Field Scale Simulation of Cyclic Solvent Injection (CSI) 1

SPE 157804
Field Scale Simulation of Cyclic Solvent Injection (CSI)

Jeannine Chang, Devon Canada
John Ivory, Alberta Innovates - Technology Futures
Copyright 2012, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Heavy Oil Conference Canada held in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 1214 June 2012.

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 have not been
reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its
officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to
reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract

Only 5 - 10% of the oil in Lloydminster heavy oil reservoirs is recovered during cold production with sand (CHOPS). Cyclic
solvent injection (CSI) is the most promising post-CHOPS follow-up process. In CSI, a solvent mixture (e.g. methane-
propane) is injected and allowed to soak into the reservoir before production begins (Figure 1). CSI has been focused on
heavy oil recovery from post-CHOPS reservoirs that are too thin for an economic steam-based process. It has been piloted
by NEXEN and by Husky and was a fundamental part of the $40 million Joint Implementation of Vapour Extraction (JIVE)
solvent pilot program that ran from 20062010.

This paper describes field scale simulations of CSI performed with a comprehensive numerical model that uses mass
transfer rate equations to represent non-equilibrium solvent solubility behaviour i.e. there is a delay before the solvent
reaches its equilibrium solubility in oil. The model contains mechanisms to consider foaming or to ignore it depending on
the field behaviour. It has been used to match laboratory experiments, design CSI operating strategies, and to interpret CSI
field pilot results.

The paper summarizes the impact on simulation predictions of post-CHOPS reservoir characterizations where the wormhole
region was represented by one of the following five configurations: (1) an effective high permeability zone, (2) a dual
permeability zone, (3) a dilated zone around the well, (4) wormholes (20 cm diameter spokes) extending from the well
without branching, (5) wormholes extending from the well with branching from the main wormholes,. The different post-
CHOPS configurations lead to dramatically different reservoir access for solvent and to different predictions of CSI
performance.

The impacts of grid size, upscaling, well inflow parameter, solvent dissolution and exsolution rate constants, and injection
strategy were examined. The assumption of instant equilibrium solubility resulted in a 23% reduction in oil production
compared to when a delay in solvent dissolution and exsolution was allowed for. Increasing the grid block size by a factor of
9 reduced the predicted oil production five-fold. Assuming isothermal behaviour in the simulations decreased predicted oil
production by 17%.
Introduction
Primary cold production of heavy oil with sand (CHOPS) is commonly used in Lloydminster and Cold Lake to produce heavy oil
reservoirs (Sawatzky et al., 2002). As a result of reservoir pressure depletion and/or excessive water production, CHOPS becomes
uneconomic after about 5 - 15% of the initial oil has been recovered. Detailed studies of the cold production process have previously been
presented (Bratli et al., 1981, 1998, Chang 2000, Dusseault et al., 1989, 1998, and 1999, Geilikman and Dusseault 1997 and 1999, Risnes
et al., 1982, Sawatzky et al., 1996, 2002, and Tremblay et al., 1998, 1999, 2003, and 2009).

CSI has shown potential as a follow-up oil recovery process to CHOPS and has undergone pilot testing. Wormholes, created during
CHOPS, extend outward from production wells and provide access for solvent injection during CSI and larger contact area for solvent
dissolution in oil. Laboratory scale numerical simulation of CSI has been investigated at Alberta Innovates Technology Futures (AITF)
for a number of years (Ivory et al., 2010) and a focus is now to use the previous learnings to improve field scale simulation of CSI as well
2 SPE 157804
as other solvent processes such as VAPEX and solvent drive thereby facilitating the development of improved injection and production
strategies. Improved representations of complex mechanisms such as non-equilibrium dissolution and exsolution of solvent, foamy oil
behaviour, and relative permeability hysteresis are being developed. In particular, the physical delay in both gas dissolution and gas
exsolution is represented by non-equilibrium behavior during both injection and production periods. In developing the CSI numerical
simulation models, the non-equilibrium representation of solvent (e.g. methane and propane) solubility, solvent/oil mixture
(methane/propane/oil mixture) viscosities, and the mixing parameters (diffusion, dispersion) of the process were incorporated into the
reservoir fluid model. Previous work at AITF for a laboratory scale experiment showed the difference between the predicted propane mole
fraction in oil and its equilibrium value during six CSI cycles (Figure 2). Predicted values for the CO
2
- propane injection experiment were
dramatically different when non-equilibrium solubility effects were considered relative to when they were ignored (Table 1). Allowance
for non-equilibrium behaviour also affects the bottomhole pressure (BHP) during injection periods in field scale simulations (Figure 3).
For confidentiality reasons, the actual values are not shown in Figure 3. In general, the quicker the solvent dissolution the slower is the rise
in BHP during injection periods.

Table 1: Comparison of non-equilibrium and instant equilibrium simulation predictions

In predicting the effectiveness of CSI and in developing operating strategies, the assumed post-CHOPS reservoir situation resulting
from sand production is of key importance. AITF has developed its sand production model, which is supported in CMG STARS, and is an
Effective Permeability model in that the regions with a wormhole network are approximated with a high permeability determined by the
sand production model. For due diligence, other post-CHOPS representations can be considered. In this paper, the effectiveness of CSI
was investigated for the following post-CHOPS representations (Figure 4): (1) an effective high permeability zone, (2) a dual permeability
zone (3) a dilated zone around the well, (4) wormholes (20 cm diameter spokes) extending from the well without branching, (5) wormholes
extending from the well with branching from the main wormholes.

Simulations were performed to examine the impact of:

o Using non-equilibrium dissolution and exsolution reaction kinetics to represent delays in solvent dissolution and exsolution
o Non-equilibrium solubility rate parameters
o Instant equilibrium versus non-equilibrium dissolution and exsolution
o Grid block size
Development of CSI Models at AITF
Over the years, CSI models have been developed at AITF (formerly Alberta Research Council) based on non-equilibrium gas
dissolution and exsolution behavior in solvent injection processes. In these models, the delay in a gaseous component dissolving or
exsolving from the oil depends on the difference between its current concentration in the oil phase (x
i
) and its equilibrium concentration in
the oil phase (x
ieqm
). The latter is determined from its mole fraction in the gas phase, the temperature, and the pressure.

Equilibrium PVT behaviour is represented by the use of K values for each component i as follows:
i
i
i
x
y
K =
(1)
Where:
x
i
= equilibrium mole fraction of i in oil phase and y
i
= equilibrium mole fraction of i in gas phase.

In the CMG STARS simulator, the equilibrium K value of a specific gas is calculated using a modified version of the Antoine
Equation,
)
) (
exp( ) (
5
4
3 2
1
kv T
kv
kv P kv
P
kv
K
+ + =
(2)
Where:
P = pressure (kPa)
T = temperature (K)
kv
1
, kv
2
, kv
3
, kv
4
, kv
5
= coefficients for specific gases

The CH
4
and C
3
H
8
kv values that were used in the simulations are provided in Table 2.

Cumulative
Oil
(cm
3
)
C
3
H
8

Recovery
(%)
CO
2

Recovery
(%)
Nett Solvent-
Oil Ratio
(liq cm
3
/cm
3
)
Non-Equilibrium 1,698 72.8 64.1 0.60
Instant Equilibrium 809 92.3 97.4 0.34
SPE 157804 3
Table 2: Methane and propane kv values used in the simulations

Gas Dissolution

The non-equilibrium behaviour of gas dissolution in oil is represented by:

CH4G + CH4L 2 CH4L (3)
C3H8G + C3H8L 2 C3H8L (4)

Where:
CH4L is dissolved methane in the oil phase
CH4G is methane in the gaseous phase
C3H8L is dissolved propane in the oil phase
C3H8G is propane in the gaseous phase

The dissolution rate for propane is:

( )
2
8 3
1
8 3 8 3
*
8 3
* * *
8 3
n
G H C g
n
L H C Geqm H C o H C
y N x x N k
t
N
L H C
=
c
c

Where:
k = rate constant for propane dissolution m
3
/moles/d if n1 = n2 = 1
N
g
= Moles of gas phase/m
3
of grid block
N
C3H8L
= Moles of propane in the oil phase/m
3
of grid block
N
o
= Moles of oil phase/m
3
of grid block
= Porosity *oil saturation * oil molar density
n1 = exponent for x
C3H8eqm
- x
C3H8

n2 = exponent for y
C3H8

The rate equation constants k
C3H8
, n1, and n2, can be determined from experimental results e.g. by history matching laboratory
experiments or field tests. Similar equations are used for methane dissolution.

