Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 12

SPE 66536

Contaminated Water Production in Old Oil Fields With Downhole Water Separation:
Effects of Capillary Pressures and Relative Permeability Hysteresis
Solomon O. Inikori, Louisiana State University, and Andrew K. Wojtanowicz, Louisiana State University

Copyright 2001, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.

permeability hysteresis are responsible for the production of
This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE/EPA/DOE Exploration and Production contaminated water experienced with application of the
Environmental Conference held in San Antonio, Texas, 26–28 February 2001.
gravity segregation approach in old oil fields. It also shows
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
how to add an envelope to the well’s inflow performance
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to window to accommodate the transition zone. Inside the
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at envelope production of oil-free water from the bottom
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of completion is possible with production of minimal water cut
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is oil at the top. This uncontaminated water could be disposed
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 while operators maximize the use of their pipeline and water
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O.
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.
separation facilities as well as improve oil recovery.

Abstract Oil production from reservoir underlain by water causes the
Industry operators using downhole water separation stable oil-water interface to deform into a cone shape.
technology in bottom water drive reservoirs with water coning Moreover, continuous production of oil at a rate above the
problem have employed two major approaches. One approach critical oil rate makes the cone oil-water interface (contact)
uses downhole hydrocyclone and pumps to separate water unstable and water breaks through into the wellbore.
from oil in one co-mingled production stream. This approach After breakthrough, the water production increases rapidly.
involves elaborate completion design and high cost equipment. The water production creates several operation problems as
The second approach, termed “gravity segregation” uses dual follows:
completion technology with zonal isolation packer to • Increased water mobility creates by-pass oil in the
separately produce the water and the oil and so counter the reservoir
cone development at the wellbore. Both methods, currently, do
• High rate water production reduces the utility of pipeline
not completely eliminate the problem of contaminated water
facilities and increase cost of water handling
production but reduces it to, perhaps, some manageable level.
• Disposal of oil contaminated produced water creates
The growing emphasis on environmental-friendly oil
environmental hazard
production operation and increasing cost of water handling
requires the production of oil-free disposable water in a simple • Corrosion and reduced life of pipeline and facilities.
completion design.
Several mechanisms have been identified as culprits of
This paper presents case studies of the pre-installation design excessive water production in oil wells from reservoirs
of gravity segregation method for three fields (West Africa, underlain by water. Among these causes are channeling
Gulf Canada and Louisiana) with strong water coning behind the casing; perforation into or too close to the water
problems. The study confirms that old oil fields that have zone; casing leaks around the water zone, depletion of the
suffered severe water coning exhibit a transitional saturation reservoir during production, creation of fracture in the water
profile and dispersed oil-water contact. In addition, the zone during stimulation operation; and coning of bottom water
imbibition/drainage process of water cone development and into the wellbore.
reversal induced by gravity segregation creates relative
permeability hysteresis effect. The effects should be included Several methods have been employed by operators to solve the
in the pre-installation modeling. problem of water production in oil wells. One of such solution
is to perforate the well high up in the oil zone above the oil-
The results using numerical simulator, indicate that the water contact (OWC). This solution delays the time to water
combined effects of capillary transition pressures and relative breakthrough into the oil well. However, as long as production
rate exceeds the critical oil rate, water production is inevitable.

