WATER DRIVE RESERVOIRS

Prof. T. Kumar
Dept. of Petroleum Engg.

Oil production by water-displacing process.

It is most efficient drive.

It also leaves a considerable percentage of residual oil.

Characteristics:
1. Pressure decline is very gradual
2. Early excess water production
3. Normally little change in GOR
4. Initial reservoir pressure is normal for the area.
Considerations:
Initial free gas cap: Gas production should be minimized to take advantage of
more efficient water displacing process. However, gas cap volume shrinkage should be
avoided at any cost, as oil saturation in the original gas cap due to upward movement of
oil will be developed, part of which can never be produced.
If impossible to stop gas production from gas cap, then it may be economically
desirable to return gas to the reservoir to maintain original size of the gas cap. In case of a
very active water drive, the effort should be to maintain the exact size of the gas cap In
partial water drive, gas should be returned to such an extent that the gas cap expands
which means a combination drive.

Efficiency of the water displacement process:

In general, as the reservoir heterogeneity increases, the recovery will decrease, due
to uneven advance of the displacing water. The rate of water advance will be faster in the
highly permeable zone. This results in earlier high water-oil ratios and consequent earlier
economic limits. In homogeneous reservoir, comparatively the advancing water would,
have contacted a greater portion of the reservoir, until economic limit.
Degree of activity of Water drive:
In a very active water drive, where degree of pressure maintenance is good, the
role of solution gas in the recovery process is reduced to almost zero, with maximum
advantage being taken of the water as a displacing force.
Effect of free gas saturation on Recovery:
It is generally agreed and proved by the laboratory results that oil recovery is
increased in the presence of free gas saturation. Although, the actual mechanism is not
completely understood this phenomenon can be taken advantage of in water drive
reservoirs. In one of the theories, it is believed that the free gas enclosed themselves in an
oil blanket due to lower gas-oil interfacial tension compared to gas-water interfacial
tension. This helps in achieving finally lower residual oil saturation, As per this theory;
the Kg/Ko vs. oil saturation relation should not have been altered for long period, which is
not true in actual behaviour. According to the second theory, as the water is held in the
smaller pores of water wet reservoirs due to capillary pressure, the gas flow occurs in the
larger pores where residual oil is present. As such, any gas saturation in the larger pores
will forcibly move only the residual oil form the pores, thereby increasing the ultimate

oil production. The second theory is believed to be more compatible with the fluid flow
observations, as the gas saturation does not have to exist inside the oil phase.
Where original pressure is above the saturation pressure of the reservoir oil it may
be desirable to reduce reservoir pressure below the saturation pressure as rapidly as
possible in order to create free gas saturation in the oil zone. After the free gas saturation
has been established it is then desirable to maintain reservoir pressure (by water injection)
as much as possible in order to prevent excessive gas saturation from developing in the
reservoir. It is possible to substantially increase oil recovery from a reservoir by this
technique and it should be taken advantage of at every opportunity.
Effect of Reservoir Rock Wettability:
It has been observed that intermediate wettability yields the best recovery. In a
highly water wet reservoir, the advancing water will be pulled into the smaller pore
spaces by capillary forces and at the same time the viscous forces will push the water into
the larger pore spaces. However, the water may advance more rapidly in the smaller pore
spaces, and the residual oil will be trapped in the larger pore space. In an oil-wet
reservoir, the capillary forces will tend to prevent the water from entering the smaller
pore spaces, resulting in relatively large residual oil saturations. In those reservoirs having
an intermediate wettability, the capillary forces will not govern the advance of the water
front, but the viscous forces will push the water into all the pore spaces, resulting in
maximum oil recovery.