The rate constants are dependent on temperature but because of the small temperature changes and because of the lack of
experimental data available to determine this dependency, they were assumed to be independent of temperature in the simulations
discussed in this report. Allowance for the temperature dependency of the rate constants is available in STARS.

Gas Exsolution

Non-equilibrium gas exsolution with foam formation is represented as follows for CH
4
and C
3
H
8
by:

CH4L SBubCH4 CH4G (5)
C3H8L SBubC3H8 C3H8G (6)

Where:
SBubCH4 is a small CH
4
bubble in the oil phase
SBubC3H8 is a small C
3
H
8
bubble in the oil phase

Unless specified otherwise, a non-equilibrium treatment was used in this project for both gas dissolution and exsolution. As a result of
non-equilibrium behaviour, solvent components can still be dissolving at the beginning of a production period and come out of solution
(exsolve) during the initial part of an injection period. Thus, although the simulations are slower, it is more representative of CSI to
include all of the exsolution and reactions during both injection and production periods.

Methane Propane
kv
1
(kPa) 476,664 726,374
kv
2
(kPa
-1
) 0 0
kv
3
0 0
kv
4
(C) -879.84 -1,872.46
kv
5
(C) -265.99 -247.99
4 SPE 157804
Solvent/Oil Mixture Viscosity

The STARS default logarithmic mixing rule was used to determine the oil phase viscosity.

( ) ( ) ( )
=
i i oil live
X ln ln (7)

Where:
i
= the pseudo-viscosity of component i.

The dead oil viscosity and the dissolved methane and propane pseudo-viscosities at 23.4 C are provided in Figure 5. The dead oil
viscosity at this temperature was 18,775 mPa.s. A rock compressibility of 2.9 x 10
-6
kPa
-1
was used. Small gas bubbles were assigned a
molar density of 41 gmol/STD m
3
as obtained from the Ideal Gas Law.

Solvent/Oil Mixing Process

Solvent and oil are mixed in a reservoir as a result of the combined effect of convection, diffusion, dispersion, and dissolution. In
diffusion, the flow of a component towards regions of lower concentration in a fluid phase is represented by Fick's First Law:

k C D S J
ij mij j ijk
o o | / ) ( = (8)

Where:
ijk
J = Flux of component i in phase j in k direction (gmoles/m
2
/d)
| = Porosity
S
j
= Saturation of phase j
Dm
ij
= Molecular diffusion coefficient of component i in phase j (m
2
/d)
oC
ij
/ok = Concentration gradient of component i in phase j in k direction (gmoles/m
3
/m)

In a porous media, allowance is made for the increased flow length caused by tortuous flow paths through the pore spaces. As a
result, the apparent diffusion coefficient (D) used for porous media is lower than the molecular diffusion coefficient and:

t
m
D D = (9)

Where:
t = tortuosity.

Individual streamlines flow in a tortuous route through porous media. A "fluid particle" can transfer (disperse) from one
streamline to another by diffusion or through turbulent eddies that disrupt the streamlines. Mechanical dispersion in porous media arises
from complex flow paths, which create mechanical mixing that is independent of molecular diffusion. It is caused by velocity gradients,
heterogeneous flow paths, and mechanical mixing.

Both longitudinal (in direction of flow) and lateral (orthogonal to flow) mixing are controlled by diffusion at low velocities and
by convection at high velocities. Velocity variations parallel to the mean flow direction are greater than those that are perpendicular to the
main flow. Thus, longitudinal dispersion is greater than transverse dispersion. At high velocities, Blackwell (1962) observed that
longitudinal dispersion was about 24 times that of lateral dispersion.

Neuman (1990) examined over 130 longitudinal dispersivity values obtained from world-wide lab and field tracer studies in
porous and fractured media. The dispersivity values ranged from less than 1 mm to greater than 1 km for studies ranging from less than 10
cm to greater than 100 km.

For laminar flow conditions in typical unconsolidated, random packs, dispersion correlations can be represented as follows
(Perkins and Johnston, 1963):

Longitudinal dispersion correlation:
1
0.5 where 50
p p
L
m m m
ud ud
K
D F D D
o
o
|
= + <
(10)

Transverse dispersion correlation:
4
1
0.0157 where 10
p p
T
m m m
ud ud
K
D F D D
o
o
|
= + <
(11)

Where: D
m
= Molecular diffusion coefficient
d
p
= Particle diameter
SPE 157804 5
u = Local fluid velocity
o = Inhomogeneity factor
F = Formation factor = 1/(t) also used for quantifying electrical conductivity through porous media

In the simulations discussed in this report, a gas phase diffusion coefficient of 0.0144 m
2
/d and an oil phase diffusion coefficient of
0.0000432 m
2
/d were used. A mechanical dispersion coefficient of 0.005 m was used for both the gas and oil phases. The diffusion and
dispersion coefficients were assumed to be independent of direction. No allowance was made for the fact that the apparent diffusion and
dispersion coefficients are different for regions with wormholes due to their impact on tortuosity and flow patterns and velocities.

The oil-water and oil-gas relative permeability values were based on Stone's Method 2 with gas phase relative permeabilities
being lower during production periods because of the impact of trapped gas bubbles. The irreducible water saturation was 0.37, the critical
gas saturation was 0.05, the water-oil residual oil saturation was 0.29 and the gas-oil residual oil saturation was 0.15.

The complex interaction between solvent exsolution and exsolution and fluid flow in a reservoir model is represented in Figure 6.
CSI Simulations for Post-CHOPS Reservoir Characterization based on AITF CHOPS
Model

For the Effective Permeability model, 2-D radial primary production simulations were first performed for an actual Lloydminster
well using AITF's sand transport and foamy oil models and the post-CHOPS reservoir results were then converted to a Cartesian grid for
the CSI simulations.

Initial Pre-CHOPS Reservoir Conditions

Some initial reservoir conditions were:

Pressure = 3,300 kPaa
Temperature = 23.4 C
Dead oil viscosity = 18,775 mPa.s
GOR = 7 std m
3
/m
3

Other pre-CHOPS reservoir conditions are provided in Table 3.

A good match of oil and water production during CHOPS was obtained (Figures 7a and 7b). The post-CHOPS permeability,
porosity, saturations, and oil phase mole fractions obtained from the history match were used as the initial conditions for simulating the
solvent cycles. As it was the only layer with relatively high porosity and permeability, Layer 4 (K = 4) was the layer where the CHOPS
simulations predicted that wormhole formation would occur. The increased permeability occurring from the creation of wormholes was
represented by high effective permeability values in the Layer 4 grid blocks (Figure 8).

Injection-Production Strategy

In this study, CSI generally consisted of three injection-production cycles in which the production period was 180 days in each
cycle and the injection period was 30 days in Cycle 1, 40 days in Cycle 2, and 50 days in Cycle 3. The composition of the injected gas was
60% methane and 40% propane and the specified gas injection rate was 20,000 STD m
3
/d in each cycle until the injection pressure
constraint of 3.5 MPaa was reached and the injection rate declined. Standard (surface) conditions were 15 C and 101.3 kPaa.

During production, the minimum bottom-hole pressure (BHP) was specified as either 150 or 200 kPaa, the maximum gas
production rate as 20,000 STD m
3
/d and the maximum liquid rate at downhole conditions as 50 m
3
/d.

6 SPE 157804
Table 3: Pre-CHOPS reservoir properties

Results for Effective Permeability Simulations

Effect of I ncreasing Reaction Rate Constants

Increasing the dissolution and exsolution reaction rate constants (frequency factors) by a factor of 100 enhanced solvent
injectivity and decreased the BHP during an injection period. Oil production was marginally decreased by 2% from 3,524 to 3,453 m
3
in
the first cycle but the nett propane to oil ratio was dramatically increased from 0.04 to 0.15 liquid m
3
/m
3
.

