SPE

Society of Petroleum Engineer'S

SPE 17289

Prediction of Waterflood Performance in Stratified Reservoirs

by R. Tompang, Petronas, and B.G. Kelkar, U. of Tulsa
SPE Members

Copyright 1988, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Permian Basin Oil and Gas Recovery Conference held in Midland, Texas, March 10-11, 1988.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the
author(s). Contents of the paper, as presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the
author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its.officers, or ~e":lbers. Pape~s
presented at SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of Petroleum Engineers. Perm1ss1on to copy IS
restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words. Illustrations may not be copied. The abstract should contain conspicuous acknowledgment of
where and by whom the paper is presented. Write Publications Manager, SPE, P .0. Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836. Telex, 730989 SPEDAL.

ABSTRACf INTRODUCTION

Crossflow between adjacent layers plays an An important consideration in using

important role on water flooding performance in a numerical models, particularly in studies of
stratified reservoir; however, the analytical waterflood performance, is the vertical definition
solutions describing the crossflow effect are of the reservoir. An accurate description of
possible only under limiting conditions: (i) where vertical sweep efficiency is important if the model
viscous forces are dominant (no crossflow); and (ii) is to simulate the actual performance correctly.
where vertical equilibrium exists (gravity and The only rigorous way of modelling vertical effects
capillary dominated displacement). This study is to use a three-dimensional reservoir simulator;
analyzes the effect of crossflow on the but, this technique is not always practical due to
waterflooding performance by comparing the excessive data preparation time and computing
simulator results under actual flooding conditions expense. In many instances, however, a 1e s s
with the approximate analytical solutions. The expensive two-dimensional areal (x-y) model can
parameters varied include the injection rate, be used to solve the engineering problem
vertical permeability variation, ordering of beds, adequately, provided the nonuniform distribution
mobility ratio and the ratio of vertical to horizontal and flow of fluids in the implied third or vertical
permeabilities. A five beds, linear model was used dimension of the areal model is p r o p e r 1 y
under wide range of operating conditions. described. This means that the input data to the
two-dimensional model must be adjusted so that it
Based on the study, it was observed that the will approximate vertical effects.
oil recovery and cross flow index were dependent
on the value of RL (effective length to height ratio) Two limiting cases are to be considered in a
for favorable mobility ratios, and on the value of prediction of a two-dimensional waterflooding
R 0 (vertical to horizontal pressure gradients ratio) performance in a stratified reservoir: (a) the one
for unfavorable mobility ratios. Ranges of RL and in which layers are communicating, with a gravity
Rn were established for which approximate dominated displacement; and (b) the one in which
analytical solutions are valid. For the intermediate each layer is isolated from the other 1ayers .
region (where both viscous and gravity forces Analytical solutions for both these limiting cases
are important), empirical correlations for crossflow are available in the literature. Unfortunately, the
index were developed. conditions under which these solutions are valid
are not well established.
References and illustrations at end of paper.

