

85

Pore Throat Size Distribution


2 ow cos( )
Pc

2 ow cos( )

r
Pc

Pc

In the absence of measured values:


for oil - water system : r

8.7
Pc

for gas - water system: r

10
Pc

r pore radius in mincron


p c capillary pressure, psi

Sw

100%

rmax

Height of the fluid contact above the


FWL is given by:
2 ow cos( )

hWOC
rmax g

Pore throat
radius r

86

Converting Laboratory Capillary Pressure Data

( pc) res = ( pc) Lab

res res k core


lab core k res

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Only Oil Flowing

After Correcting Pc

Only Oil

h
Pc

144
or :
Oil + Water

144 Pc
h

Only water

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

87

Displacement pressure

WOC !!!!

1-Soc

88

h
h
Pc
( NW W )

144
144
or :
144 Pc
h

Transition zone

WOC

Swc

FWL = WOC +

Sw

FWL

144 p d

177

Class Problem
The reservoir capillary pressure-saturation data of the Big Butte Oil reservoir as
represent by an average permeability of 30 md is shown in next slide.
Geophysical log interpretations and core analysis establish the WOC at 5023 ft.
The following additional data are available.
Oil density = 43.5 lb/ft3
Water density = 64.1 lb/ft3
Interfacial tension = 50 dynes/cm
Please calculate:
a) Connate Water Saturation (Swc)
b) Depth to FWL
c) Water saturation profile as a function of depth
d) Thickness of the transition zone

89

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

1
( k )

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

90

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Variable WOC
Different HFU; Layers, Reservoirs,..etc

k1
k2
k3
k4

91

Important Class Problem


A Five-layer oil reservoir is characterized by a set of five reservoir capillary
pressure-saturation curves, as shown next. The following additional data are also
available
Layer

Depth, ft
1
2
3
4
5

4600-4700
4700-4750
4750-4850
4850-4950
4950-5000

Permeability, md
300
3
30
100
10

FWL = 5000 ft
Water density = 65.2 llb/ft3
Oil density = 55.2 lb/ft3
Please calculate and plot water saturation versus depth for this reservoir

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

92

Class Problem
A four-layer oil reservoir is characterized by a set of four reservoir capillary
pressure-saturation curves, as shown next. The following additional data are also
available
Layer

Depth, ft
1
2
3
4

4000-4010
4010-4020
4020-4035
4035-4060

Permeability, md
80
100
70
90

WOC = 4060 ft
Water density = 65.2 llb/ft3
Oil density = 55.2 lb/ft3
Please calculate and plot water saturation versus depth for this reservoir

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

93

Capillary Pressure Hystresis

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Oil+Water

Only Oil

Only Water

94

Useful Capillary Pressure Applications

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

95

The key to characterized reservoir description is:


Pore Size Distribution Index
0.00084k 0.5498 pd0.9930
1.0485

(1 S wi ) 2.2790

define :

S w*

Pc
k rw

S w S wi

1 S wi S or
1
*
pd S w
*
w

ln(S w* )
ln( pc / pd )

Proper way of estimating :


from curve-fit of pc vs. Sw

23

k rnw (1 S w* ) 2

*
1 S w

96

97

Normalizing Capillary Pressure Data


The Leverett J-Function
Leverett defined the dimensionless function of saturation, which he called the Jfunction, as

J ( S w ) = 0.21645
J(Sw)
Pc

pc

= J-Function
= Capillary pressure, psi
=Interfacial tension, dynes/cm
=Permeability, md
=Fractional porosity

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

98

J-Function can be used as


Hydraulic Flow Unit Indicator
Or for Zonation

J ( S w ) = 0.21645

pc

Class Problem
A laboratory capillary pressure test was conducted on a core sample taken from
the Nameless Field. The core has a porosity and permeability of 16% and 80
md, respectively. The capillary pressure-saturation data are given below.
Sw
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2

pc, psi
0.50
0.60
0.75
1.05
1.75

The interfacial tension is measured at 50 dynes/cm. Further reservoir


engineering analysis indicated that the reservoir is better described at a
porosity value of 19% and an absolute permeability of 120 md. Generate the
capillary pressure data for the reservoir.