Effect of Grid Block Size - Upscaling

One-quarter symmetry was used in all of the CSI simulations and they covered one-quarter of the 400 m x 400 m area in which
the vertical CSI well was in the centre. A 36 x 36 x 7 Cartesian grid was used for most of the simulations.

Table 4: Effect of frequency factors and dispersion coefficients

Run Grid
FF Dissolution
(m
3
/gmole/day)
FF
Exsolution
(day
-1
)
Dispersion
Coefficient
(m)
CSI Cumulative Oil at End
of Cycle - Full well basis
(m
3
)
Nett propane/Oil
(liquid m
3
/m
3
)
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3
Cycle
1
Cycle
2
Cycle
3
Baseline Fine 0.0005 0.0005 0.005 4,139 9,041 13,769 0.15 0.03 0.03
Upscale
1
Coarse 0.0005 0.0005 0.005 322 1,343 2,788 2.08 0.68 0.36
Upscale
2
Coarse 0.00005 0.00005 0.005 3,003 4,792 - 0.16 0.30 -
Upscale
3
Coarse 0.05 0.05 0.005 4,206 7,584 10,968 0.04 0.03 0.05
Upscale
4
Coarse 0.5 0.5 0.005 4,871 7,245 9,199 0.00 0.00 0.00
Upscale
5
Coarse 0.05 0.0005 0.005 4,059 7,982 11,651 0.05 0.04 0.04
Upscale
6
Coarse 0.0005 0.05 0.005 4,382 8,688 12,285 0.11 0.08 0.07
Upscale
7
Coarse 0.0005 0.0005 0 4,198 8,830 11,763 0.13 0.03 0.00
Upscale
8
Coarse 0.0005 0.0005 0.1 4,339 8,872 13,510 0.12 0.11 0.09
Some simulations were performed using a 16 x 16 x 7 grid with larger grid blocks (Figure 9) in order to increase simulation
speed. When all other parameters remained the same, the use of the coarse grid resulted in a much quicker reduction in BHP during
production (Figure 10a) and much lower oil rates (Figure 10b). Adjustments of dissolution and exsolution rate parameters and of
Layer
Thickness
(m)
S
o
S
w
|
Perm.
(md)
7 (top) 0.15 0.0 1.0 0.05 0.02
6 0.23 0.37 0.63 0.20 40.8
5 0.53 0.70 0.30 0.26 277.1
4 0.99 0.79 0.21 0.31 1,563
3 1.14 0.66 0.34 0.25 290.7
2 0.38 0.55 0.45 0.14 11.1
1 0.15 0.15 0.85 0.06 0.0
SPE 157804 7
dispersion coefficients can be made to compensate for changes in predicted oil and gas production caused by increasing the size of grid
blocks. Simulation run Upscale 1 in Table 4 had the same kinetic parameters and dispersion coefficients as the baseline fine grid run and
the predicted oil production was an order of magnitude less than for the fine grid. Changing the frequency factor rate parameters
significantly impacted predictions (Upscale 2 to Upscale 6) as did changing the dispersion coefficients (Upscale 7 and Upscale 8).
For example, Upscale 6 had the rate constant for the exsolution reactions increased from 0.0005 to 0.05 day
-1
and resulted in a reasonable
approximation to the fine grid case in terms of gas injection, oil production and nett solvent to oil ratio (Table 4 and Figure 11).
Alternatively, increasing the dispersion coefficients from 0.005 to 0.1 m (Upscale 8) also resulted in similar results to the fine grid case.
Decreasing the dispersion coefficients to 0 m (Upscale 7) resulted in satisfactory oil production but the nett solvent to oil ratio was much
lower than for the fine grid case. Fine tuning of the dispersion coefficients and/or non-equilibrium parameters can result in a close match
for oil, water, and gas production between coarse and fine grid predictions.

I sothermal versus Non-I sothermal Simulations

Performing non-isothermal simulations resulted in increased oil production in Cycle 1 by 17% (from 3,524 to 4,139 m
3
, Table 5)
but the nett propane/oil ratio ratio (propane left in reservoir/oil produced) was unchanged at 0.15 at liquid m
3
/m
3
. Due to the heat of
solution, the temperature rises during solvent dissolution in the oil and falls during solvent exsolution. During solvent dissolution, the
rising temperature affects predictions as it causes a decrease in both the viscosity of the live oil components (dead oil, dissolved methane,
and dissolved propane) and the solubility of methane and propane. Allowing for non-isothermal behaviour typically slows down
simulations so this must be considered when deciding whether to use it. Many of the simulations discussed in this paper were based on
non-isothermal conditions.

Table 5: Isothermal versus non-isothermal predictions

Oil Production
(m
3
)
Nett Propane/Oil
(liquid m
3
/m
3
)
Isothermal 3,524 0.15
Non-
isothermal
4,139 0.15

Equilibrium versus Non-Equilibrium Solubility

Ignoring non-equilibrium behaviour dramatically impacts predictions and is difficult to justify. The use of instant equilibrium
results in more rapid gas exsolution when the pressure is decreased during production and low oil production due to the severe reduction in
the reservoir pressure and the elimination of bubble creation and foamy oil drive. In addition, the initial high gas flow rate negatively
impacts oil production. Assuming that equilibrium solvent solubility is immediately obtained during both dissolution and exsolution
resulted in lower injection pressures, greater gas injection and production, and lower oil production over 3 cycles (Figures 12 and 13). Oil
production was marginally greater in Cycle 1 for the instant equilibrium situation but was much lower in Cycles 2 and 3.

As propane dissolved much more rapidly in oil for the instant equilibrium solubility simulations, these simulations predicted
much lower reservoir pressures during an injection period than did non-equilibrium solubility simulations (Figure 14). This also results in
reduced injection pressure as shown in Figure 3. The 2-D IJ profiles are shown for Layer 4 in this figure as this was the layer with a high
effective permeability. I refers to the grid block number in the X direction and J to the grid block number in the Y direction. During a
production period, the pressure decreased more slowly in the instant equilibrium simulations as propane came rapidly out of solution and
helped maintain the reservoir pressure. In contrast, much of the propane was produced in the oil phase in the non-equilibrium simulations.

Effect of Extra Exsolution Reaction

Foamy oil behaviour during exsolution is represented in AITF CSI models by assuming that each dissolved component first
forms small pure bubbles dispersed in the oil phase prior to entering the free gas. A refined parallel model allows for cases where rapid gas
exsolution occurs. The parallel bubble destruction reaction can also remove small bubbles created during CHOPS prior to solvent
injection.

Use of the reaction bypassing bubble formation resulted in greater gas production in Cycle 1 as gas could exsolve more quickly
from solution (Figure 15a). In addition, oil production over 2 cycles was increased by 9% from 9,041 to 9,871 m
3
(Figure 15b) by
incorporating the extra gas exsolution reaction. Although the new reaction competed with the bubble forming reaction, it actually
increased the amount of free bubbles produced at the well as a result of its effect in increasing the pressure drawdown rate during
production due to increased gas production (Figures 16a, 16b, and 16c).

8 SPE 157804

Simulation Speed

Due to the complexity of the simulations, simulation speed was an issue. Parallel processing was routinely used with little
difficulty although run speed was still slow. Dynamic refined gridding was tried but due to the cyclic nature of the process (resulting in
constantly changing conditions) and numerical difficulties in simulating CSI, dynamic gridding had limited success and even impacted the
results. The use of DynaGrid (based on oil phase mole fraction differences) reduced the predicted oil production by 28% and increased the
predicted gas production by 22%. Thus, the selection of DynaGrid parameters needs to be improved for CSI simulations so as to increase
simulation speed and minimize changes in results resulting from block amalgamations. Other DynaGrid simulations were made using
different constraints (difference in pressure, gas phase mole fractions, and/or global mole fractions between grid blocks) and they too were
unsuccessful.