213
2 PREDICTION OF WATERFLOOD PERFORMANCE IN STRATIFIED RESERVOIRS
To determine these limiting conditions, a
waterflooding performance in a two-dimensional
(x-z), linear reservoir was conducted using a black-
oil simulator. The simulator is commercially
available as BOSSAIM (Black Oil Simulation System
Adaptive Implicit Method), and is developed by
Scientific Software. The capillary forces were
neglected so that the analyses can be concentrated
on the effects of viscous and gravity forces on the
displacement mechanism. Particular attention was
given to the crossflow rates in an attempt to find
limiting cases to decide when to use the isolated
layers calculation procedures (no crossflow) or the
one-dimensional vertical equilibrium ( V E)
crossflow calculation procedures developed by
Coats et a1. 1•2 A systematic study of the effects of
parameters, including mobility ratios, vertical
permeability variations, injection rates, ratio of
vertical to horizontal · permeabilities and the
ordering of the layers (i.e., highest or lowest
permeability bed on top), on the oil displacement
was conducted.
BACKGROUND
In this section, we will first discuss the
development of the analytical solutions for the
limiting cases in a stratified reservoir. The
discussion also includes a modification of a
previous analytical solution for an isolated layer
case, to incorporate the effect of displacement
efficiency. The last part of the section introduces a
concept of crossflow index with appropriate
equations.
Analytical Solutions for Limiting Cases
As stated before, the analytical solutions for
the limiting cases can be divided into two
categories. The first category describes a gravity
dominated displacement (vertical equilibrium
case) in which significant communication or
crossflow occurs between the various layers. The
second category describes a viscous force
dominated displacement in which there is a
negligible communication (crossflow) between the
layers.
a) vertical Eqilibrium <YE> Condition
The calculations of sweep efficiency for a
stratified reservoir with good communication
between layers was first developed by Coats et
a1. 1•2 Their work used the VE concepts to describe
the generation of thickness averaged relative
214
SPE 17289
permeability curve which allows two-dimensional
simulation of three-dimensional problems with
equivalent accuracy. Hearn3 used these concepts
to show that fluid crossflow is dominated by
viscous force due to vertical permeability
variation. Zapata and Lake4 also showed that if the
ratio of effective length-to-height ratio RL is less
than 0.1, viscous crossflow will be insignificant,
and if this value is greater than 10, viscous
crossflow is maximum, and therefore, important
for the displacement process. In this study, for the
vertical equilibrium (VE) case, we used the method
developed by Coats et a1. 1 •2
b) No Crossflow Condition
Calculations of displacement performance for
a stratified reservoir for the second analytical
limiting case is obtained by summing individual
layer performances, calculated by a one-
dimensional flow theory. 9 • 10 The nature of
displacement in each layer depends on the
fractional flow characteristics. If the displacement
is assumed to be piston like, the sweep efficiency
calculations involve the use of the methods
developed by either Dykstra and Parsons 10 or by
Reznik et a1.5 (REP method). For adverse mobility
ratios (M > 1), the assumption of piston-like
displacement is not valid, becuase the water
travels faster than the oil and bypasses it. The
calculations for such a non-piston like
displacement for each bed and for the total
reservoir need to be slightly modified from the
previous methods.5,lO This calculation will be
called the Modified REP (MREP) method and will be
briefly described below.
The MREP Method
This method combines the advantages of REP
and Welge's6 graphical techniques. The
assumptions for MREP are similar to the one made
for REP method except for one; the oil
displacement in each bed is a non-piston like type.
However, it is assumed that the water saturation
behind the front in all the beds is equal, and
remains constant until that bed breaks through.
This follows from the assumption that the relative
permeabilities of water and oil are the same for all
the beds. After arranging the beds in a descending
or4er in terms of permeability, by analogy to the
REP calculations, the distance travelled by the
front, before breakthrough, in any bed j is given in
terms of the distance travelled by the front in the
last (least permeable) bed, N, as
 -seE 17 2 a 9
~-~---~------------------------~R~·~T~o~mp~a~n~g~a~n~dTB~·~G~·~K~e=lk~a~r~------------------------------~3
For an incompressible displacement, the amount of
water injected is equal to oil produced for all the
bed which have yet to breakthrough.

-
Wm=Npo
- (6)
where a' =Mbt
I k• For the beds which have broken through, the
bj = 2Mbt(l - MbJ k~ (2)
Welge's graphical technique is used on the
fractional flow curve to determine the average
2 k•
I

q=(l- MbJ k~
water saturation in each bed so that the oil
produced from these beds is given as

Similarly, the time increment for the saturation

(7)
front in the Nth bed to travel from distance Xn N 1 to
XnN2 is given as;
2 - and the cumulative water injected for these beds
JloL <j)(Swbt- Swc)
dt= ... at that instant is given as:
kN kro .1P

