Part1 Fluids Rock Properties

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
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
Understanding the Critical point is

Essential
Liquid
PC
PC
C
Liquid+Gas
Liquid
Gas
Gas
TC
TC
Bubblepoint
pressure curve
100% Liquid
P-T Diagram
C
Liquid+Gas
Classification of Reservoirs
Oil Reservoirs
Gas Reservoirs
Near Critical
This Classification is Based on:

1- Initial Composition
2- Initial Pressure
3- Initial Temperature
8
Types of Reservoirs
Oil reservoirs
Gas reservoirs
Near Critical
9
Oil Reservoir
Gas Reservoir
Oil Reservoirs
Undersaturated Oil Reservoir.

Saturated Oil Reservoir.
Gas-cap Reservoir.
11
1- undersaturated reservoir
2- saturated reservoir
3- Gas-Cap reservoir
1
2
Typical P-T diagram

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
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
Liquid-shrinkage curve for black oil.

100%
Liquid Volume
Residual oil
0%
pb
Pressure
Liquid Shrinkage Curve

15
2- Low-shrinkage Oil.
Liquid
critical point
pressure
Liquid+Gas
A
G
85%
75%
Gas
F
Temperature
16
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
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
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
11
Gas Reservoirs
Dry Gas Reservoirs
Wet Gas Reservoirs
Retrograde Gas Reservoirs
Near-critical Gas-condensate Reservoirs
23
1- Dry Gas Reservoirs
24
12
2- Wet Gas Reservoirs
25
3- Retrograde Gas Reservoirs
26
13
A typical liquid dropout curve.
27
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
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
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
18
On Near-critical Reservoirs
37
Temperature
Depth
Gas Cap
Critical Region
Oil Rim
19
Pi>>>>Pb !!!!!!!!
Gas Cap
Critical Mixture
Oil Rim
39
Fundamental of PVT Properties

A Short Review
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
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
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
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
Constant Composition Expansion Test

CCE
Pb
Co
PVT above Pb
Bt
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?
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
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:
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
51
Identifying the Outliers

Saturation pressure vs. depth
C1 mole% vs. depth
C7+ mole% vs. depth
MC7+ vs. depth
103
Saturation Pressure
X
True Vertical Depth
X
X
X Outlier (removed) data
Figure 2-11. Measured Saturation Pressure versus Depth

104
52
Mol % of Methane
True Vertical Depth
Figure 2-12. Measured Methane Content versus Depth

105
Mol% of Heptanes-Plus Fraction
True Vertical Depth
X
X
X
106
Figure 2-14. Measured Mol % of C7+ versus Depth

53
Molecular weight of Heptanes-Plus Fraction
True Vertical Depth
X
X
Figure 2-13. Measured C7+ Molecular Weight versus Depth
107
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)
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 !!!!?
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
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)
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
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
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
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
59
Porosity
Space Between grains
Permeability
Ease to flow Between grains
Low
Pressure
High
Pressure
Reservoir Rock
Oil getting left behind

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

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
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 ) ]
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
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?????
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
66
Averaging the Saturation

n
hS
i
( S o ) avg
oi
i=1
n
i=1
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
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
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 -
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
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 )
Klinkenberg Effect
kgas > kliquid
WHY?
140
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
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.
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
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
73
Parallel Layers
(k w h )
i
wighted average: k
i 1
n
( w h )
i
i 1
Series beds
( L / A )
i
Harmonicaverage :
i 1
[( L /( A k )]
i
i 1
74
Radial Zones
k avg =
l n ( re / r w )
l n ( r j / r j -1 )
[
]
k
j
j=1
n
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
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:
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
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
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.
81
6- Surface and Interfacial Tension

Forces acting on the interface between two immiscible
fluids:
surface tension
Interfacial tension.
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
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
Porous Plate
84
Porous Plate
Most accurate
Others:
1- Centrifuge Technique
2- Mercury Injection
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
Only Oil Flowing
After Correcting Pc
Only Oil
h
Pc

144
or :
Oil + Water
144 Pc
h

Only water
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
1
( k )
90
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
Please calculate and plot water saturation versus depth for this reservoir
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
Please calculate and plot water saturation versus depth for this reservoir
93
Capillary Pressure Hystresis
Oil+Water
Only Oil
Only Water
94
Useful Capillary Pressure Applications
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
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.
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 %
Contact angle = 0o
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

Contact angle = 0o
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
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
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
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
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.
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
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)
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
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
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.
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.
115

(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

(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
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
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
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 :
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
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
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
Log-log
X (FZI)1
RQI
X (FZI)2
X (FZI)3
45o
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
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 )
126
The fitting parameters a&b of the

straight for the Nameless Field:

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
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
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.
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
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
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

Part1 Fluids Rock Properties

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Part1 Fluids Rock Properties

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Basic Waterflooding

Characterization and Classification

A Good Starting Point:

Understanding the Critical point is

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

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

This Classification is Based on:

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

Undersaturated Oil Reservoir.

Typical P-T diagram

Characterization of Crude Oils

1- Ordinary Black Oil.

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

API gravity 15-40 API

Liquid-shrinkage curve for black oil.

Liquid Shrinkage Curve

Oil formation volume factor less than 1.2 bbl/STB

3- Volatile Crude Oil

A typical liquid-shrinkage curve for a Volatile crude oil

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

4- Near-critical Crude Oil

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

Liquid shrinkage for crude oil systems

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

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

1- Dry Gas Reservoirs

2- Wet Gas Reservoirs

3- Retrograde Gas Reservoirs

A typical liquid dropout curve.

4- Near-critical Gas-condensate Reservoirs

Liquid dropout curve for a near-critical

Near Critical Systems

Figure 1-35. Determination of GOC from Pressure

Depth Pressure Temperature Phase Sat Point Molecular Fluid Dens

GOR STO Oil Dens

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

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

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

Fundamental of PVT Properties

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

ON Gas Solubility Rs & Bo

Under-saturated Oil Properties

X = 0.0125 API 0.00091(T-460)

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

Crude Oil Viscosity

a = 10.715 (Rs + 100)-0.515

X = 0.0125 API 0.00091(T-460)

Bo 0.9759 0.000120 R s 1.25 T 460

a = 10.715 (Rs + 100)-0.515

PVT Conventional & Special

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

Constant Composition Expansion Test

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

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

What is the Bubble-Point Pressure?

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

Variable Bubble-point Pressures !!!

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved

Assume that the waterflood will commence when the reservoir

Differential Expansion (Liberation) Test

Gas Solubility Rs & Bo

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