Predicting Reservoir Performance:

Schilthuis developed an equation for calculating water influx under steady state
condition as:
We = K (Pi - P) dt
where
We = gross water influx, bbl
Pi = initial boundary pressure, psi
P

= boundary pressure at some later time, psi

= time, days

K = water influx constant, bbl/day/psi

The compression of the void spaces in the reservoir rock due to pressure drop has
got effect on performance similar to that of water influx. It is difficult to separately note
the effect of the two in the reservoir; hence a combined term for the two effects called
effective water compressibility is used.
It has been seen that the process of water influx is in reality an unsteady state
phenomenon. In the combination drive reservoirs, however, the use of schilthuis steady
state equations is possible with reliable results because the water influx rate is small
compared to the other driving forces. The water influx constant K could be found from
past production data, and then this same value of K could be used for performance
prediction.

Unsteady state water influx equation was developed by Hurst; and van Everdingen
and Hurst. This equation has been developed from the constant terminal pressure solution
of the diffusivity equation describing the reservoir behaviour.
van Everdingen and Hurst equation can be written as:

2 C r2 e h p Q(t)
We = -------------------------------5.615
or
We = 1.119 C r2e h p Q(t)
or
We = B. p. Q(t)
where
B = 1.119 C r2e h, constant, bbl/psi
p = pressure drop, psi
Q(t) = dimensionless water influx.

This phenomenon of water influx being unsteady state, it should be realized that
for longer time duration, the effect of pressure drop can be accounted for only by using
the principle of superposition. If a long interval is chosen for which p is the pressure
drop, then while the influx is taking place from the aquifer to the reservoir during the first
part of the chosen time interval, the influx due to the second (or the subsequent) part of
the time also takes place, hence the cumulative water influx is the result of superposition

of a series of water influx superimposed during the given time interval. This can be
expressed as :
We = B p x Q(t)
The value of B is modified, if the water encroaches through a fraction of the
reservoir periphery only. It has been reported that instead of using the entire pressure drop
for the first period a better approximation is to consider that one-half of the pressure drop,
1/2 (Pi - P1), is effective during the entire first period. For the second period the effective
pressure drop then is one-half of the pressure drop during the first period, 1/2 (Pi - P1),
plus one-half of the presence drop during the second period, 1/2. (P1- P2) which simplifies
to:
1/2 (Pi - P1) + 1/2 (Pi - P2) = 1/2 (Pi - P2)
Similarly, the effective pressure drop for use in the calculation for the third period
would be equal to 1/2 (Pi - P3)

Example calculation
In typical water drive reservoir, the water influx at the end of
(I) Six month (Pi = 2500 psi, P1 = 2490 psi) is calculated as :
B = 1.119 Cr2e h
= 1.119 x 0.20 x (1.0 x 10-6 ) x (2000)2 x 25
= 22.38 bbl/psi

tD =

6.323 x 10-3 kt
6.323 x 10-3 x 100 (t)
------------------------- = ------------------------------------------ C r2
0.80 x 0.20 x 1.0. x 10-6 x (2000)2
= 0.99 (t)

tD

= 0.99 x 182.5 = 180.6

Q(t) from table of Q(t) vs tD

= 69.46
Therefore We = B x P x Q(t)
= 22.38 x 1/2. (2500 - 2490) x 69.46
= 7773 bbl.
(ii) Water influx at the end of one year (P2 = 2472 psi) is calculated as :
p = 1/2 . (Pi - P2 ) = 1/2. (2500 - 2472)
= 14 psi.
The first pressure drop, pi - p1 has been effective for one year, but the second
pressure drop, p1 - p2 , has been effective only for 6 months. Separate calculations must
be made for the two pressure drops because of this time difference and the results added
in order to determine the total water influx.
tD (1 year) = 0.99 x 365 = 361, Q(t) = 123.5
tD (6 months) = 0.99 x 182.5 = 180.6, Q(t) = 69.46
Therefore, We = B p x Q(t)
= 22.38 (5 x 123.5 + 14 x 69.46)
= 22.38 (618 + 972 ) = 22.38 x 1590
= 35,584 barrels.
Use of the unsteady state equation in predicting Reservoir Performance :
The principal utility of the unsteady state water influx equation is in the prediction
of reservoir performance, although this equation alone can not be used because there are

two unknown, water influx and pressure. Commonly Material Balance equation is used
along with water influx equation for performance prediction.
Procedure for performance analysis :
1. Collect all necessary reservoir and PVT data
2. Calculate the value of B, the water influx constant from the best available data,
B = 1.119 C h r2
3. Check the validity of B, water influx, We is found at different time intervals and B is
calculated as :
We (mb)
B = -------------------- p x Q(t)
The apparent value of B is plotted against the corresponding value of Np and the most
likely value of B is chosen from the best horizontal line. This value of B is normally used
for all future calculations after verification from its value computed as in step 2.
4.