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

99

Class problem:
Using the capillary pressure data as tabulated on the next slide; generate the
capillary pressure data for a reservoir layer as characterized by the flowing
properties:
Permeability = 72 md
Porosity = 19.1 %
Interfacial tension = 28 dynes/cm
Contact angle = 0o

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Core 1
K=11.2 md
= 0.147

Core 3
K=157 md
= 0.208

Core 2
K=34 md
= 0.174

Core 4
K=569 md
= 0.275

Sw, %

Pc

Sw, %

Pc

Sw, %

Pc

Sw, %

Pc

100

2.15*

100

1.60*

100

0.93*

100

0.60*

87

2.27

82

1.79

79

1.00

65

0.67

74

2.59

54

2.28

60

1.19

47

0.87

60

2.95

43

3.25

42

1.77

40

1.15

54

3.50

35

4.91

31

3.28

33

1.63

47

3.85

29

6.55

23

5.46

29

2.31

41

4.82

28

7.92

22

7.93

22

2.80

37

5.69

27

10.25

21

10.25

19

3.59

34

7.45

16

6.52

32

10.25

16

10/25

Interfacial tension = 70 dynes/cm


Contact angle = 0o

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

100

8- Relative Permeability

101

Water-oil relative permeability curves.

(Krw )Soc

203

Soc =20%

Gas-oil relative permeability curves.

204

102

Original Coreys Correlation


Developed for the drainage cycle in water-wet sandstones
Applies ONLY to well-sorted homogenous rocks

kro kro Swc

1 S w Sorw

1 S wc Sorw

S g S gc

Swc
1 S Lc S gc

k rg k rg

no

S S

krw krw Sorw w wc


1 S wc Sorw

ng

k ro k ro Sgc

1 S g S Lc

1 S gc S Lc

nw

ngo

Accounting for Stratification


Stratification Factor m
kro kro Swc
krw

1 S w Sorw

1 S wc Sorw

S S

krw Sorw w wc
1 S wc Sorw
S g S gc

Swc
1 S Lc S gc

k rg k rg

ng

1 S g S Lc
k ro k ro Sgc

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

103

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

104

Relative history
Permeability Hysteresis

(Hysteresis describes the

of the saturation changes)

Drainage Process
Oil
core 100% H2O
Kro
Krw
Imbibition Process
H2O

Oil +
residual H2O

0%
100%

210

SW
SO

100%
0%

Soc & Sorw !!!!!

105

Gas-oil relative permeability curves.

Sgc & Sgr , Trapped Gas!!!!!


211

k ro /krw as a function of saturation.

kro
a ebSw
krw

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

106

One of the most practical applications of the MBE is its ability to generate the field
relative permeability ratio as a function of gas saturation that can be used to adjust
the laboratory core relative permeability data. The main advantage of the field or
well generated relative permeability ratio is that it incorporates some of the
complexities of reservoir heterogeneity and degree of the segregation of the oil and
the evolved gas.

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All


Rights Reserved

8/13/2011

N = 7758 A h (1 Swi)/Boi
So

N N B
p

N Boi

1 S wi

N p Bo

So 1 S wi 1
N Boi

Sg = 1 So - Swi

krg
WOR

k rw o Bo

k ro w Bw

B
a e b S w WOR w w
o Bo

B
WOR a e b S w / ( w w )
o Bo

kro

g Bg
GOR Rs
o Bo

g Bg

a e b So GOR Rs
o Bo
g Bg

GOR Rs a e b So / (
)
o Bo

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved

8/13/2011

107

Class Problem:
A volumetric undersaturated oil reservoir has a bubble-point pressure of
4500. The initial reservoir pressure is 7150 psia and the volumetric
calculations indicate the reservoir contains 750MM STB of oil initially in
place. The field is a tight naturally fractured chalk reservoir and was
developed without pressure support by water injection. The following
additional data is available:
Swi = 43%
,
Bw = 1.0 bbl/STB

cw = 3.00x10-6 psi-1
,
pb = 4500 psi

cf = 3.3x10-6 psi-1

The field production and PVT data are summarized below:

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All


Rights Reserved

p
psia

Qo
STB/day

7150
6600
5800
4950
4500
4350
4060
3840
3600
3480
3260
3100
2940
2800

44230
79326
75726
70208
50416
35227
26027
27452
20975
15753
14268
13819

Qg
Bo
MMscf/day bbl/STB
64.110
115.616
110.192
134.685
147.414
135.282
115.277
151.167
141.326
125.107
116.970
111.792