After water breakthrough, the first of industry approach is to The second approach is the application of the downhole
evaluate production logs to see the presence of some possible separation of water and oil from separate perforations using a
natural permeability barrier within the zone of perforation. A dual completion with zonal isolation packer.
cement squeeze operation is then performed to isolate the
production zone closest to the water contact and reduce the Pirson and Mehta3 also investigated the selective production of
incidence of high watercut. water and oil from their respective zones and concluded that
though it reduces the cone growth, it gives the same overall
Another industry solution is injection of polymers, resins or water-oil ratio at all times.
gels to create artificial permeability barriers that works in the
same way as natural permeability barriers and reduces water Widmyer4 patented water coning control technology in 1955
production. where he proposed a dual completion string to separately
The application of polymers for water coning control can take produce the oil and water zones and thus counter the cone
one of two mechanisms: development. He suggested perforating the top and bottom of
• Reduction of the mobility ratio between the displacing the oil zone and producing each perforation with a production
fluid (water) and the displaced fluid (oil) to a favorable string.
value of less than or equal to 1.0.
• Creation of a diversion or block at depth in the reservoir Apparently considering the cost of the dual completion string,
by cross-link process when an injected inorganic metal Driscoll5 suggested a variant of the dual perforation
cation comes in contact with the polymer molecules. technology. He suggested two perforations with the bottom
Azari and Soliman1 give details of the mechanism of this section below the original oil-water contact. Production from
operation. both perforations is to be co-mingled in one production string
with the possible use of a packer and adjustable flow choke to
These polymers, in some cases also become source of skin control oil/water rates. The demerit of this approach is the
damage and consequently, impede oil production. Another reduction in oil rate as a result of the increased hydrostatic
aspect of these polymers that needs detailed evaluation is the head of the co-mingled fluid. The problem of separation of the
effect on the wettability properties of the reservoir rocks. produced fluid and disposal of the contaminated water makes
this technology not so different from the conventional
Smith and Pirson2 suggested the injection of the produced oil completion.
into the reservoir below the perforation in a “re-circulation
method” called “the hydraulic doublet” method. Pirson and This is perhaps one of the catalysts to the concept of downhole
Mehta3 found that this process gives optimum water coning water separation in oil wells with water coning problem.
control when the ratio of injected to produce oil is equal to 0.3
and it could be introduced at anytime in the life of the well. In the dual completion technology with downhole water sink
This method did not gain any field application because of its (DWS), the top completion is placed as high as possible,
economics. within the top 20 percent of the oil zone and the second
perforation placed at some depth below the oil water contact.
Downhole Separation and Dual Completion As will be seen later, the location of this bottom completion
The concept of downhole installation for water control has two (the water sink) is a very important determinant of the
approaches. environmental and production efficiency of the technology.

One approach uses downhole water separation equipment such Fisher et al.7 used numerical simulation model for water
as hydrocyclone (oil-water separators), by-pass valves, coning studies to evaluate the performance of separate
injector pumps and accessories to separate the produced water production of water and oil in a dual completion (DWS). They
from the oil downhole. In most cases, the separated water is concluded that it could reduce water cut and, in some cases,
re-injected into some formation below the producing zone. completely eliminate water coning.
This has been found to give as low as 23 ppm (parts per
million) oil contamination level. Management of these pumps Wojtanowicz, Xu and Bassiouni8 and Wojtanowicz and
and increased oil contamination with deterioration is a major Shirman9, conducted theoretical studies on the hydrodynamics
concern. Also, the location of this equipment in the production of water coning control with DWS.
string makes it a wellbore phenomenon. It does not address the
reservoir aspect of by-pass oil due to cone development. The model used flow potential distribution generated by two
Matthews6 showed that a substantial amount of the produced constant-terminal-rate sinks located between the two linear
water is separated with this technology. “Typically, the boundaries of the oil-water contact (OWC) and no-flow top
water/oil ratio (WOR) of the oil concentrate stream is reduced boundary in the oil zone and constant-pressure outer radial
to between 1.0 and 2.0”. boundary representing a steady state process. Figure 1.0.

The studies indicated an increase in oil production from the technology11. For this field, the location of the OWC was not
top completion by efficient water production from the bottom known and oil water transition zone has developed due to the
completion. It also shows that the bottom completion can long production history. The result of this field test indicated
produce oil-free water. that, even at a high water sink rate they continued to produce
A critical limitation of these studies is the lack of analytical contaminated oil (i.e. oil with water) from the top completion.
representation of the oil/water transition zone (capillary However, uncontaminated water was not produced from the
transition) and related effects of water saturation changes on sink except when the top completion is shut-in. The model did
oil contamination in the produced water. not incorporate a saturation transition effect for this old field.