Water influx over the past history of the reservoir is next calculated using both
unsteady state equation and the material Balance equation. These two should
agree if the average value of B has been used in the unsteady state equation.

5.

On the basis of the past production history of the reservoir the following curves
are usually drawn:
A. Gross water influx vs. Time (and cum oil).
B. Net water influx vs. Time (and cum. oil).
C. Net change in gas cap vs. Time (and cum. oil).

These calculated values are then compared to actual performance data to determine
whether the calculated values are indicative of actual behaviour.

6.

Prediction of Future Reservoir Behaviour.

A. Selection of a combination of oil, gas and water production rates, which will
hold throughout the prediction period.
B. The first step is the estimation of the reservoir pressure at the end of the first
trial period (say six months). Gross water influx is calculated by both the
equations. If the results agree then the first estimated pressure is correct; if not,
then another pressure must be selected and the procedure repeated until
agreement is reached.
C. Additional calculations are repeated for additional equal time intervals until the
desired range of reservoir history has been studied.

7.

Several different combination of oil, gas and water producing rates should
be used, and a complete prediction made for each set of values. The advantage of
having these different combinations of withdrawal rates is that if for any reason
the withdrawal rates are changed in the future from these expected, a set of
performance curves will already be available for the altered production condition,
and an entirely new study will not be required.

Validity of Performance Predictions :

The simultaneous solution of the unsteady state water influx equation and the MB
Equation is dependent on the following assumptions :
1. The two equations represent independent methods of solving for identical quantities.
2. An error in boundary pressure results in a deviation in the calculated water influx by
the unsteady state equation which is opposite in direction from the same deviation in
water influx as calculated by the MB equation.

3. Errors in the initial volumes of oil and gas in place result in erroneous calculations by
the MB equation but do not effect the water influx calculated by the unsteady state
equation.
4. Errors in production data or in PVT data will result in erroneous calculations of water
influx by the MB Equation, but do not affect results obtained by the unsteady state
equation.
As a result of these four factors, when agreement is finally reached between water
influx calculated by both the MB and unsteady state equations, the data will have usually
been adjusted with sufficient accuracy to permit reliable predictions of reservoir
performance. A good practice is to check the sensitivity of the results due to various
parameters, which constitute the outcome.
Limitations in Performance Predictions:
If the simultaneous solution technique results in the good match of the past
performance, the future predictions could be expected to be reasonably reliable. However,
there are some points to be kept in mind while accepting the validity of the future
predictions:
1. Extent of the Aquifer:
The solution of the diffusivity equation is based on the size of the aquifer. A large
aquifer (usually this is true) compared to oil reservoir size provides the basis of
assumption of infinite size of the aquifer. Therefore the obvious limitations of the
performance prediction will be when the solution assumes infinite size aquifer, but at a
later date the expansion of water reaches the border of the aquifer:

10

2. Determination of the value of B:

The MB equation is not a good tool for calculating water influx, particularly in
use of week water drive reservoir, as the value of water influx is obtained by subtracting a
large number from another large number. (Reservoir fluid production - reservoir fluid
expansion). When reservoir pressure changes, only slightly, small errors in pressure
measurement can cause relatively large errors in the fluid expansion term and
consequently in the calculated water influx. The use of an average value of B at several
different times reduces the magnitude of any potential errors.
3. Selection of time intervals in Performance Prediction:
The accuracy of the technique is dependent on the length of time between periods,
the shorter the time, the more accurate the calculations. Periods of three or six months are
usually sufficiently reliable for most calculations.

11