1.743
1.760
1.796
1.830
1.850
1.775
1.670
1.611
1.566
1.523
1.474
1.440
1.409
1.382

8/13/2011

Rs
Scf/STB

Bg
BBL/scf

o/ g

Np
MMSTB

RP
Scf/STB

1450
1450
1450
1450
1450
1323
1143
1037
958
882
791
734
682
637

0.000797
0.000840
0.000881
0.000916
0.000959
0.001015
0.001065
0.001121
0.001170

5.60
6.02
7.24
8.17
9.35
9.95
11.1
11.9
12.8
13.5

0
8.072
22.549
36.369
43.473
49.182
58.383
64.812
69.562
74.572
78.400
81.275
83.879
86.401

1450
1450
1455
1455
1447
1576
1788
1992
2158
2383
2596
2785
2953
3103

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved

8/13/2011

108

3- Phase Relative Permeability


kro

Sg krg

krw

So kro
Sw

Sw krw
krg

kro

Sg

krog

kro kro Swc row krw


krg krw krg
kro Swc

kro Swc

217

Data and Observations


Rock Properties
Critical water saturation in low-perm
rocks

Typical reservoir
rock

109

Poor quality
reservoir rock

Poor quality
reservoir rock

Critical Saturations increase

Critical Saturations increase

Worse quality
reservoir rock

110

Data and Observations


Rock Properties
All show and no
flow!!

Worse quality
reservoir rock

Permeability Jail

Near-Well Upscaling
( K rf ) I , J 1/ 2 ,K
coarse scale

f qIC, J 1,K
TI , J 1/ 2 , K ( PI , J 1,K PI , J , K )

J-1
I-1

fine scale

I+1

West

East

J+1

South
Figure 1. Diagram to illustrate the near-well upscaling method

111

Near-Well Approach
f q
q
k

k
f w

k ro o (1 f w )
k rw w f w

t
k

t
k

Analytical representations for individual-phase relative permeabilities are commonly


used in numerical simulators. The most frequently used functional forms used for
relative-permeability and capillary-pressure data are given below:
Oil-Water Systems:
1 S w Sorw
kro kro Swc

1 S wc Sorw

no

krw

S S

krw Sorw w wc
1

S
wc
orw

nw

1 S w Sorw

Pcwo Pc Swc
1 S wc Sorw

np

Gas-Oil Systems:
S g S gc
krg krg Swc

1 Slc S gc

ng

1 S g Slc
kro kro Sgc

1 S gc Slc

ngo

S g S gc
Pcgo Pc Slc

1 Slc S gc

n pg

SLc = Swc + Sorg


where:
SLc = Total critical liquid saturation
no, nw, ng, ngo = Exponents on relative permeability curves
np = Exponent of the capillary pressure curve in gas-oil system
(Pc)Sl = Capillary pressure at critical liquid saturation.
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

112

Class Problem.
Generate the relative permeability and capillary pressure data using the following
information on the water-oil and gas-oil systems:
Swc = 0.25,

Sorw = 0.35,

Sgc = 0.05,

(kro)Swc= 0.85,

(krw)Sorw = 0.4,

(Pc)Swc= 20 psi

kro)Sgc= 0.60,

(krg)Swc

no = 0.9,

nw = 1.5,

(Pc)slc

Sorg = 0.23

= 0.95
np= 0.71

,ngo= 1.2,ng= 0.6 ,

= 30 psi, npg= 0.51

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Analytical Expressions
So*

So
1 S wc

S w*

S w S wc
1 S wc

S g*

Sg
1 S wc

Drainage Oil-Water Relative Permeabilities


Type of formation
kro
krw
Equati
on
Unconsolidated sand, 1 S *
* 3
Sw
w
well sorted
(5-4)
Unconsolidated sand, 1 S * 2 1 S *1.5
* 3.5
w
w
Sw
poorly sorted
(5-5)
2
4
Cemented sandstone,
*
*2
*
1 S w 1 S w
Sw
oolitic limestone
(5-6)