Environmental and Productivity Performance of Modeling Clean Water Performance of DWS in Old
DWS. Fields.
The major environmental merit of the DWS technology is the To effectively model the performance of old field with long
ability to produce oil-free water and water-free oil with the production history, the inclusion of capillary transition zone to
separate completion. This pressure sink concept not only account for displacement of the OWC is necessary. Mattax12
permits production of environmentally friendly fluids, it recommends that where saturation reversals occur, relative
counters the cone height growth around the wellbore and so permeabilities are history-dependent and hysteresis should be
overcome the problem of by-pass oil in the reservoir. In taken into account. The combined application of capillary
offshore environment where environmental regulations are transition and relative permeability hysteresis in modeling of
most stringent, the produced fluid is disposable overboard old fields has revealed the presence of an operation zone to
saving substantial cost of water handling. In some cases, the achieve uncontaminated water and minimal watercut oil
produced water is re-injected into the lower reservoir. production. It also revealed that the performance of these old
Possibility also exists to inject the produced water into the wells differs significantly from new wells.
lower part of the reservoir for pressure maintenance in
stratified reservoirs with competent zonal isolation. Model description. To overcome the limitation of the
theoretical models, a commercial numerical simulator (Eclipse
The most stringent environmental guideline at present 100) was adapted for this study. This gives the flexibility to
recommends maximum of 20 ppm (parts per million) oil cut incorporate the dual concept of history dependent relative
standard for disposable oil field water production. permeability curves and capillary transition zone.

The first field application of the technology was in the Nebo- The model is a conceptual radial grid with fluid and rock
Hemphill field located in LaSalle Parish in Louisiana10. Figure properties from fields with severe water coning history (table
2.0 is the typical completion diagram of the field test project. 1.0.).

The environmental performance of the technology was A straight-line approximation of capillary pressure transition
outstanding as shown in tables 2.0 and 3.0. An analysis of was employed:
produced water from the sink and water from conventional
completions in the field after one year of production indicated H ( S w )( ρ w − ρ o )
that the level of contamination of the produced water from the Pc ( S w ) =
sink was below detection limit14. 144

Another merit of the technology, beside environmental This linear approximation, though not very representative of
efficiency is accelerated recovery. The productivity actual capillary pressure data, has been used by several
performance was also outstanding. Figure 3.0 shows the researchers, and is suitable for conceptual evaluation studies.
consistent increase in production over conventional
completions in field. This is also confirmed by result of Typical Corey model13 relative permeability correlations were
simulation studies on DWS well recovery performance on a used to generate imbibition and drainage relative permeability
Louisiana field data in figure 4.0. In figure 4.0, the intercepts curves for this study. See figure 5.0.
of the various recovery lines on the ordinate represent the
typical performance of a conventional oil well. The upward The Eclipse hysteresis option was used to permit the
sloping trends of the recovery line demonstrates the specification of different saturation table for both drainage
superiority of the technology over conventional wells. (decreasing wetting phase saturation) and imbibition
(increasing non-wetting phase saturation). The Killogh’s13
The technology was also applied in an old well with prolong model of scanning curves, should the process be reversed at
water coning history in Texaco’s Kern county field in some intermediate point before full drainage or imbibition,
California. The result indicated that a history match was was adopted. This is to ensure that the trapped critical
required to effectively predict the performance of the saturation (Sncrt) always lies between the two critical ends of