(8)

where superscript n represent the nth time· steps

after breakthrough of that bed.
The method of calculations for oil displaced as a
function of water injected is divided into two parts: Therefore if we add the oil produced and
(a) for beds which have broken through; and (b)
water injected for all the beds, we get the total oil
for beds which have not broken through. These
produced and water injected in term of
two methods of calculations are linked by the time
dimensionless PV for the entire reservoir, i.e., total
increment, given in Eq. (3), required for the front
dimensionless PV of oil produced is given as:
in the least permeable bed to travel an increment
of dXDNk II -
NpDT = Npo + Npo (9)

dxoNk ::::: XoNk+l - XDNk (4)

and similarly, the total dimensionless PV of water
injected is given as:
where k = 1, 2, 3, ............ etc.

Let at time t after the start of injection, the (10)

jth bed has broken through and the (j+1)th bed is
next to breakthrough. Define super-scripts " and -
on parameters for bed which have and have not
broken through respectively.
The oil produced from beds which have not
broken through in terms of the distance travelled
by the flood front in the least permeable bed is
given as:
Npo=
(5)
At the time when all the beds have broken
through, the values of :Npo and wiD are equal to
zero, and the calculations for the total oil produced
and water injected for the entire reservoir are
~iven by Eqs: (7) and (8) respectively. During this
time an arbitrary small time increment can be
used to proceed with the calculations. For details
of the calculation procedure, see the Appendix A.
Crossflow Index Orn
This index is a measured ratio of the amount
of maximum crossflow possible by the system, for
a set of given conditions, measured at 1 PV of
cummulative injection of water in that reservoir.