Alternative Post-CHOPS Characterizations

Reservoir Models Considered

In addition, to the AITF Effective Permeability model, CSI performance was predicted using a number of other models (Figure 4)
after first performing primary production simulations. For the Dual Permeability, Dilated Zone, Spokes, and Spokes & Branches models,
the simulations started at the initial pre-CHOPS pressure, temperature, and saturations with the pressure being drawn down prior to the
initiation of CSI. Non-equilibrium solubility conditions were used for most of the Effective Permeability model simulations and for the
Spokes and Spokes & Branches simulations.

Dual Permeability Model

A Dual Permeability model (Figure 4b) was set up with fractures in Layer 4. The matrix represents the intact reservoir and the
fractures represent the wormhole network. The fluid flow between the matrix and fracture represents the fluid flow between the intact
reservoir and the wormhole network. The fracture porosity (= fracture volume/block volume) selected was 0.0067 and the fracture
permeability was 10,000 Darcy. The horizontal fractures were spaced 10 cm apart. The initial properties (pressure, temperature,
permeability, porosity, saturations) in the reservoir matrix were the same as those pre-CHOPS values that were used to obtain the initial
(post-CHOPS) reservoir for the Effective Permeability model. Primary production was modelled without sand production and instant
equilibrium solubility behavior was assumed because simulation of non-equilibrium behavior was slow and unstable.

Dilated Zone Model

In the Dilated Zone model (Figure 4c), it was assumed that there was dilation in a region (153.28 m x 153.28 m = 23,525 m
2
on a
full well basis) around the well causing a high permeability (1,000 Darcy) there and that there was no wormhole formation. As a result of
slow run times, an instant equilibrium model was used to represent CSI. The high permeability region was in place at the beginning of
primary production.

Spokes Model

In the spokes model, it was assumed that wormholes emanated from the well (Figure 4d). The spokes were only in Layer 4 as it
was assumed that this was the only layer with high enough porosity and permeability for wormholes to develop during CHOPS. The
spokes were represented by 20 cm diameter source-sink horizontal wells whose length increased with time during primary production as
shown in Table 6. The spokes were assigned a maximum BHP during injection of 3,500 kPaa and a minimum BHP during production of
200 kPaa. It was assumed that if large diameter wormholes did exist then the pressure drop in them would be low and they could be
represented by source-sink horizontal wells. Representation of the spokes as shut-in horizontal wells where backflow is permitted rather
than as producers with a specified minimum BHP (e.g. 150 kPaa) or as injectors with a maximum BHP (e.g. 3,500 kPaa) is an alternative
approach that will be evaluated in the future.

Bubble
destruction
Bubble
formation
Dissolved Gas
Small Bubbles
Free Gas
SPE 157804 9
Spokes & Branches Model

The Spokes and Branches model included 20 cm diameter spokes extending in Layer 4 from the CSI well with offshoot 20 cm
diameter branches emanating from the spokes (Table 6 and Figure 4e). The branches were orthogonal to the spokes from which they
emanated.

Table 6: Length of spokes and branches versus time

Time
(days)
Spoke 1
Length
(days)
Spoke 2
Length
(days)
Spoke 3
Length
(days)
Branch 1
Length
(days)
Branch 2
Length
(days)
0 0.2 0.2 3.2 0 0
12 8.4 8.4 11.9 8.4 8.4
26 21.4 21.4 30.2 21.4 21.4
40 34.4 34.4 48.6 34.4 34.4
54 47.3 47.3 66.9 34.4 34.4
68 60.3 60.3 85.3 34.4 34.4
83 73.3 73.3 103.7 34.4 34.4
98 86.3 86.3 122.0 34.4 34.4
114 99.3 99.3 140.4 34.4 34.4
122 105.7 105.7 149.5 34.4 34.4
3657 105.7 105.7 149.5 34.4 34.4

Results for Different Models

Primary Production

Gas injection and oil, water, and gas production during primary production and CSI are summarized in Table 7 for the different
models. As outlined above, the Effective Permeability Instant Equilibrium and Non-Equilibrium CSI models started with the post-CHOPS
reservoir characterization determined using AITFs CHOPS model.

Table 7: Primary production (full well basis) for different models

Model
Eqm
or
NE
Oil
(m
3
)
Water
(m
3
)
Gas
(STD m
3
)
AITF CHOPS model NE 15,677 3,593 568,901
Dual Permeability Eqm 14,606 228 929,036
Dilated Zone Eqm 5,460 33 35,708
Spokes NE 10,518 2,946 99,874
Spokes & Branches NE 6,005 1,512 79,580
Eqm = instant equilibrium solubility
NE = Non-equilibrium solubility

Dual Permeability Model

For the Dual Permeability model, the oil rate was specified to be the actual field value for the first part of the primary production
simulations. The oil rate was averaged during the latter half of the Dual Permeability primary production simulations in order that a
constant rate would speed up the simulations. A match of the specified production was achieved.

The greater contact area due to wormhole formation resulted in high gas injectivity particularly for the Effective Permeability
model (Figure 17). As compared to the Effective Permeability model, the Dual Permeability model resulted in the same gas injection in
Cycle 1, more gas injection in Cycle 2, and less gas injection in Cycle 3. For the latter model, oil was produced at a similar rate during CSI
10 SPE 157804
as it had been during primary production (Figure 18). In contrast for the Effective Permeability model predictions, the oil rate was much
higher during CSI than during primary production. Although the Dual Permeability and Effective Permeability models both matched
specified primary oil production, there was substantially less oil production for three CSI cycles for the Dual Permeability model
(1,968 m
3
) as compared to 13,769 m
3
(non-equilibrium) or 9,988 m
3
(instant equilibrium) for the Effective Permeability system.

For the Effective Permeability non-equilibrium simulations, the solvent penetrated to near the edge of the reservoir although at
low concentrations (Figure 19a). For the Effective Permeability and Dual Permeability instant equilibrium models, the propane did move
upwards and downwards from Layer 4 but there was much less lateral penetration beyond the high permeability region (Figures 19b and
19c). This was probably because the instant equilibrium solubility conditions, which were assumed in these latter simulations, allowed
rapid dissolution of injected propane and so it remained closer to the well.

The high oil saturation (Figure 20a) in the fracture network reduced gas injectivity in Cycle 3 of the Dual Permeability simulation
(Figure 17). The oil saturation in the matrix adjoining the fractures was reduced to about 70% during primary production and to about 60%
during CSI. Propane penetrated into the fractures and the adjoining matrix (Figure 20b). Although the oil saturations were significantly
different in the matrix and fractures, their propane mole fractions in the oil phase were very similar.

Dilated Zone Model

Apart from the exception discussed now, a well radial inflow parameter (permeability x completion length) of 1 x 10
5
md-m was
specified in all of the simulations. With this parameter value, very low gas injection (Figure 17) and oil production (Figure 18) were
predicted for the Dilated Zone configuration. Increasing the parameter by a factor of 100 resulted in a higher oil production for the Dilation
Zone model but the primary gas production rate was increased by two orders of magnitude and was unacceptable.

Spokes and Spokes & Branches Models

For both the Spokes and Spokes & Branches models the specified oil production during primary production could not be
achieved during primary production (Table 7 and Figure 18) even though the oil rate was a well control parameter. Much lower rates were
also obtained during CSI as compared to the Effective Permeability model. For the Spokes model, the oil rate was a little lower in the first
CSI cycle than at the end of primary production but it was much higher in Cycle 2 (Figure 18).

Oil saturation changes were mainly limited to areas where the spokes were (Figure 21a). Oil flow occurred from the outer
regions of the reservoir to the spokes in the high permeability Layer 4. This flow occurred even during injection periods as a result of the
high pressure at the outer regions of the reservoir. Although not shown here, oil flow from the outer regions towards a CSI well also
occurred in Effective Permeability simulations during injection periods until the outer reservoir pressure had been somewhat depleted.
There was limited gas phase flow from the outer regions towards the spokes (Figure 21b) as methane remained in solution there because
the pressure was still high. There was low gas saturation at the end of primary production and very little gas formation during CSI for the
Spokes model. Similar behaviour was observed for the Spokes & Branches model. Predicted oil production for two CSI cycles with the
Spokes model was only 3,235 m
3
as compared to 9,041 m
3
for 2 cycles with the Effective Permeability model.