the drainage and imbibition curves. These two end-points were be run to ascertain the level of movement of the oil water
made to coincide in to have uniform residual oil saturation and contact over time.
effectively evaluate the recovery performance.
For thin reservoirs, there is no appreciable difference as the
DWS Well evaluation and the Inflow Performance segregated fluid domain is almost non-existent.
Window (IPW)
The study developed an innovative technique to evaluate the The domain of segregated fluid production could be
performance of the wells called inflow performance window tremendously reduced or even non-existent depending on the
(IPW), figure 6.0. The inflow performance window is a plot size of the capillary transition. Not incorporating these
of production rate at the top completion on the abscissa versus concepts in the model development and pre-installation
water production rate from the sink completion on the planning for old wells will result in over-estimation of the
ordinate. The points of the plot represents critical rates at one performance of the well. Figure 9.0 shows that the segregated
completion (top or bottom) for constant rate at the second flow domain gets smaller with increasing size of capillary
completion – as shown in figure 6.0. The IPW consist of three transition. In figure 6.0, the shaded section shows the typical
domains; a triangular shaped envelope represents the domain difference between an IPW for old wells with coning history
of segregated fluid production (water- free oil production from and a new well with distinct oil-water contact. Operating the
the top completion and oil-free water production from the DWS well in this region for the old well means operating
water sink completion). This is the domain of interest for outside the domain of segregated fluid production and the
environmentally sensitive areas. Below the envelope is the result is contaminated fluid in one or both completions.
domain of water breakthrough into the oil completion. Above
the envelope is the domain of reverse oil coning with oil The size of capillary transition determines the critical rates of
breakthrough into the water sink completion. An addendum the IPW. The critical oil rate is most affected by the capillary
region beyond the apex of the envelope displays a “flip-flop” transition size changing from about 146 BOPD for a new well
line representing a region of instability with some level of with sharp contact to about 82 BOPD for an oil zone with 60
contamination in fluid production on either side. percent capillary height. The area of the domain reduces by
about 36 percent. The critical water rate at the sink shows
Figure 7.0 gives an understanding of the cone behavior within some slight but unappreciable decrease with increasing size of
the IPW. The bottom line of the IPW is the water capillary transition zone.
breakthrough line and the top line represents oil breakthrough.
Between these lines the cone height decreases gradually with Another interesting aspect of the effects of capillary transition
increased water production at the sink. At a certain the rate, in old wells is the location of the water sink completion.
production from the sink balances oil production from the top
completion and the oil water contact remains flat. Increasing Within the transition zone both fluids are mobile depending on
water production beyond this point leads to inverse oil cone the extent of sweep. For environmental purposes, it is very
development until oil breakthrough beyond the top line. important that production logging operation be performed and
the exact water saturation profile be determined as part of the
The behavior of fluid production within the three regions of pre-installation modeling. For effective environmental
the IPW is best captured in figure 8.0 (without the capillary application, the water sink should be located either below the
transition effects). For a certain rate of oil production the rate original oil water contact or in a completely swept zone with
of the sink is varied. The downward sloping curves show the only residual oil saturation. The location of the sink within a
initial breakthrough of water into the top completion. The zone of mobile oil creates an inverse oil cone and
amount of water production decreases gradually with consequently, oil production in the water sink. This production
increasing rate at the sink until cone is stabilized and there is of oil may persist with increasing rate of the water sink.
segregated fluid production from both completions. This
region represents zero oil cut and zero water cut. Beyond this While locating the water sink close the OWC contact reduces
region, the cone is inverted and oil breakthrough into the water the amount of water production at the sink to stabilize the cone
sink. it also creates two unwanted problem of:
• Reducing the size of the segregated fluid production
DWS Well Performance with Relative Permeability domain as can be seen in figure 10.0.
Hysteresis and Capillary Pressure transition. The result of • Creating the problem of initial inverse oil cone and
the evaluation of the DWS well performance indicated that, a consequent contaminated water production (figure 11.0).
major merit of the technology, uncontaminated single phase Figures 13.0 and 14.0 shows the cone development profile
fluid production from the two completions needs effective in a DWS model. First, there is water cone development
modeling with reasonable field data from the producing wells at low rate at the water sink. Then at high rates from the
from extensive reservoirs. Specifically, production logs should sink, there is reverse oil cone development as in figure