215
4 PREDICTION OF WATERFLOOD PERFORMANCE IN STRATIFIED RESERVOIRS
It ·is mathematically expressed as: (see Appendix
B)
(11)
OBSERYATIONS AND DISCUSSIONS
The two limiting analytical cases discussed
above were compared with the simulator results
for actual flooding conditions under varying
system parameters. The range of the parameters
is given in Table 1. The Table 2 lists the rock and
fluid properties used for the simulation studies.
These parameters are then transformed into
dimensionless parameters (see Appendix C) and
their effects on crossflow index, Ixp, (see Appendix
B) were also investigated.
The Dykstra-Parsons permeability variation
coefficient, V, was used to characterize the
stratified reservoir in this study. A wide range of
values of V with both bed ordering were chosen
(between 0.3 to 0.7). We used the term H and L to
represent the bed permeabilities arrangement
with the highest permeability on top and the
lowest permeability at. the bottom, and vice versa,
respectively.
The value of crossflow index OxF) is an
indication of the extent to which crossflow occurs.
For example, for the value of IxF close to one, we
can approximate the simulator solution with the
vertical equilibrium approximation. On the other
hand, for the value of IxF close to zero, we can
approximate the simulator solution with the no
crossflow approximation. As expected, all the
simulated results fall between the two limiting
analytical cases. If the difference between the two
limiting cases (in terms of oil recovered at one
pore volume of injected water) is very small (less
than 10%), the value of Ix F does not have
significant meaning, because any of the analytical
limiting cases can be used to predict the simulated
results. Therefore, if the difference between
limiting cases was found to be less than 10%, the
value of IxF was not computed. An example of
such a case is shown in Fig. 1. We found this to be
especially true where the mobility ratio was close
to one and the order of .beds was L.
. Figure 2 shows lxF versus the cumulative
water· injected (WiD) for the cases where the
difference between the oil recoveries. of the two
limiting cases is greater .than 10% of the total PV of
the reservoir. From this figure it is seen that IxF is
216
SPE 17289
a weak function of WiD· Therefore, it is assumed
that IxF calculated at WiD equal to 1 represents IxF
values during the entire life of the waterflood.
The effects of dimensionless parameters (as
defined in the Appendix C) on overall oil
recoveries were observed to be mobility ratio
dependent. Therefore, the discussion is divided
into two sections; one for the favorable mobility
ratio, and the other for the unfavorable mobility
ratio.
Effect of Mobility Ratio
It was observed that the oil recovery for
favorable values of M*, (M* < 1), is only a strong
function of ratio of vertical to horizontal
permeability, Rk (kz/kx). Figures 3 and 4 show
that as the values of Rk increases the oil recovery·
and amount of crossflow increase, and flow moves
toward the VE type of flow. However for values of
M* greater than 1, the oil recovery and crossflow
are functions of Rk, V and qi. At high injection rate
and for M* greater than 1, the effect of injection
rate (i.e., viscous force) is more predominant than
Rk (i.e., gravity force) and the trend of oil recovery
follows the isolated layer flow case (Fig. 5).
However at a low injection rate, the oil recovery is
more affected by gravity force than the viscous
force, as shown in Fig. 6. It can be seen that at
small value of Rkt the oil recovery follows the oil
recovery for isolated layer case; while for large
value of Rk it follows the vertical equilibrium case.
Therefore from the discussions above, the
effect on oil recovery is divided into two
categories:
(a) Favorable Values of M* (M* < 1)
Figure 7 shows graphical relation of IxF to RL
for values of M* less than 1. The graph
indicates that for RL values of 10 or greater,
the values of IxF are above 0.9, and for RL
values of 0.1 or less the values of IxF are less
than· 0.1. The results suggest that for
stratified reservoir with the value of R L
greater than 10, the recovery of
waterflooding is best described with the
analytical VE flow solution, and for value of
R L less than 0.1, the recovery is best
described with the analytical isolated layers
flow solution. This observation agrees with
the conclusion' by Zapata and Lake,4 although
they did not consider the effect of gravity.
From multiple linear regression analysis on
RL values between 0.1 and 10, the IxF can be
SPE 17289 R. Tompang and B. G. Kelkar
approximated by the correlation as given
below:
lxp = (0.70746) + 0.1778 In (RL)
+0.00341 ln(M*) (12)
with an averaged absolute error of 12%.
(b) Unfavorable values of M*. (M* > 1)
Figure 8 relates IxF to Rn graphically by
showing numerous points calculated from the
simulator's results with varying system and
fluid parameters for M* greater than 1. The
graph indicates that for Rn values of 0.1 or
greater, the values of IxF are above 0.9.
There results suggest that VB flow solution
would best describe , the behavior of
waterflood recovery of the stratified
reservoir. The graph also indicates that for
Rn values below 0.001, the system could be
best described with no crossflow.
From multiple regression analysis on
Rn values between 0.001 and 0.1, IxF can be
approximated by the correlation given below:
Ixp = In (0.8364 + 23.0622 Rn + 0.033 M*)
(13)
with 10% average absolute error.
CONCLUSIONS
1. At favorable value of M*, (¥* < 1), the oil
recovery and the crossflow index, Ixp,
calculated from the simulator were found
to be functionally dependent on the ratio
of vertical to horizontal permeability, Rk,
where Rk is a function of the effective
length to height ratio, RL. The oil recovery
and crossflow index were negligibly affected
by the injection rate, qi, and the bed
permeability ordering.
2. For favorable values of M* and a stratified
system with value of RL greater than 10,
the recovery of waterflooding is best
described with the analytical VB flow
solution. For value of RL less than 0.1, the oil
recovery is best described by the analytical
no crossflow solution.
3. For a value of M* close to 1, and the bed
permeability ordering equal to L, a
stratified system can be approximately
5
modelled by any of the two limiting cases
(i.e., VB or no crossflow case).
4. For unfavorable value of M*, (M* > 1), the
oil recovery and the fluid crossflow
calculated from the simulator were found
to be dependent on (a) injection rates, qh
(b) ratio of vertical to horizontal
permeability, Rk, (c) bed permeability
ordering, and (d) vertical permeability
variation.
5. For unfavorable value of M*, the
applicability of each limiting case model
for the resrvoir does not depend solely on
the vertical permeability. The response of
a reservoir to gravity and viscous
crossflow is more accurately determined
by its ratio of vertical to horizontal
pressure gradient, R0 . This study
indicates that a Rn value of approximately
0.001 or less allows the simulator results
to be described by the no crossflow model,
and a Rn value of approximately 0.1 or
greater allows the reservoir to be
described by the VB flow displacement.
6. An original solution of Reznik et ai.5 was
modified to include the effects of non-
piston like displacement in a stratified
reservoir. The modified solution appears
to be quite accurate and slightly under-
predicts the oil recovery for zero vertical
permeability case obtained from the
simulator. The small differences may have
resulted from computations of slopes on the
fractional flow curve, a requirement for the
analytical solution.
NOMENCLATURE
Symbol Description
A Cross-sectional area, ft2[m]2
EA Areal sweep efficiency
En Displacement efficiency
E1 Vertical sweep efficiency
E1s Vertical sweep efficiency from
simulator
6 PREDICTION OF WATERFLOOD PERFORMANCE IN STRATIFIED RESERVOIRS SPE 17289