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

113

Drainage Gas-Oil Relative Permeabilities


Type of formation
kro
krg

Unconsolidated sand, well


sorted
Unconsolidated sand, poorly
sorted
Cemented Sandstone, oolitic
limestone, rocks with
vugular porosity

Equatio
n

1 S

* 3
o

* 3
o

(5-7)

1 S 1 S

(5-8)

1 S 1 S

(5-9)

* 3.5
o

* 2
o

* 4
o

* 2
o

*1.5
o

*2
o

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Relative Permeability from Capillary Pressure Data


1- Oil-Water System
k ro

1 S w


1 S wc

S S wc

k rw w
1 S wc

Sw
1

(1 / Pc2 )dSw

Swc

(1 / Pc2 )dSw

Sw

Swc
1
Swc

(1 Pc2 )dSw

Pc

(1 Pc2 )dSw

Sw

2- Gas-Oil System
S S or

k ro o
1 S or

k rg

So

(1 P )dS
(1 P )dS

S S or
1 o

S
g S gc

2
c

o
1
o

2
c

1/P2c

(1 P )dS
(1 P )dS
So
1
o

2
c

2
c

Sw

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

114

Normalization and Averaging


Relative Permeability Data
Results of relative permeability tests performed on several core samples of a
reservoir rock often vary. Therefore, it is necessary to average the relative
permeability data obtained on individual rock samples. Prior to usage for oil
recovery prediction, the relative permeability curves should first be normalized to
remove the effect of different initial water and critical oil saturations. The relative
permeability can then be de-normalized and assigned to different regions of the
reservoir based on the existing critical fluid saturation for each reservoir region.

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

To perform the normalization procedure, it is helpful to set up the calculation


steps for each core sample i in a tabulated form as shown below:

Relative Permeability Data for Core Sample i


(1) (2) (3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
k rw
k ro
*
*
S w S wc
*
k ro
k rw
Sw
k ro @ S wc
1 S wc Soc
k rw @ S oc
Sw kro krw
The following normalization methodology describes the necessary steps for a
water-oil system as outlined in the above table.
Step 1. Select several values of Sw starting at Swc (column 1), and list the
corresponding values of kro and krw in columns 2 and 3.

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

115

Relative Permeability Data for Core Sample i


(1) (2) (3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
k rw
k ro
*
*
S S wc
k ro

k rw

S *w w
k ro @ S wc
1 S wc Soc
k rw @ S oc
Sw kro krw
Step 2. Calculate the normalized water saturation S*w for each set of relative
permeability curves and lists the calculated values in column 4 by
using the following expression:
S *w

S w S wc
1 S wc Soc

Step 3. Calculate the normalized relative permeability for the oil and
water phase at different water saturations by using the following
relationships and list results in column 5 and 6:

k ro*

k ro

k ro Swc

*
krw

krw
krw Soc

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Relative Permeability Data for Core Sample i


(1) (2) (3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
k rw
k ro
*
*
S w S wc
*
k ro
k rw
Sw
k
@
S
1 S wc Soc
k rw @ S oc
Sw kro krw
ro
wc
Step 4. Using regular Cartesian coordinate, plot the normalized k*ro and k*rw
versus S*w for ALL core samples on the same graph.

S*w
2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

116

S*w
Step 5. Determine the average normalized relative permeability values for oil
and water as a function of the normalized water saturation by select
arbitrary values of S*w and calculate the average of k*ro and k*rw by
applying the following relationships:

h k k
n

*
ro avg

*
ro i

i 1

h k i

h k k
n

*
rw avg

*
rw i

i 1

h k
i 1

i 1

where
n= Total number of core samples
hi= Thickness of sample i
ki= Absolute permeability of sample i

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Step 6. The last step in this methodology involves de-normalizing the average
curve to reflect actual reservoir and conditions of Swc and Soc. These
parameters are the most critical part of the methodology and,
therefore, a major effort should be spent in determining
representative values.
When representative critical saturations have been estimated, it is
again convenient to perform the de-normalization calculations in a
tabular form as illustrated below:

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

S*w (k*ro)avg (k*rw)avg

(5)

(6)