The level of oil production at the water sink depends on the Conclusion
location of the sink. In figure 12.0 location of the water sink in This paper presents the results of studies conducted to evaluate
the zone of water saturation transition leads to permanent the performance of one of industry’s solution to water
inverse oil cut. The production of oil reduces with movement production – the Downhole Water Sink technology (DWS), in
of the sink below the initial oil water contact. Location of the old oil wells with persistent water coning history. The study
sink below the top 20 percent of the water zone eliminates the included the effect of capillary transition in the modeling of
problem of inverse oil coning. the DWS application in old oil wells where the long history of
persistent water production creates a water saturation
Also, the target of a company could be to produce clean water transition above the original oil-water contact. The result
at the sink and minimal water cut oil at the top completion. shows that adequate planning and understanding of the
This will involve operating the belt region before the flip-flop reservoir and well history is necessary to effectively operate
line . The diagram in figure 15.0 gives a guide on the within the segregated flow domain and avoid the problem of
operation range. In the sample schedule (figure 15.0), top contaminated water production. It shows that the inclusion of
completion liquid rate of 180 BLPD is targeted. The sink rate the effect reduces the segregated fluid flow domain and
could be operated anywhere from 0 to 250 BWPD. Beyond increases the possibility of contaminated water production.
this point, instability sets in and there is initial contamination By adequate modeling and production control it is possible to
in both completion. Producing water at 250 bb/day gives produce completely oil-free water and water-free oil.
optimum oil recovery with less than 10 percent water cut in In summary:
the top completion and oil-free disposable water in the bottom • The application of DWS enables operators to produce
completion. uncontaminated water from oil wells that are disposable
or could be re-injected for pressure maintenance.
DWS well design and production schedule. • This possibility could be eroded in old oil fields with
To mitigate the problem of produced water contamination severe water coning history without adequate pre-
while maximizing oil recovery with the DWS technology, installation modeling and planning.
effective design and planning is necessary. • Incorporating the dual concept of capillary pressure
• Adequate field data and production logs should be run to transition and relative permeability hysteresis effects in
understand the extent of water saturation transition modeling of old wells can mitigate the problem of
development over time and the possible current location contaminated fluid production in these wells.
of oil-water contact. • Where water handling and disposal is not restricted as in
• A good understanding of field history from start of offshore environments, location of the sink closest to the
production and location of original oil-water contact is bottom of the water zone increases the size of the domain
necessary for segregated fluid production and accelerates oil
• Capillary pressure data from core analysis within the field recovery.
or correlation fields could be used to derive suitable • Locating the water sink at the oil-water contact or slightly
capillary pressure data from the Leverett J-function below reduces the amount of water production required to
correlation for the pre-installation studies. counter cone development. However, it creates the
• In the absence of core data, capillary pressure information environmental problem of inverse oil cone.
could be obtained from electric resistivity log responses
using typical capillary profile match.15 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
• In the last option, linear approximations from Young’s This study is part of an LSU research project funded by the
equation could be used to together with information from joint industry panel for the application and development of the
the production logs. Downhole Water sink Technology for water coning control.
• To avoid, initial oil breakthrough (initial inverse oil cone), Authors would like to express appreciation to the DWSTI JIP
the water sink location should be as deep as the limit of for encouragement to carry out this study and permission to
water handling capacity can dictate. The sink should not publish the result.
be installed just below the oil-water contact or in the
transition zone where mobile oil can easily flow into the References
water sink. 1 Azari, M. and Soliman, M.:1996, “Review of Reservoir
• In wells where the transition size is almost the same size Engineering aspects of Conformance Control technology”, Paper
as oil zone thickness water production starts almost SPE 35171 SPE Permian Basin Oil and Gas Recovery
immediately at the oil zone completion. For such Conference, Midland, TX, March 27-29.
completions, it might be necessary to turn on the water 2 Smith, C.R., and Pirson, S.J.: “Water Coning Control in Oil
sink for a period to collapse the cone prior to start up oil Wells by Fluid Injection,” SPEJ, Vol.3, No. 4, 314 – 326, 1963.
production as was the case in the Texaco operation in 3 Pirson, S.J., and Mehta, M.M., 1967, “A Study of Remedial
Measures for Water-Coning By Means of a Two-Dimensional
kern county.
Simulator”, Paper SPE 1808, 42nd Annual Fall Meeting of the