Vertical sweep efficiency for Cumulative water injected, bbl

reservoir with no vertical [m3]
communication
Water injected in bed j, bbl [m3]
By Volumetric sweep efficiency

EVE Vertical sweep efficiency for Greek Symbols

vertical equilibrium condition
'Y Conductance ratio [also specific
Gravitational acceleration, ftlsec 2 gravity in Eq. (C~3)]
[mlsec 2 ] · ·
Difference
H Total weight of reservoir, ft [m]
Porosity
h Height of individual layer, ft [m]

Crossflow index p Fluid density, lblft3

IXF

k Absolute permeability, md Fluid viscosity, cp

k Thickness averaged absolute

permeability, md Subscripts

Relative permeability bt Breakthrough condition

Thickness averaged relative D Dimensionless (typically by

dividing the quantity by pore
permeability
volume)
L Length of reservoir, ft[m]
e Post breakthrough condition
M Mobility ratio
i initial condition
Np Oil production rate, rb/D [m31d]
j jth layer
p Pressure, psi [Pa]
0 oil
PV Dimensionless pore volume
or residual oil
q Flow rate, rb/D [m3I d] w water
Injection rate, rb/D [m3 I d] we connate water

Ro Vertical to horizontal pressure X x-direction

gradient ratio
z z-direction
Vertical to horizontal pressure
differential ratio
Superscripts
Vertical to horizontal
permeability ratio
* End point values

s Fluid saturation n Number of time steps after

breakthrough
s Averaged fluid saturation

t Time, day

218
SPE 17289 R. Tompang and B. G. Kelkar 7

Implies the quantity is evaluated
for pre-breakthrough beds
Implies the quantity is evaluated
for post breakthrough beds
8. Goddin, C. S., Jr., Craig, F. F., Jr., Wilkes, J. 0.
and Tek, M. R.: "A Numerical Study of
Waterflood .Performance in a Stratified
System with Crossflow," JPT (June, 1966),
765-771.

ACJ{NOWI.EOOEMENTS 9. Stiles, W. E.: "Use of Permeability

One of the authors (RT) would like to thank
Malaysian Petroleum Company Limited
(PETRONAS) for the financial sponsorship. provided
throughout this study. The authors would also like
to acknolwedge the help of The University of Tulsa
in providing the computer services. We thank the
Scientific Software, Inc. for donating BOSSAIM
program to the Petroleum Engineering Department
at The University of Tulsa.
REFERENCES
1. Coats, K. H., Nielsen, R. L., Terhune, M. H.,
and Weber, A. G.: "Simulation of Three-
Dimensional, Two-Phase Flow in Oil and
Gas Reservoir," .s..fE..L. (Dec. 1967), 377-388.
Distribution in Waterflood Calculations,"
Trans. AIME (1949) .l.SQ, 9-13.
10. Dykstra, H. and Parsons, R. L.: "The
Prediction of Oil Recovery by Waterflood,"
Secondary Recoyery of Oil in the United
SJm.£, API (1950) 160-174.
11 . Tompang, R.: "Relative Effects of
Gravitational and Viscous Forces on
Waterflooding in a Linear, Stratified
Reservoir," M. S. Thesis, University of
Tulsa, Tulsa, OK (1987).
APPENDIX A
Modified RFD Method <MRFP)