In Layer 4, most of the pressure changes during CSI injection and production periods occurred where the spokes were (Figure
22a) and the production period pressure profiles for the Spokes and Spokes & Branches models were very similar except for the region near
the branches, which had lower pressure values even during the injection period. There was very little pressure build-up during the injection
period of the Spokes & Branches model simulation. The low pressure values obtained during injection resulted in very little oil production
during CSI. During CSI, the pressure from Layer 4 was transmitted above and below so that a pressure profile for any layer was similar to
that for Layer 4 (Figure 22b).

For Cycle 1 with the Spokes & Branches Model, the desired gas injection rate of 20,000 STD m
3
/d (full well basis) was
maintained for the entire 30 day injection period. Despite this, predicted oil production for Cycle 1 was only 168 m
3
as compared to 4,139
and 630 m
3
, respectively for the Effective Permeability and Spokes models. The nett propane to oil ratio was considerably higher for the
Spokes and Spokes & Branches models as compared to the Effective Permeability predictions (Table 8). The branches were too close to
the vertical well and as a result had a negative rather than a positive impact on oil production. For the Spokes model, propane dissolution
in oil was also limited to the region near the spokes (Figures 23 and 24) and the extent of this region was actually increased during
production periods. The branches in the Spokes & Branches model changed where the propane dissolved as compared to when the Spokes
model was used. The propane did not penetrate as far along the middle spoke as it did when there were no branches (Spokes model). In
the former case there was more propane dissolved nearer the vertical well. If branches were further from the vertical well and extended
into oil sand that would not be contacted by the main spokes then increased oil production could be expected although interference between
the spokes and branches could still occur.

SPE 157804 11
Table 8: Comparison of Effective Permeability, Spokes, and Spokes & Branches model predictions

Oil Production
(m
3
)
Nett Propane/Oil
(liquid m
3
/m
3
)
Effective
Permeability
4,139 0.15
Spokes 630 1.14
Spokes &
Branches
168 4.91
Nett Propane/Oil Ratio = (Propane injected Propane produced)/Oil produced
Conclusions

o Oil recovery from CSI is mostly limited to high permeability regions created during CHOPS.

o As compared to fine grid blocks, the use of coarse grid blocks in Effective Permeability model simulations resulted in a much
quicker reduction in BHP during production and much lower oil rates as a result of rapid reservoir depressurization. One needs to
adjust parameter(s) to compensate for this behaviour if using coarse grid blocks.

o Changing the frequency factors for gas exsolution and/or dissolution and/or changing the dispersion coefficient values is an
effective upscaling strategy.

o Ignoring non-equilibrium behaviour dramatically impacts the results and is difficult to justify especially for large grid blocks. The
use of instant equilibrium results in rapid gas exsolution during production and low oil production as a result of the severe reduction
of the reservoir pressure and the elimination of foamy oil behavior.

o Increasing the reaction rate constants (frequency factors) from 0.0005 to 0.05 increased propane injectivity and decreased the BHP
during an injection period. The impact on oil production was small (decreased by only 2%).

o Gas exsolution rates were increased when an extra reaction was used to bypass gas bubble formation during gas exsolution. It
resulted in a 9% increase in oil production. The new reaction increased the amount of free bubbles produced at the well because it
increased the pressure drawdown rate during production.

o Performing non-isothermal simulations decreased the injection BHP and the amount of gas injected and resulted in increased oil
production by 11%. Allowing for non-isothermal behaviour typically slows down simulations so this must be considered when
deciding whether to use it.

o Although the Dual Permeability and Effective Permeability models both matched specified primary oil production, there was an
order of magnitude less oil production during CSI for the Dual Permeability model using instant equilibrium solubility conditions as
compared to non-equilibrium or instant equilibrium Effective Permeability model predictions.

o For the Dilated Zone model, increasing the well radial inflow parameter by a factor of 100 doubled primary oil production but
increased gas production by two orders of magnitude.

o For both the Spokes and Spokes & Branches models, the predicted primary oil production was much less than the actual field values
even though the oil rate was used as a well control. Much lower oil rates were also obtained during CSI as compared to the
Effective Permeability model.

o Predicted oil production for two CSI cycles with the Spokes model was about one-third of that predicted by the Effective
Permeability model.

o Predicted oil production for one CSI cycle with the Spokes & Branches model was about one-seventh of that predicted by the
Effective Permeability model.

o A single cycle should not be used to estimate solvent recovery as it will be low due to an unrecoverable (by pressure reduction
alone) solvent inventory being built up in the part of the reservoir to where solvent penetrates. In later cycles, a greater percentage
of the injected solvent is recovered as the total solvent retention at the end of each cycle only increases a relatively small amount.

o CSI simulations are complex and slow and do not generally respond well to a dynamic refined grid approach as they are not very
stable and parameters are changing frequently due to the cyclic nature of the process. Parallel simulations somewhat improve the
simulation speed.
12 SPE 157804
References

Blackwell, R.J. 1962. Laboratory Studies of Macroscopic Dispersion Phenomena. SPE J. March, 18.

Bratli, R. K. and Risnes, R. 1981. Stability and Failure of Sand Arches. SPE J. April, 236248.

Bratli, R.K. Dusseault M.B. Tronvoll, J. and Santarelli, F. 1998. Sand Management Protocol Increases Production Rates, Reduces
Completion Costs. SPE International, Proc. Trinidad and Tobago Biennial SPE Conf. Port-of-Spain.

Chang, J. 2000. System Dynamics Approaches for Sand Production Simulation and Prediction (a Semi-Analytical Implementation). MSc
Thesis, Waterloo.

Dusseault, M.B. Santarelli, F.J. 1989. A Conceptual Model for Massive Solid Production in Poorly-Consolidated Sandstones. Proc. ISRM
Int. Symp. on Rock at Great Depth, eds: Maury, V. and Fourmaintreaux. D., Balkema, Rotterdam, 2, 789-797.

Dusseault, M.B. El-Sayed, A. 1999. CHOP-Cold Heavy Oil Production. Proceedings 10th European Improved Oil Recovery Symposium,
EAGE, Brighton, August, Poster number 086.

Dusseault, M.B. Geilikman, M.B. and Spanos, T. 1998. Mechanisms of Massive Sand Production in Heavy Oils. Proceedings of the 7th
International Conference on Heavy Oils and Tar Sands, Beijing, PRC, 14p.

Geilikman, MB, Dusseault MB, 1997. Dynamics of Wormholes and Enhancement of Fluid Production. Paper presented at the 48th Annual
Technical Meeting of the Petroleum Society in Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

Geilikman, MB, Dusseault MB, 1999. Sand Production Caused by Foamy Oil Flow. Transport in Porous Media, 35 (2):25972.

Ivory, J. Chang, J. Coates R. and Forshner, K. 2010. Investigation of Cyclic Solvent Injection Process for Heavy Oil Recovery. J. Cdn. Pet.
Tech. 49 (8):2-13.

Kristoff, B.J. Knorr, K. D. Preston. C.K. Worth, K. and Sawatzky, R. 2008. Joint Implementation of Vapour ExtractionHeavy Oil
Recovery Process. Paper 2008-468 presented at the World Heavy Oil Congress, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, 1012 March.

Perkins TK, Johnston OC, 1963. A Review of Diffusion and Dispersion in Porous Media. SPE J. March, 7084.

Neuman SP, 1990. Universal Scaling of Hydraulic Conductivities and Dispersivities in Geologic Media. Water Resources Research, 26
(8):174958.

Risnes R, Bratli RK. And Horsrud, P. 1982. Sand Arching a Case Study. Proceedings of the European Petroleum Conference, EUR,
310:31318.

Sawatzky RP, Lillico DA, Vlcsak G, et al., 1996. Initiation of Sand Production in the Cold Production Process. Presented at the Petroleum
Society of CIM 47th Annual Technical Meeting, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, June.

Sawatzky RP, Lillico DA, Tremblay, et al., 2002. Tracking Cold Production Footprints. Paper 2002-086, presented at the Petroleum
Societys Canadian International Petroleum Conference, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 1113 June.