Society of Petroleum Engineers of AIME, Houston, TX, October

4 Widmyer, R.H.: “Producing Petroleum from Underground
Formations,” U.S. Patent No. 2,855,047, Oct. 3, 1955.
5 Driscoll, V.J.: “Multiple Producing Intervals to Suppress
Coning,” US Patent No. 3,638,731, Feb. 1, 1972.
6 Matthews, C.. Chachula, R., Peachey, B.R., and Solanki, S.C.,
1996, “Application of Downhole Oil/Water Separation Systems
in the Alliance Field,’ Paper SPE 35817, Third International
Conference on Health, safety & environment in Oil and Gas
Exploration, New Orleans, LA, June 9-12.
7 Fisher, W.G, Letkeman, J.P., and Tetreau, E.M., 1970, “The
Application of Numerical Coning Model to Optimize
Completion and Production Methods To Increase Oil
Productivity in Bellshill Lake Blairmore Pool” Journal of
Canadian Petroleum Technology, Oct. – Dec., 33-39.
8 Wojtanowicz, A.K., Hui Xu, and Bassiouni, Z., 1991, “Oilwell
Coning Control Using Dual Completion With Tailpipe Water
Sink”, Paper SPE 21654, SPE Production Operation
Symposium, Oklahoma City, OK, April 7-9.
9 Wojtanowicz, A.K., and Shirman, E.I., 1994, “An In-situ
Method for Downhole Drainage – injection of Formation Brine
in a Single Oil-Producing Well,” Proc. Int. Symposium on
Scientific and Engineering Aspects of Deep Injection Disposal
of Hazardous and Industrial Wastes, Lawrence Berkeley
Laboratory, Berkeley, CA, May 10 –13.
10 Swisher, M.D., and Wojtanowicz, A.K., 1995, “New Dual
Completion Eliminates Bottom Water Coning”, Paper SPE
30697, SPE Annual Technical Conference & Exhibition, Dallas,
TX, October 22-25.
11 Bowlin, K.R., Chea, C.K., Wheeler, S.S., and Waldo, L.A.,
1997, “Field Application of In-situ Gravity Segregation to
Remediate Prior Water Coning”, Paper SPE 38296, SPE
Western regional Meeting, Long Beach, CA, June 25-27.
12 Mattax, C.C and Dalton, R. (ed.), 1989, “Reservoir Simulation”,
Monograph Vol. 13, SPE Textbook Series, Richardson, TX,
pp. 135.
13 Archer, J.S. and Wall, C.G., 1988, “Petroleum Engineering –
principles and practice” , Graham and Trotman, London, , pp.
14 Swisher, M.D., and Wojtanowicz, A.K., 1995, “In-situ
Segregated Production of Oil and water – A Production Method
With Environmental Merit: Field Application”, Paper SPE
29693, SPE/EPA Exploration and Production Environmental
Conference, Houston, TX, March 27-29.
15 Ibrahim, A., Desbrandes, R., and Bassiouni, Z., “Derive
Capillary Pressure From Well Logs”, Petroleum Engineer, July
1994, pp 38 – 41.

Table 1.0 Input data For DWS Studies

INPUT DATA Unit Gulf Canada Louisiana West Africa
Reservoir pressure psi 1987 1788 4150
Thickness of oil/gas column ft 6.5 50 20
Thickness of water column ft 6.5 50 20
Depth of OWC/GWC (static) ft 6161 4770 9786
Position and length of production perforations ft 6154 – 6157.5 4720 – 4725 9766 – 9776
Position and length of water zone perforations ft 6165 – 6168 4780 – 4790 9796 – 9806
Horizontal permeability in oil/gas column mD 888.64 1000 3060
Vertical permeability in oil/gas column mD 74.82 500 75
Horizontal permeability in water column mD 2252.15 1000 3060
Vertical permeability in water column mD 112.28 500 75
Water density at temperature Ib/ft2 74 62.47 61.47
Water viscosity at temperature cP 0.45 0.46 0.39
Reservoir temperature F 152 150 165
Porosity in oil column Fraction 0.1142 0.30 0.27
Porosity in water column Fraction 0.0748 0.30 0.27
Oil/gas formation volume factor Rb/stb 1.47 1.26 1.26
Oil gravity / gas gravity API 34 32.4 35
Oil/gas viscosity at temperature (@BHP cP 0.405 1.25 2.5
Completion diameter/hole size inches 7 7 7

Table 2.0 – Hydrocarbon contamination of Drainage/System waters14

Parameter Unit Detection Limit Drainage Water1 System Water2
Total Dissolved mg/l 1.0 63,300 69,100
Oil and Grease mg/l 2.0 < DL 484
Benzene mg/l 1.0 < DL < DL
Ethylbenzene mg/l 1.0 < DL < DL
Toluene mg/l 1.0 < DL < DL
Xylene mg/l 1.0 < DL1.0 < DL
Average of two measurements; 2 Endpoint system water

Table 3.0 – PAH Contamination of Drainage/System Waters

Component Unit Drainage water System Water
Mid-pont End-point2
Naphtalene ppb 11.32 536.61 450.38
Phenanthrene ppb ND 34.74 26.35
Fluorene ppb ND 6.66 6.11
Dibenzothiophene ppb ND 12.70 9.54
Anthracene ppb ND 0.17 ND
Pyrene ppb ND 0.25 0.23
Other PAH ppb ND 1.48 0.33
Total PAH ppb ND 592.61 492.94

O il

W a te r

Fig. 1.0 DWS Water Control Principle

W a te r

O il

18 ’
O il
W a te r 7’

64 ’

Fig. 2.0 Typical completion diagram of DWS well.