2. Coats, K. H., Dempsey, J. R., and Henderson,
J. H.: "The Use of Vertical Equilibrium in
Two-Dimensional Simulation of Three-
Dimensional Reservoir Performance," SPEJ.
(March, 1971), 63-71.
3. Hearn, C. L.: "Simulation of Stratified
Waterflooding by Pseudo Relative
Permeability Curves," JPT. (July, 1971),
805-813.
4. Zapata, V. J. and Lake, L. W.: "A
Theoretical Analysis of Viscous Crossflow,"
SPE 10111. Presented at the 56th Annual
Fall Technical Conference and Exhibition of
the SPE of AIME, held in San Antonio,
Texas, October 5-7, 1981.
5. Reznik, A. A., Enik, R. M., and Panvelker, S.
B.: "An Analytical Extension of the
Dykstra-Parson Vertical Stratification
Discrete Solution to a Continuous, Real-Time
Basis," SPEJ. (Dec., 1984) 643-656.
Consider a stratified reservoir with a total of
N layers with beds arranged in a descending order
of absolute permeabilities. The schematic of the
displacement is shown in Fig. A-1. The flood front
is assumed to be non-piston like. The mobility
ratio at the stable front is defined as
<krwiJ.t.w + YJ.Lo> Iswbt
Mbr • (A-1)
krofJ.Lo
The conductance ratio for bed j is defined as
(A-2)
where xnj is Xj/L and Xj is the distance travelled
by flood front in bed j. The distance travelled in
bed j can be expressed in terms of the distance
travelled in the least permeable bed (bed N) as
1
Xoj = 1 _ MbJ Ja'+b~xo~~xk - Mbt] (A-3)

6. Welge, H. J.: "A Simplified Method for where

Computing Oil Recovery by Gas or Water a'=~t
Drive," Trans. AIME, (1952), .1.2i, 91-108.
I k•
bj = 2Mbt(l - MbJ k~ (A-4)
7. Rapoport, L. A.: "Scaling Laws for Use in
Design and Operation of Water-Oil Flow I 2k•
Models," Trans. AIME (1955), 204, 143. C· = (1 - MbJ ..L
J kN

219
8 PREDICTION OF WATERFLOOD PERFORMANCE IN STRATIFIED RESERVOIRS SPE 17289

~n-1 = (~/J.lw ~ kdJ.lo)S~j

1
The average saturation behind the front is
calculated by Welge's method. The same technique (A-10)
is used for average saturation in each bed after the ~JJ.lo
breakthrough; (For details, see Tompang 11 ). Let
us assume that at time t j 1h bed has already The amount of water injected during the time
broken through. For all the beds below j, the oil increment ll t is calculated as
produced is given by
(A-ll)

Cumulative water injected is calculated as

(A-12)
(A-5)
Knowing the cumulative water injected, the
(the notations ,.., and A are used for yet to derivative of fractional flow is calculated as
breakthrough and brokenthrough beds
respectively.) The water injected would be the 'n 1
fwj= -,.- (A-13)
same as the oil produced for the beds below j. WOj
- -
Wm=Npo (A-6) where Woj is ratio of Wj to pore volume of bed j.
The value of derivative of fractional flow will be
For all the beds ·above j we can relate the oil used to calculate average saturation for the next
recovery to incremental time, ll t, required for the time step using Welge's method. The cumulative
oil produced from the beds which have already
flood front to travel from distance xo N k to xo N k + 1
broken through is given as
in the least permeable bed. If we assume an
increment in the least permeable bed, ll t can be
calculated as (A-14)