*
Sw Sw* 1 Swc Soc Swc kro (kro )avg k ro

Swc

*
krw (krw
) avg k rw

Soc

Where average (kro)Swc and average (krw)Soc are the average relative
permeability of oil and water at connate water and critical oil, respectively, and
n
n
given by:
h k krw Soc i
h k k ro Swc i
k rw Soc i 1 n
k ro Swc i 1 n
h k i
h k

i 1

i 1

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

117

The Swc and Soc are usually determined by averaging the core data, log analysis, or
correlations. Versus graphs, such as: (kro)Swc vs. Swc, (krw)Soc vs. Soc, and Soc vs.
Swc should be constructed to determine if a significant correlation exists. Often plots
of Swc and Sor versus log k may demonstrate a reliable correlation to determine
end-point saturations as shown schematically below :

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Class Problem
Relative permeability measurements are made on three core samples. The measured data
are summarized below:

Sw
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.65
0.72

Core Sample #1

Core Sample #2

Core Sample #3

h = 1ft
k = 100 md
Soc = 0.35
Swc = 0.25

h = 1ft
k = 80 md
Soc = 0.28
Swc = 0.30

h=1
k = 150 md
Soc = 0.35
Swc = 0.20

kro
0.850*
0.754
0.557
0.352
0.131
0.000
-

krw
0.000
0.018
0.092
0.198
0.327
0.400*
-

kro
0.800
0.593
0.393
0.202
0.111
0.000

krw
0
0.077
0.191
0.323
0.394
0.500*

kro
1.000*
0.872
0.839
0.663
0.463
0.215
0.000
-

krw
0.000
0.008
0.027
0.088
0.176
0.286
0.350*
-

*values at critical saturations

It is believed that a connate water saturation of 0.27 and a critical oil saturation of
30% better describe the formation. Generate the oil and water relative
permeability data using the new critical saturations.

118

UPSCALING

Absolute Permeability Upscaling


Arithmetic (Volumetric) Average
Root-Mean-Square RMS Average
Tensor Averaging

Renormalization (on-going)

238

119

Power Averaging Procedures


1/

(ki ) coarse [ki ]fine dV


Vb V

(ki ) coarse upscaled permeabili ty


[ki ]fine

fine - scale permeabili ty

Vb

coarse block bulk volume

power average exponent !!! Choice of is very tedious

lies between -1 and 1:


= 1; Arithmetic average (parallel flow)
= -1; harmonic average (Series flow)
= 0; geometric average (kw is replaced by ln(k))
= 1/3; average k will lie between geometric and arithmetic averages
= 0.57, for horizontal flow in shale-sand environments
= 0.12, vertical flow
239

Root Mean Square RMS

(k IJK ) coarse

(k
i

ijk

) 2fine

nm z

240

120

Permeability Tensor
Permeability tensors allow a more rigorous representation
of permeability. The method uses the numerical solution
of the PDE that governs single-phase steady state flow conditions
to calculate kxx, kyy,and kzz. The equation for the system consisting
of fine-scale blocks that fall inside the coarse black is:

p
(k xx ) (k yy ) (k zz ) 0
x
x
y
y
z
z

This equation is solved with constant pressure conditions at


inlet and outlet faces, which are normal to the direction in which
coarse-scale permeability is being calculated; with closed boundaries
in the other directions;
k1

k2

. .
.
.

k3

p ( x 0) p o

k4

p ( x L) p L
p
y
p
z

dp/dy = 0

0
y 0, Ly

0
z 0 , Lz

The numerical solutions to the above equations provides the pressure distribution
And flow rates in the fine scale system; with coarse grid permeability as given by:
241

Kxx = Lx (Q)fine) / [ A (po pL)]

Renormalization
The Method uses the analogy between flow in
Porous media and electric circuits to calculate Kcoarse.
The approach based on averaging the permeability
over small regions (2x2x2 of the fine-scale block) to
form a new average permeability with the equation
as derived from circuit analogs.

k1

k2

k3

k4

KA

KA

KB

KC

KD

KCoarse

4 A (k1 k 3 ) (k 2 k 4 )
3 B (k1 k 2 k 3 k 4 ) A

A k 2 k 4 (k1 k 3 ) k1 k 3 (k 2 k 4 )
B (k1 k 2 ) (k 3 k 4 ) (k 1 k 3 ) (k 2 k 4 )

242

121

Identifying Hydraulic Flow Units


&
Zonation

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Prediction of Hydraulic Flow Units