Tremblay B. 2003. Modelling of Sand Transport through Wormholes. Paper 2003-101, presented at the Petroleum Societys Canadian
International Petroleum Conference, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

Tremblay, B. Sedgwick, G. Forshner, K. 1998. Modeling of Sand Production from Wells on Primary Recovery. J. Cdn. Pet. Tech. 37
(3):4150.

Tremblay, B. Sedgwick, G. and Vu, D. 1999. A Review of Cold Production in Heavy Oil Reservoirs. Tenth European Symposium on
Improved Oil Recovery, Brighton, UK.

Uddin, M. 2005. Numerical Studies of Gas Exsolution in a Live Heavy-Oil Reservoir. Paper SPE/PS-CIM/CHOA 97739, SPE International
Thermal Operations and Heavy Oil Symposium, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 13 November.

SPE 157804 13
Oil
Solvent dissolved in oil
CSI well on production
Pressure Profile
Oil
Solvent dissolved in oil
CSI well on injection
Pressure Profile
Bubble
s
200 kPaa
3000 kPaa
Figure 4: Propane non-equilibrium solubility during
an experiment

x
C3H8Leqm
x
C3H8L
x
C3H8Leqm
x
C3H8L
Cycle1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6
Slow solvent dissolution
Instant solvent dissolution
Insoluble gas
FF=0.01
FF=0
Figure 2: Propane non-equilibrium solubility during
a CSI experiment
Figure 3: Effect of dissolution rate on well BHP
during injection
Figure 4: 1/4 symmetry representation of different reservoir configurations being tested

Wormhole diameter = 20 cm Spoke 1
S
p
o
k
e
3
S
p
o
k
e

2
Permeability = 1.56 darcy
S
p
o
k
e
3
S
p
o
k
e

2
Spokes model
Spoke 1
S
p
o
k
e
3
S
p
o
k
e

2
Branch 2
B
r
a
n
c
h

1
S
p
o
k
e
3
S
p
o
k
e

2
Branch 2
B
r
a
n
c
h

1
Wormhole diameter = 20 cm
Spokes & Branches model
Porosity = 0.3
Porosity = 0.7
Permeability
= 1,000 darcy
Porosity = 0.3
Porosity = 0.7
Permeability
= 1,000 darcy
Dilated Zone model
2
0
0

m

Figure 1: Reservoir behaviour during CSI
e)
d)
c)
b) a) VW
High perm
region
VW
High perm
region
Effective Permeability model
Frac Perm = 10,000 darcy
Frac Trans = 1,000
In blocks with fractures,
Frac Vol/Block Vol = 0.067
Fractures
Frac Perm = 10,000 darcy
Frac Trans = 1,000
In blocks with fractures,
Frac Vol/Block Vol = 0.067
Fractures
Dual Permeability model
Dual permeability
Figure 1: Reservoir behaviour during CSI
14 SPE 157804
1
10
100
1000
10000
100000
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
V
i
s
c
o
s
i
t
y

(
m
P
a
.
s
)
CH
4
or C
3
H
8
Mole Fraction in Oil
Oil-CH
4
Oil-C
3
H
8
240
2
Figure 7: CHOPS (a) oil production and (b) water production using AITF cold production model
Figure 5: Live oil viscosity
Figure 6: Solubilty and fluid transport mechanisms
Grid Block n Grid Block n + 1

SPE 157804 15
Figure 10: Impact of grid size on (a) BHP and (b) oil production (1/4 well basis)
Figure 8: Post-CHOPS porosity and effective permeability (AITF radial model)
Figure 9: Fine and coarse grids used in simulations

Porosity
Permeability
md
250 m
3
.
6

m
> 10,000 darcy
Porosity
Permeability
md
250 m
3
.
6

m
Porosity
Permeability
md
Porosity
Permeability
md
250 m
3
.
6

m
> 10,000 darcy
Fine grid
Coarse grid
Fine grid
Coarse grid
Fine grid
Coarse grid
Fine grid
Coarse grid
Fine grid
Coarse grid
Fine grid
Coarse grid
Fine grid
Coarse grid
Fine grid
Coarse grid
Fine grid
Coarse grid
Fine grid
Coarse grid
Fine grid
Coarse grid
Fine grid
Coarse grid
a) b)
36 x 36 x 7 16 x 16 x 7
VW
6.49 x 6.49 m 1 x 1 m
High perm
region
Permeability:
5,000 to 100,000 darcy
1 x 1 m
19.47 x 19.47 m
High perm
region
VW
VW
36 x 36 x 7 16 x 16 x 7
VW
6.49 x 6.49 m 1 x 1 m
High perm
region
Permeability:
5,000 to 100,000 darcy
1 x 1 m
19.47 x 19.47 m
High perm
region
VW VW
VW
1 m x 19.47 m
1 m x 6.49 m
36 x 36 x 7 16 x 16 x 7
16 SPE 157804
Figure 12: Impact of equilibrium versus non-equilibrium on (a) BHP and gas injection (1/4 well basis)
Figure 13: Impact of equilibrium versus non-equilibrium on (a) oil and (b) gas production (1/4 well basis)
Figure 11: Upscaling simulation results - cumulative oil production (1/4 well basis)

Fine grid o = 10
Upscale 6, FFD = 0.0005, FFE = 0.05
U
pscale 2, FFD
= FFE = 0.00005
Upscale 1, sam
e properties as fine grid
o = 0
Upscale 4, FFD = FFE = 0.5
U
p
s
c
a
le
3
, F
F
D
=
0
.0
5
,
F
F
E
=
0
.0
5
Fine grid o = 10
Upscale 6, FFD = 0.0005, FFE = 0.05
U
pscale 2, FFD
= FFE = 0.00005
Upscale 1, sam
e properties as fine grid
o = 0
Upscale 4, FFD = FFE = 0.5
U
p
s
c
a
le
3
, F
F
D
=
0
.0
5
,
F
F
E
=
0
.0
5
Equilibrium
Equilibrium
Non-equilibrium
Non-equilibrium
Equilibrium
Equilibrium
Non-equilibrium
Non-equilibrium
Equilibrium
Equilibrium
Non-equilibrium
Non-equilibrium
Equilibrium
Equilibrium
Non-equilibrium
Non-equilibrium
a) b)
Equilibrium
Equilibrium
Non-equilibrium
Non-equilibrium
Equilibrium
Equilibrium
Non-equilibrium
Non-equilibrium
Equilibrium
Equilibrium
Non-equilibrium
Non-equilibrium
Equilibrium
Equilibrium
Non-equilibrium
Non-equilibrium
a)
b)
SPE 157804 17
Figure 14: 2-D (IJ) pressure profile in high permeability Layer 4 at end of first injection and production periods
Figure 15: Impact of extra exsolution (bypass of bubble formation) reaction on (a) gas and (b) oil production (1/4
well basis)

Extra reaction
Extra reaction
No extra
reaction
No extra
reaction
Extra reaction
No extra reaction
Extra reaction
Extra reaction
No extra
reaction
No extra
reaction
Extra reaction
No extra reaction
Equilibrium (30 days)
Non-equilibrium (30 days)
kPaa
kPaa
Figure 16: Impact of extra exsolution (bypass of bubble formation) reaction on propane production (a) C3H8G, (b)
C3H8L, and (c) SBubC3H8 (1/4 well basis)

Extra reaction
Extra reaction
No extra reaction
No extra
reaction
Extra reaction
Extra reaction
No extra reaction
No extra
reaction

Extra reaction
Extra reaction
No extra reaction
No extra
reaction
Extra reaction
Extra reaction
No extra reaction
No extra
reaction
a) b)
a)
b)
c)

Extra reaction
Extra reaction
No extra
reaction
No extra
reaction
Extra reaction
No extra reaction
Extra reaction
Extra reaction
No extra
reaction
No extra
reaction
Extra reaction
No extra reaction

Extra reaction
Extra reaction
No extra
reaction
No extra
reaction
Extra reaction
No extra reaction
Extra reaction
Extra reaction
No extra
reaction
No extra
reaction
Extra reaction
No extra reaction
18 SPE 157804
Figure 18: Cumulative oil produced for different models
(1/4 well basis)