The total water injected from the bed which have

already broken through is

" ~hi n
Wrn= ~H'Woj (A-15)
i=l
(A-7) Therefore the total oil produced is

For the beds which have broken through, the - 1\

injection rate in those beds can be related to initial NpDT = Npo + Npo (A.;...16)
injection rates in those beds. The initial injection
rate in each bed is proportional to permeability of and the water injected is
that bed, and the total initial injection rate.
- 1\
wiDT= Wrn + w rn (A-17)
(A-8)
APPENPIXB
where(qi)j represents the initial injection rate in
bed j and n represents the time step after the bed Crossflow Index. Ixp
has broken through. The conductance ratio 'Yjn for
the bed j can be approximated as This index is a measured ratio of the amount
of maximum crossflow possible by the system at 1
PV of injected fluid. It is mathematically
(A-9)
expressed as:

where Mjn-l is the mobility ratio in bed j .after

(B-1)
breakthrough for (n-1)1h time step.

220
SPE 17289 R. Tompang and B. G. Kelkar 9
...
where,
M* = Yllw =[mobility of displacing fluid] (C- 1)
~JJ.lo - mobility of displaced fluid
E1s is the vertical sweep efficiency from
simulator

ENV is the vertical sweep efficiency for

no crossflow (REP or MREP methods,
depending on the nature of the front
R =
L
!:Jf-
H
= [effective length]
_ -
kx
effective height (C-2)

in each bed), and,

EVE is the vertical sweep efficiency for

maximum vertical communication
under fully segregated flow
conditions (VE concepts to generate
_ [ vertical pressure differential J (C-3)
= horizontal pressure differential
pseudo properties and then using
the Welge's graphical technique).
~=RoxRL
IxF is bounded by 0 and 1 with 1 being the
asymptotic maximum limit. This limit is attained
as E1s approaches EvE· IxF = 0 when E1s =ENv·
1.127 X 1 c-3~ 0.4335 (!l:y) Ax
Ro=--------~~------------
qi J.l.o
APPENDIXC
=[ vertical pressure gradient J (C-4)
- horizontal pressure gradient
In this study, three types of dimensionless
groups are of interest. A single differential
equation was written by combining the continuity
equation with Darcy's law for both horizontal and -
Note: kz is the harmonic average of vertical
vertical flow through a uniformly anistropic
formation. The resulting equation accounts for the permeability values; whereas, kx is the arithmetic
properties of all the fluids involved and the rock average of horizontal permeability values.
' properties. The following dimensionless groups
are in Field units and similar to that described by
Rapoport7 and Goddin ~Lal..S

221
 seE 17289

TABLE 1
Range of Parameters for Simulation Studies

Reservoir Length, L = 800 ft [262.5 m]

Reservoir Width, W = 50 ft [16.4 m]

Total Reservoir Height, H = 40 ft [13.1 m]

Thickness of each layer, hi =8ft [2.6 m]

Injection Rate, qi = 20 b/d - 500 b/d

[3.18 m3/d - 79.5 m3/d]

Coefficient of Variance (V) = 0.3 - 0.7

Order of Beds Descending order

(Highest permeability at the
top)
and Ascending order
(Lowest permeability at the
top)

TABLE 2
Rock and Fluid Properties Used for Simulation Studies

1) R~latiy~ Perm~abilit~ Values

.s.lY: kl.l!l;,....-----k.LQ

0.160 0.000 0.900

0.180 0.010 0.750
0.200 0.020 0.680
0.225 0.025 0.550
0.250 0.030 0.460
0.300 0.040 0.320
0.400 0.070 0.130
0.500 0.100 0.040
0.550 0.125 0.025
0.600 0.160 0.020
0.650 0.200 0.015
0.750 0.300 0.005
0 800 0.400 0.000