HFU
HFU is commonly characterized by the following three functions:

1) Reservoir quality Index (RQI) :

RQI 0.0314*

2) Pore volume to grain volume ratio

1
3) Flow Zone Indicator (FZI) :
FZI

RQI
z

Linear equation with a unit slope

log RQI logz log FZI

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

122

Proposed Approach for Defining HFU:


The proposed approach is based on utilizing to all available core data and
determining :
calculate RQI and z for each sample core data
Plot RQI vs. z on loglog-log coordinates. The plotting data will form a straight line with
a 45o degree angle (unit slope) if FZI is constant for all samples . Data samples with
similar but not identical FZI values will be located around the single unit slope straight
line.
Samples with significantly different FZI will for another parallel unitunit-slope straight
line
Each line is a FLOW UNIT that is characterized with an average FZI
FZI.. The average
FZI for
for each FU is the intercept of a unitunit-slope straight line with the coordinates z =1
Permeability of a sample point can be calculated from a pertinent HFU using the
average FZI values and the corresponding sample porosity:

k 1014( FZI ) 3

3
(1 ) 2

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Log-log
X (FZI)1

RQI

X (FZI)2

X (FZI)3
45o

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

123

Identifying Hydraulic Flow Units

RQI vs PHIZ
z
Ourhoud Field Wells
10.00
HFU12
HFU11
HFU10
HFU9
HFU8
HFU7
HFU6
HFU5
HFU4
HFU3
HFU2
HFU1

RQI

1.00

0.10

0.01
0.01

0.10
PHIz

1.00

Class Problem:
The following tabulated data shows properties of core plugs from different field locations.
Determine the numbers of HFU
.

124

Solution:

The fitting parameters a&b of the


straight for the Nameless Field:

log(S w ) log(a) log[ J (S w ) b ]


Sw

a
J (S w )b

Sw

0.207
J ( S w ) 0.5852

125

Applied Mathematical Manipulations


for each HFU
Sw
Sw=

Sw=

a
J (S w )b

J ( S w ) = 0.21645

pc

pc
0.21645

h
0.21645
144

pc = (

h
)
144

Sw above FWL

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

FOIL Function
The FOIL function (Cuddy and co-workers(1993) proposed a simple mathematical
function that relates the Bulk Water Volume BWV to the height h above the free
water level by using 2-constant mathematical expression:

A
hB
A 1
Sw B
h

BWV S w

A & B are fitting parameters


Independed of k

It should be noted that a log-log plot of the J(Sw) vs. Sw (as shown on
next slide) will yield a linear relationship of the form:

S w a J (S w )

log(S w ) log(a) log[ J (S w ) b ]

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

126

The fitting parameters a&b of the


straight for the Nameless Field:

log(S w ) log(a) log[ J (S w ) b ]


Sw

a
J (S w )b

Sw

0.207
J ( S w ) 0.5852

Reservoir Heterogeneity
The reservoir heterogeneity is then defined as a variation in reservoir properties as
a function of space. Ideally, if the reservoir is homogeneous, measuring a
reservoir property at any location will allow us to fully describe the reservoir. The
task of reservoir description is very simple for homogeneous reservoirs. On the
other hand, if the reservoir is heterogeneous, the reservoir properties vary as a
function of a spatial location. These properties may include permeability, porosity,
thickness, saturation, faults and fractures, rock facies and rock characteristics. For
a proper reservoir description, we need to predict the variation in these reservoir
properties as a function of spatial locations. There are essentially two types of
heterogeneity:
Vertical Heterogeneity
Areal Heterogeneity

127

Reservoir Heterogeneity
Vertical Heterogeneity
Dykstra and Parsons permeability variation V
Lorenz coefficient L
Areal Heterogeneity
The Polygon Method
The Inverse Distance Method
The Inverse Distance Squared Method
Triangulation Method
Delaunay Triangulation

255

Vertical Heterogeneity
Perhaps the area of the greatest uncertainty in designing a waterflood is the
quantitative knowledge of the permeability variation within the reservoir.
The degree of permeability variation is considered by far the most
significant parameter influencing the vertical sweep efficiency. To calculate
the vertical sweep efficiency, the engineer must be able to address the
following three problems:
1. How to describe and define the permeability variation in mathematical
terms
2. How to determine the minimum number of layers that are sufficient to
model the performance of the fluid
3. How to assign the proper average rock properties for each layer (called
the Zonation Problem)
8/13/2011