Dual permeability
Effective permeability
Spokes
Dilated zone (kh=1x10
5
)
7
)
Spokes & Branches
Dual permeability
Effective permeability
Spokes
5
)
7
)
Spokes & Branches

D
u
al p
erm
eab
ility
E
ffective p
erm
eab
ility
Spokes
5
)
7
)
Spokes & Branches
D
u
al p
erm
eab
ility
E
ffective p
erm
eab
ility
Spokes
5
)
7
)
Spokes & Branches
Primary Production CSI
Figure 17: Cumulative gas injected for different
models (1/4 well basis)
Figure 20: Dual permeability model Layer 4 (a) Oil saturation and (b) propane mole fraction in oil phase in matrix
and fractures
Figure 19: C
3
H
8
mole fraction in oil phase for (a) Effective Permeability (non-equilibrium), (b) Effective Permeability
(non-equilibrium), and (c) Dual permeability models

Fractures Matrix
0 days
3,707 days, end of
Injection Period 3
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
3,887 days, end of
Production Period 3
Fractures Matrix
0 days
3,707 days, end of
Injection Period 3
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
3,887 days, end of
Production Period 3

3,707 days, end of
Injection Period 3
Matrix Fracture
3,707 days, end of
Production Period 3
3,707 days, end of
Injection Period 3
Matrix Fracture
3,707 days, end of
Production Period 3
3,707 days, end of
Injection Period 3
Matrix Fracture
3,707 days, end of
Production Period 3
3,707 days, end of
Injection Period 3
Matrix Fracture
3,707 days, end of
Production Period 3
3,707 days, end of
Injection Period 3
Matrix Fracture
3,707 days, end of
Production Period 3
3,707 days, end of
Injection Period 3
Matrix Fracture
3,707 days, end of
Production Period 3

3,707 days, end of
Injection Period 3
Matrix Fracture
3,707 days, end of
Production Period 3
3,707 days, end of
Injection Period 3
Matrix Fracture
3,707 days, end of
Production Period 3
3,707 days, end of
Injection Period 3
Matrix Fracture
3,707 days, end of
Production Period 3
3,707 days, end of
Injection Period 3
Matrix Fracture
3,707 days, end of
Production Period 3
3,707 days, end of
Injection Period 3
Matrix Fracture
3,707 days, end of
Production Period 3
3,707 days, end of
Injection Period 3
Matrix Fracture
3,707 days, end of
Production Period 3

3,707 days, end of
Injection Period 3
Matrix Fracture
3,707 days, end of
Production Period 3
3,707 days, end of
Injection Period 3
Matrix Fracture
3,707 days, end of
Production Period 3
3,707 days, end of
Injection Period 3
Matrix Fracture
3,707 days, end of
Production Period 3
3,707 days, end of
Injection Period 3
Matrix Fracture
3,707 days, end of
Production Period 3
3,707 days, end of
Injection Period 3
Matrix Fracture
3,707 days, end of
Production Period 3
3,707 days, end of
Injection Period 3
Matrix Fracture
3,707 days, end of
Production Period 3
b)
a)

3,707 days, end of
Injection Period 3
3,887 days, end of
Injection Period 3
Dual Perm Effective Perm
< 1 x 10
-5
3,707 days, end of
Injection Period 3
3,887 days, end of
Injection Period 3
< 1 x 10
-5
< 1 x 10
-5

< 1 x 10
-5

3,887 days, end of
Production Period 3

3,707 days, end of
Injection Period 3
3,887 days, end of
Injection Period 3
< 1 x 10
-5
3,707 days, end of
Injection Period 3
3,887 days, end of
Injection Period 3
< 1 x 10
-5
< 1 x 10
-5

< 1 x 10
-5

3,887 days, end of
Production Period 3
b) a)
End Inj. 3
End Prod. 3
< 0.00001

3,707 days, end of
Injection Period 3
3,887 days, end of
Injection Period 3
< 1 x 10
-5
3,707 days, end of
Injection Period 3
3,887 days, end of
Injection Period 3
< 1 x 10
-5
< 1 x 10
-5

< 1 x 10
-5

3,887 days, end of
Production Period 3
c)
SPE 157804 19
Figure 22: (a) pressure in Layer 4 and (b) reservoir pressure for Spokes and Spokes & Branches models
Figure 21: Spokes model (a) oil saturation and oil velocity vectors and (b) gas saturation and gas velocity vectors in high
permeability Layer 4

Spokes Spokes & Branches B)
Spokes Spokes & Branches a)
3,227 days. End of
Primary Production
3,437 days. End of
Production Period 1
3,257 days. End of
Injection Period 1

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa kPaa
b) Spokes & Branches

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
kPaa 3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
kPaa kPaa

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
kPaa kPaa

0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
3,437 days, end of CSI
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 1
Injection Period 1

0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 1
Injection Period 1

0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 1
Injection Period 1

0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 1
Injection Period 1

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa kPaa

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa kPaa

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa kPaa

0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 1
Injection Period 1
a) Spokes

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa kPaa

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
kPaa kPaa

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
kPaa kPaa

0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 1
Injection Period 1

0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 1
Injection Period 1

0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 1
Injection Period 1

0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 1
Injection Period 1

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa kPaa

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa kPaa

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa kPaa

0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 1
Injection Period 1
a) Spokes

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa kPaa

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
kPaa kPaa

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
kPaa kPaa

0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 1
Injection Period 1

0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 1
Injection Period 1

0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 1
Injection Period 1

0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 1
Injection Period 1

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa kPaa

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa kPaa

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa kPaa

0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 1
Injection Period 1
a) Spokes

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa kPaa

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
kPaa kPaa

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
kPaa kPaa

0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 1
Injection Period 1

0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 1
Injection Period 1

0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 1
Injection Period 1

0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 1
Injection Period 1

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa kPaa

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa kPaa

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa kPaa

0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 1
Injection Period 1
a) Spokes

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa kPaa

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
kPaa kPaa

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
kPaa kPaa

0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 1
Injection Period 1

0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 1
Injection Period 1

0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 1
Injection Period 1

0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 1
Injection Period 1

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa kPaa

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa kPaa

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa kPaa

0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 1
Injection Period 1
a) Spokes

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa kPaa

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
kPaa kPaa

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
kPaa kPaa

0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 1
Injection Period 1

0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 1
Injection Period 1

0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 1
Injection Period 1

0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 1
Injection Period 1

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa kPaa

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa kPaa

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa kPaa

0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 1
Injection Period 1
a) Spokes

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa kPaa

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
kPaa kPaa

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
kPaa kPaa

0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 1
Injection Period 1

0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 1
Injection Period 1

0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 1
Injection Period 1

0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 1
Injection Period 1

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa kPaa

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa kPaa

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end of
CSI Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
kPaa kPaa

0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 1
Injection Period 1
a) Spokes

3,257 days, end of
Injection Period 1
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
3,437 days, end of
Injection Period 1
Spokes & Branches Spokes
3,477 days, end of
Injection Period 2
3,657 days, end of
Injection Period 2
kPaa
3,257 days, end of
Injection Period 1
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
3,437 days, end of
Injection Period 1
3,477 days, end of
Injection Period 2
3,657 days, end of
Injection Period 2
kPaa kPaa
3,437 days, end of
Production Period 1

3,257 days, end of
Injection Period 1
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
3,437 days, end of
Injection Period 1
3,477 days, end of
Injection Period 2
3,657 days, end of
Injection Period 2
kPaa
3,257 days, end of
Injection Period 1
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
3,437 days, end of
Injection Period 1
3,477 days, end of
Injection Period 2
3,657 days, end of
Injection Period 2
kPaa kPaa
3,437 days, end of
Production Period 1