P r o d u c tio n r a te , B O P

W C = 0 .1 %



W C =97%
0 W a te r B T 6 12 18 24
T im e , m o n t h s
Fig. 3.0 Production Histories for conventional and DWS wellsNebo-Hemphill field

5 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0

4 ,5 0 0 ,0 0 0

4 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0

3 ,5 0 0 ,0 0 0

3 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0

2 ,5 0 0 ,0 0 0

2 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0

1 ,5 0 0 ,0 0 0

1 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0

5 0 0 ,0 0 0

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

S in k D r a in a g e R a t e , b b l/d a y

200B O P D 150B O P D 100B O P D 300B O P D 400B O P D 600B O P D

Fig. 4.0 DWS Well Recovery Analysis for different oil rates.
R e la tiv e p e r m e a b ility

0 .9
0 .8
0 .7
0 .6
0 .5
0 .4
0 .3
0 .2 Im b ib it io n c u r v e s
D ra in a g e
0 .1

0 .0 0 0 .2 0 0 .4 0 0 .6 0 0 .8 0 1 .0 0
W a te r S a tu r a tio n (S w - f r a c tio n )
Fig. 5.0 Relative Permeability Hysteresis Curve (Corey Exponent = 4.0)

W a te r R a te (b b l/d a y )




0 50 100 150 200 250

O il R a te (b b l/d a y )
H Y S 3 0 ' C A P :W a te r B t H Y S 3 0 ' C A P : O il B t
Fig. 6.0 Relative Permeability Hysteresis Effect on IPW with Capillary transition (envelope of water cut oil Prod.)

N e g a tiv e V a lu e s in d ic a te in v e rs e o il c o n e d e v e lo p m e n t
-5 0 100 200 300 400 500 600
-1 0
-1 5
S in k P r o d u c tio n R a te ( B L P D )
Fig. 7.0 Typical Cone Profile Within IPW
Water Cut (top Completion) (fraction)

0.3000 0.0600

0.2500 0.0500

0.2000 0.0400

0.1500 0.0300

0.1000 0.0200

0.0500 0.0100

0.0000 0.0000
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400

Sink Production Rate (BLPD)

WC@100 BLPD top WC@200 BLPD Top Oc @100 BLPD Top OC@200 BLPD top
Oil cut ( btm Completion) (fraction)

Fig. 8.0 Oil cut/Water cut Analysis in DWS well

(bbl fluid/day)
Water Rate

0 50 100 150 200 250
Oil Rate (bbl fluid/day)

60%' CAP:Oil Bt 60%' CAP:Water Bt 20%' CAP:Oil Bt

20%' CAP:Water Bt NO CAP: Water Bt" NO CAP:Oil Bt
Fig. 9.0 Effect of Capillary Pressure Transition zone on DWS well performance (IPW)

Liquid rate at completion (BLPD)

- 100
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Liquid Rate at top Completion (BLPD)

Nsp =0 Nsp =0 Nsp - 0.75 Nsp =0.75 Nsp =0.5 Nsp =0.5
Fig. 10.0 IPW variation with Sink Position Number (refernce depth of sink in water zone)


0 1 2 3 4 5
T im e (years)
Fig. 11.0 Initial inverse Oil Cone in DWS wells

Location of Sink above or Below OWC

-20000 -5 0 20000 40000 60000 80000
Total oil production ( stb )
Fig. 12.0 Water Sink Oil Production with Depth (Transition zone to below OWC)

Fig. 13.0 Simulation representation of water cone profile

Fig. 14.0 Inverse Oil Cone Development in DWS wells

0.2500 0.0450
Oil Cut In btmCompletion

0.2000 0.0350
Water cut in top Completion

0.0500 0.0100
0.0000 0.0000
0 200 400 600 800
Fluid Production at Sink (BLPD)

Fig. 15.0 OilCut and Watercut Profile outside Segregated Flow domain