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights


Reserved

128

It is appropriate to be able to describe the degree of heterogeneity within a


particular system in quantitative terms. The degree of homogeneity of a
reservoir property is a number that characterizes the departure from
uniformity or constancy of that particular measured property through the
thickness of reservoir. A formation is said to have a uniformity coefficient of
zero in a specified property when that property is constant throughout the
formation thickness. A completely heterogeneous formation has a uniformity
coefficient of unity. Between the two extremes, formations have uniformity
coefficients comprised between zero and one. The following are the two most
widely used descriptors of the vertical heterogeneity of the formation:
Dykstra and Parsons permeability variation V
Lorenz coefficient L

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.

8/13/2011

k50 k84.1
k50

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights


Reserved

129

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

260

130

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
Porosit
Depth
k
y
ft
md
%
17.4
5397-5398.5 72
18.0
-539.95
100
16.7
-5402
49
17.4
-5404.5
90
19.2
-5407
91
16.8
-5409
44
16.8
-5411
62
15.9
-5413
49
17.6
-5415
49
17.2
-5417
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

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.

131

The Zonation Problem


In waterflooding calculations, it is frequently desirable to divide the
reservoir into a number of layers that have equal thickness but different
permeabilities and porosities. Traditionally, two methods are used in the
industry to assign the proper average permeability for each layer:
(1) The positional method
(2) the permeability ordering method.

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved

132

Positional Method
The positional method describes layers according to their relative location
within the vertical rock column. This method assumes that the injected fluid
remains in the same elevation (layer) as it moves from the injector to the
producer. The method have been successfully demonstrated this in predicting
the performance in several Projects. The average permeability in a selected
layer (elevation) should be calculated by applying the geometric-average
permeability as given by:

k avg

hi ln(ki )

exp i 1 n

hi

i 1

If the all thicknesses are equal, then:


1

k avg (k1 k 2 k 3 . . . k n ) n

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved

k avg (k1 k 2 k 3 . . . k n )

1
n

133

Class Problem
Using the core analysis data given below for ten wells system, assign the
proper average permeability for each layer if the reservoir is divided into:
10 equal-thickness layers; each with 1 ft. thickness
5 equal-thickness layers; each with 2 ft. thickness

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved

Layering using D&P Method


In water flooding calculations, it is frequently desired to divide the reservoir into
layers that have equal thickness and different permeability. The log-probability
scale can be used in this case to assign the permeability scale into equal percent
increments and reading the corresponding permeability at the midpoint of each
interval.

134

Class Problem
Using the data given in the previous problem, determine the average
layer permeability for a 10 layered system, assuming a uniform porosity.
Well #1
Depth
ft

5389-5391
--5393
-5395
-5397
-5399
-5401
-5403
-5405
-5406
-5409

Well #2

Well #3

k
md

Porosity
%

Depth
ft

k
md

porosity
%

Depth
ft

k
md

porosity
%

166
435
147
196
254
105
158
153
128
172

17.4
18.0
16.7
17.4
19.2
16.8
16.8
15.9
17.6
17.2

5397-5398.5
-539.95
-5402
-5404.5
-5407
-5409
-5411
-5413
-5415
-5417

72
100
49
90
91
44
62
49
49
83

15.7
15.6
15.2
15.4
16.1
14.1
15.6
14.9
14.8
15.2

5401-5403
-5405
-5407
-5409
-5411
-5413
-5415
-5417
-5419

28
40
20
32
35
27
27
9
30

14.0
13.7
12.2
13.6
14.2
12.6
12.3
10.6
14.1

Lorenz Coefficient L
Schmalz and Rahme (1950) introduced a single parameter that describes the
degree of heterogeneity within a pay zone section. The term is called Lorenz
Coefficient and varies between zero, for a completely homogeneous system, to
one for a completely heterogeneous system.
The following steps summarize the methodology of calculating Lorenz Coefficient:
Step 1. Arrange all the available permeability values in a descending order.
Step 2. Calculate the cumulative permeability capacity kh and cumulative
volume capacity h.
Step 3. Normalize both cumulative capacities such that each cumulative capacity
ranges from 0 to 1.
Step 4. Plot the normalized cumulative permeability capacity versus the
normalized cumulative volume capacity on a Cartesian scale.