0

d
a
y
s
3
,
2
2
7

d
a
y
s
,

e
n
d

o
f

P
r
i
m
a
r
y

P
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
0

d
a
y
s
3
,
2
2
7

d
a
y
s
,

e
n
d

o
f

P
r
i
m
a
r
y

P
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
3
,
4
3
7

d
a
y
s
,

e
n
d

o
f

C
S
I

P
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n

1
3
,
2
5
7

d
a
y
s
,

e
n
d

o
f

C
S
I

I
n
j
e
c
t
i
o
n

P
e
r
i
o
d

1
3
,
4
3
7

d
a
y
s
,

e
n
d

o
f

C
S
I

P
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n

1
3
,
2
5
7

d
a
y
s
,

e
n
d

o
f

C
S
I

I
n
j
e
c
t
i
o
n

P
e
r
i
o
d

1
3
,
6
5
7

d
a
y
s
,

e
n
d

o
f

C
S
I

P
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n

2
3
,
4
7
7

d
a
y
s
,

e
n
d

o
f

C
S
I

I
n
j
e
c
t
i
o
n

P
e
r
i
o
d

2
3
,
6
5
7

d
a
y
s
,

e
n
d

o
f

C
S
I

P
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n

2
3
,
4
7
7

d
a
y
s
,

e
n
d

o
f

C
S
I

I
n
j
e
c
t
i
o
n

P
e
r
i
o
d

2
3
,
4
3
7

d
a
y
s
,

e
n
d

o
f

C
S
I

P
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n

1
3
,
2
5
7

d
a
y
s
,

e
n
d

o
f

C
S
I

I
n
j
e
c
t
i
o
n

P
e
r
i
o
d

1

0

d
a
y
s
3
,
2
2
7

d
a
y
s
,

e
n
d

o
f

P
r
i
m
a
r
y

P
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
0

d
a
y
s
3
,
2
2
7

d
a
y
s
,

e
n
d

o
f

P
r
i
m
a
r
y

P
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
3
,
4
3
7

d
a
y
s
,

e
n
d

o
f

C
S
I

P
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n

1
3
,
2
5
7

d
a
y
s
,

e
n
d

o
f

C
S
I

I
n
j
e
c
t
i
o
n

P
e
r
i
o
d

1
3
,
4
3
7

d
a
y
s
,

e
n
d

o
f

C
S
I

P
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n

1
3
,
2
5
7

d
a
y
s
,

e
n
d

o
f

C
S
I

I
n
j
e
c
t
i
o
n

P
e
r
i
o
d

1
3
,
6
5
7

d
a
y
s
,

e
n
d

o
f

C
S
I

P
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n

2
3
,
4
7
7

d
a
y
s
,

e
n
d

o
f

C
S
I

I
n
j
e
c
t
i
o
n

P
e
r
i
o
d

2
3
,
6
5
7

d
a
y
s
,

e
n
d

o
f

C
S
I

P
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n

2
3
,
4
7
7

d
a
y
s
,

e
n
d

o
f

C
S
I

I
n
j
e
c
t
i
o
n

P
e
r
i
o
d

2
3
,
4
3
7

d
a
y
s
,

e
n
d

o
f

C
S
I

P
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n

1
3
,
2
5
7

d
a
y
s
,

e
n
d

o
f

C
S
I

I
n
j
e
c
t
i
o
n

P
e
r
i
o
d

1

Production 1
Injection Period 1
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2

Production 1
Injection Period 1
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2

Production 1
Injection Period 1
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2

Production 1
Injection Period 1
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
= 0
= 0
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
= 0
= 0
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
< 0.00001 < 0.00001

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
= 0
= 0
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
= 0
= 0
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
< 0.00001 < 0.00001

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
= 0
= 0
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
= 0
= 0
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
< 0.00001 < 0.00001

Production 1
Injection Period 1
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2

Production 1
Injection Period 1
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2

Production 1
Injection Period 1
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2

Production 1
Injection Period 1
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
= 0
= 0
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
= 0
= 0
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
< 0.00001 < 0.00001

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
= 0
= 0
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
= 0
= 0
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
< 0.00001 < 0.00001

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
= 0
= 0
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
= 0
= 0
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
End of Production Period 1 End of Injection Period 1

0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 1
Injection Period 1

0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 1
Injection Period 1

0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 1
Injection Period 1
End of Production Period 1 End of Injection Period 1
End of Production Period 2 End of Injection Period 2 End of Production Period 2 End of Injection Period 2
20 SPE 157804
Figure 24: Propane mole fraction in oil phase for (a) Spokes
and (b) Spokes & Branches models
Figure 23: Spokes model propane mole fraction in
oil in high permeability Layer 4

End Prod. 1

3,257 days, end of
Injection Period 1
3,437 days, end of
Injection Period 1
3,477 days, end of
Injection Period 2
3,657 days, end of
Injection Period 2
3,257 days, end of
Injection Period 1
3,437 days, end of
Injection Period 1
3,477 days, end of
Injection Period 2
3,657 days, end of
Injection Period 2
< 0.00001
< 0.00001
< 0.00001
< 0.00001
< 0.00001
< 0.00001
3,657 days, end of
Production Period 2
3,437 days, end of
Production Period 1

3,257 days, end of
Injection Period 1
3,437 days, end of
Injection Period 1
3,477 days, end of
Injection Period 2
3,657 days, end of
Injection Period 2
3,257 days, end of
Injection Period 1
3,437 days, end of
Injection Period 1
3,477 days, end of
Injection Period 2
3,657 days, end of
Injection Period 2
< 0.00001
< 0.00001
< 0.00001
< 0.00001
< 0.00001
< 0.00001
3,657 days, end of
Production Period 2
3,437 days, end of
Production Period 1
b) Spokes & Branches a) Spokes
End Inj. 1
End Prod. 1

3,257 days, end of
Injection Period 1
3,437 days, end of
Injection Period 1
3,477 days, end of
Injection Period 2
3,657 days, end of
Injection Period 2
3,257 days, end of
Injection Period 1
3,437 days, end of
Injection Period 1
3,477 days, end of
Injection Period 2
3,657 days, end of
Injection Period 2
< 0.00001
< 0.00001
< 0.00001
< 0.00001
< 0.00001
< 0.00001
3,657 days, end of
Production Period 2
3,437 days, end of
Production Period 1

Production 1
Injection Period 1
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2

Production 1
Injection Period 1
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2

Production 1
Injection Period 1
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2

Production 1
Injection Period 1
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
= 0 = 0
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
= 0 = 0
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
< 0.00001 < 0.00001

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
= 0 = 0
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
= 0 = 0
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
< 0.00001 < 0.00001

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
= 0 = 0
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
= 0 = 0
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
End
Injection

Production 1
Injection Period 1
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2

Production 1
Injection Period 1
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2

Production 1
Injection Period 1
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2

Production 1
Injection Period 1
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
= 0 = 0
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
= 0 = 0
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
< 0.00001 < 0.00001

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
= 0 = 0
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
= 0 = 0
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
< 0.00001 < 0.00001

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
= 0 = 0
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
= 0 = 0
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
End
Production

Production 1
Injection Period 1
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2

Production 1
Injection Period 1
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2

Production 1
Injection Period 1
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2

Production 1
Injection Period 1
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
= 0 = 0
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
= 0 = 0
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
< 0.00001 < 0.00001

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
= 0 = 0
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
= 0 = 0
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
< 0.00001 < 0.00001

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
= 0 = 0
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
= 0 = 0
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
< 0.00001 < 0.00001

Production 1
Injection Period 1
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2

Production 1
Injection Period 1
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2

Production 1
Injection Period 1
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2

Production 1
Injection Period 1
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
0 days
3,227 days, end of
Primary Production
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 1
Injection Period 1
Production 2
Injection Period 2
Production 2
Injection Period 2

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
= 0 = 0
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
= 0 = 0
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
< 0.00001 < 0.00001

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
= 0 = 0
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
= 0 = 0
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
< 0.00001 < 0.00001

3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
= 0 = 0
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
3,227 days, end
of Primary
Production
0 days
3,437 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,257 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 1
3,657 days, end
of CSI
Production
Period 2
3,477 days, end
of CSI Injection
Period 2
= 0 = 0
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
< 0.00001 < 0.00001
Cycle 2 Cycle 1

Field Scale Simulation of Cyclic Solvent Injection (CSI) 1

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Field Scale Simulation of Cyclic Solvent Injection (CSI) 1

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

SPE 157804

Field Scale Simulation of Cyclic Solvent Injection (CSI)

Вам также может понравиться