2) Qil PrQJ:!~rti~~

Formation volume factor, Bo = 1.176 rb/STB

Density of oil = 48.65 lb/SCF

[778.9 kg/m3]

Oil Viscosities = 0.4, 0.6, 4.0 and 22.5 cp

[0.0004, 0.0006, 0.004 and
0.0225 Pa · s]

3) WMer Properties

Formation volume factor, Bw = 1.0 rb/STB

Density of Water = 62.4 lb/SCF

[999.0 kg/m3]

Water Viscosity = 1.0 cp [0.001 Pa•s]

222
 0.7~--~~--~--~---.---r--,---.---r--. 1.0 I IJ IJ ;::: ~ o--o--o--o--o-- IJ IJ IJ A

>o.6
~

v M* q
IJ 0.7H 1.78 20b/D
<> 0.3H 10 20b/D
k. ~
0.7L · 10 20b/D
X
..... X 0.7L 10 500 b/0
0 0.7H 10 500 b/0
0.4 + 0.3H 10 500 b/0

x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-...-x-x-x--a-a-a-x

00 0.4 0.8 1.2 2.0 00 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6

CUM. WATER INJECTED, WiD CUM.WATER INJECTED, Wio [PV]
Fig. 1-011 produced as a function of water Injected [M" =0.9, V=0.7L) . Fig. 2-The effect of injected water on crossflow Index.

..,........

o. 7 1 --.-___,--,--.-.-----r--.--r-___,.-......-----.-- 0.7

> 0.6
VERTICAL
~ 0.6,
~ VERTICAL
EQUILIBRIUM EQUILIBRIUM
fo.st
0
LIJ
a
LIJ 0.4
0 0
::l ::l
c c
0 0
a:: a::
IL. IL.
....J ....J

~ V-'~
I
0 aRk= 1
a Rk= I
~ Rk = 0.1
:E
::l
0
0.1
~ Rk =0.1
+ Rk =0.001
a 0.1 + Rk = 0.001 ·en
j"'lJ
m
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 ....
"'"
CUM. WATER INJECTED, Wio [PV] CUM.WATERINJECTED,Wio [PV]
Fig. 3-Effect of permeability ratio on oil produced [M" =0.178, q 1=20 B/0, V=0.7H). Rg. 4-Effect of permeability ratio on oil produced [1\1" =0.178, q 1 =500 B/0, V=0.7H).
co
~
 SPE 1 7 2 8 q-·

0.7 0. 7 ----r----r----r----r---r---r---r-----,---r--,

>a..
~
VERTICAL >
~
0.6
EQUILIBRIUM 0

~0.5
z
cl
LLJ
c
LLJ
(.) (.)
::;:) ::;:)
0 0
0 0
a:: a::
a.. a..
...J o Rk =I ...J
0 5 o Rk =I
+ Rk =0.001
~ :E
::;:)
(.) 0.1 B o.1 + Rk =0.001

oo---~--._--~--~--~--_. ___.__ ~--~--~

0~--~--~--~~~~~~--~--~--~--~
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2.0 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2.0
CUM. WATER INJECTED, WiD [PV) CUM. WATER INJECTED, WiD [PV]
Fig. 5-Effect ol permeability ratio on oil produced [M" =1.78, q 1=500 BID, V=0.7H]. Fig. 6-Effect ol permeability ratio on oil produced [M" =1.78, q 1=20 B/D, V=0.7H].

1.0

0 o M* = 1.78
+ M* = 10
0.8 (
~

0.6
"- "-
X
X
..... .....
0.4
o M* = 0.6
6 M* = 0.178

+ M* = 0.178

10

Fig. 7-Effect ol permeability ratio on crossllow Index lor M•51. Fig. 8-Effect ol pressure gradient ratio on cross flow Index lor M • > 1.

Injection

Fig. A·1-Schematlc diagram ol noncommunlcatlng stratified dis-

placement.

224