135

Area above the straight line A

Area below the straight line B

271

A
B

Area above the straight line A

Area below the straight line B

136

This relationship can be expressed mathematically by the following two


expressions:
Lorenz Coefficient in Terms of Permeability Variation:

L 0.0116356 0.339794V 1.066405V 2 0.3852407V 3


Permeability Variation in Terms of Lorenz Coefficient:

V 5.05971 (10 4 ) 1.747525 L 1.468847 L2 0.701023 L3


The above two expressions are applicable between 0<L<1 and 0<V<1.

Class Problem
Using the data given in last Example, calculate Lorenz Coefficient assuming a
uniform porosity.
Well #1
Depth
ft

5389-5391
--5393
-5395
-5397
-5399
-5401
-5403
-5405
-5406
-5409

Well #2

Well #3

k
md

Porosity
%

Depth
ft

k
md

porosity
%

166
435
147
196
254
105
158
153
128
172

17.4
18.0
16.7
17.4
19.2
16.8
16.8
15.9
17.6
17.2

5397-5398.5
-539.95
-5402
-5404.5
-5407
-5409
-5411
-5413
-5415
-5417

72
100
49
90
91
44
62
49
49
83

15.7
15.6
15.2
15.4
16.1
14.1
15.6
14.9
14.8
15.2

Dept
ft

5401-5403
-5405
-5407
-5409
-5411
-5413
-5415
-5417
-5419

k
md

porosity
%

28
40
20
32
35
27
27
9
30

14.0
13.7
12.2
13.6
14.2
12.6
12.3
10.6
14.1

137

Layering using Lorenz Plot


A plot of the cumulative permeability capacity kh vs. h (without normalization) is
commonly constructed, as shown, and used to assign average permeability values for a
selected number of reservoir layers. If the intervals of the thickness are chosen, then the
average values of permeability for each thickness interval (layer) can be calculated by
dividing the incremental (kh) by the incremental thickness h .
It should be noted that it is not necessary that equal thickness sections be chosen. They
may be selected at irregular increments as desired. There are also some advantages of
selecting layer properties so that each layer has the same permeability thickness product.

Class problem
Using Lorenz approach and the data in D&P example, calculate the average
permeability for a ten-layered system reservoir. Compare the results with those of
Dykstra and Parsons method.

138

Areal Heterogeneity
( x)

i 1

i 1

i xi

i 1

Where:
Z*(x) = estimate of the regionalized variable at location x
Z (xi) = measured value of the regionalized variable at position xi
i = weight factor
n = number of nearby data points

277

The Polygon Method


This technique is essentially based on assigning the nearest
measured value of the regionalized variable to the designated
location. This implies that all the weighting factors, i are set equal
to zero except the corresponding i for the nearest point is set equal
to one.

The Inverse Distance Method

i 1 i
n

i
di

The Inverse Distance Squared Method

1
i
di

i 1 d i
n

278

139

Class Problem:
The illustration below shows the locations of four wells and distance
between the wells and point x. The average permeability in each well
location is given below

Well #
1
2
3
4

Permeability, md
73
110
200
140

Well #3
410 ft
Well #4

380 ft

Well #2

170 ft
Well #1

Estimate the permeability at location x by the polygon and the two inverse
distance methods.

Delaunay Triangulation Method

k
k
280

(k1 ) (area I ) (k1 ) (area II ) (k3 ) (area III )


(area I ) (area II ) (area III )

(696) ( 22.25) ( 227) (12.) (606) (9.5)


548.7 md
( 22.25) (12) (9.5)

140

Triangulation Method

Z=ax+by+c
k1 = a x1 + b y1 + c
k2 = a x2 + b y2 + c
k3 = a x3 + b y3 + c

63 a + 140 b + c =696
64 a + 129 b + c =227
71 a + 140 b + c =606

a = -11.25, b = 41.614 , c = - 4421.159


k = -11.25 (65) + 41.614 (137) - 4421.159 = 548.7 md
281

End of 1st part

141