Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Introduction
Forecasting the behavior of a reservoir is one of the volving unsteady-state flow of fluids. Later, progress
more important but complicated tasks of engineers was made by Welge7 in solving onedirnensional dis-
in the oil industry. Knowledge of reserves remaining placement equations more easily. The advent of digital
in a reservoir is vital to planning optimum depletion computers led to the development of methods of
of a field. Unfortunately, the engineer assigned the solving problems of greater and greater complexity.
task of predicting reserves often faces a CM%CLA ~ndi~ating the progress being made with computers,
choice. For the most accurate answer, he can use a Douglas er al. in one papefl inciuded tiie ei?ect of
computer program that takes into account all of the capillary pressure in one-dimensional flow, and in
pertinent factors, but this approach is usually expen- another papere dealt with the flow of two phases in
sive and time consuming, and requires a detailed two dimensions. The utility of computers in predict-
knowledge of the reservoir. On the other hand, he ing reservoir behavior has continued to grow as pro-
can use conventional one-dimensional displacement grams have become more user-oriented and as com-
calculations that are easily applied but that in some puters have become faster and more economical to
cases do not adequately describe the reservoir flow employ. But even today, the time, effort, and money
system. The purpose of this paper is to describe a required to use computers to solve reservoir prob-
middle-ground approach that in special situations has lems cannot always be justified. Thus, other tools are
many of the advantages of the above methods with- needed.
. .
out their more seriom ---- ~rnwbacks, This approach An excellent example of another approach is given
SJS:S~.ath~matical models that describe the principal in a paper by Jos!in. 10 ~~ ~nalvzin~ a gas injection
flow mechanisms and can be quickly appiied by hand project in a large Venezuelan re&vo;r, Joslin realized
calculations. that gas had overridden the entire oil sand became
..~ A~~V d-. predicting reservoir behavior
The Icv,,nv.wb, production was above the critical rate. However, the
has grown steadily since the ‘pioneering work of pre=nce ~f pan~~ke-like shale members penetrated
Muskat’ and of Buckley’ and Leverett.’, 3 Muskat’s by the wells prevented coning of gas into perforations
tank-type or zero-dimensional method of predicting located below the shale near the base of the sand. Oil
behavior in dissolved gas drive reservoirs has been recovery was predicted by assuming that gas displaced
invaluable to the industry. Another milestone was oil vertically downward throughout the producing
reached with the Buckley -Leverett method of pre- area. Another paper demonstrating the practical use
dicting linear displacement of oil by water or gas when of simple mathematical models is that of Matthews
flow was principally along the bedding plane. The and Lefkovitsll for predicting producing rates for
classic work of Hurst,4 Muskat.5 and van Everdingen wells in depletion-type reservoirs.
and Hurst6 laid a firm foundation for problems in- We shall describe here technology that can be used
~.HeTe is an approach
.. .. jor solving reservoir flow problems where behavior is dominated
.*
i by a rate-lzmztlng step, Simple mo~en are d zvelope~J I-,
{nr uravitY drainage where vertical
~.
f70w occurs, jor water unfierrunning cj viscous oils, jor gravity segregation of water
, banks in gas caps, and jor control of coning by injection oj oil.
( I
----l#QC’? 7Q71 d7r- 1145
to solve several other types of reservoir problems. Second, oil drains vertically downward through the
Our purpose is not to write an exhaustive treatise on gas-invaded region, joining the main oil column by
each of the subjects covered, but to show an approach flowing along the bottom of the interval.
to solving reservoir flow problems.
The Mathematical Model
Use of Simple Mathematical Models for A ve~ simple mathematical model accurately de-
pre~,c~lfig p=e~er~oir &havior ~cfibes ~he ~isplacement of oil by gas drive and
Understanding the basic mechanisms that govern flow gravity drainage when the rate is less than one-half
of oil, water, and gas in any given reservoir situation the critical rate. The first calculation determines the
is necessary in developing reliable methods of pre- gas saturation just above the gas-oil contact, using
dicting behavior in that reservoir. Four kinds of the Welge procedure to solve the fractional flow
forces — viscous, gravitational, and capillary or diffu- equation.
sional — can be involved in the dkplacement of oil
by water, gas, or solvent from a three-dimensional
~OiCW ItRd!U~.. Thus, analysis of a displacement
process in a particular reservoir can become quite
complex if each of these forces and flow ht each
..
mmension are- :—---+ -+ 12firt11ma~e!y,~tudies of some
IIIIIJUI L~lL. s”1 . ●
the dip is great enough, oil that drains through the in which
thickness will flow in a thin layer along the bottom
‘-.--..1 +~ +h. h~ce nf the ~eservok as shown
d ‘he ~lllG1 Val LU .1!- “--w -. . . .
U. = oil fiow rate, cu ft/D
in Fig. 1. Thus, the displacement process occurs in k. = effective permeability to oil, darcies;
two steps. First, gas invades the sand and the main
gas-oil contact moves downdip. The tilt angle of the
front can be predicted using Dietz’s method,” if the
rate is less than the critical rate given by
0.044 k Ap Sill a
(9/~)criti.al =
(1)
_. PO —PO ‘“ “ “
k or k gr
in which
4 = total flow rate through area A, cu ft/D
A = area of cross-section normal to bedding
plane, sq ft
k = perrneabllity, darcies
Ap = density difference, lb/cu ft
p. viscosity of oil, cp
=
l% viscosity of gas, cp
=
k = relative permeability to oil, fraction
k; = relative permeability to gas, fraction
a = angle of dip, degrees Fig. l—Mechanics of gravity drainage.
,,AJC JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY
and from continuity data can be correlated by the dimensionless parameter,
/& hP
o
UT
dz 1 du. ,..
—— . . . . . . which is derived by dividing the time re-
(4) k,, Ap ~ ‘
X6. = + dS. quired for vertical drainage,
in which h.
r,=—
z = vertical distance, ft k, Ap
t = time, days P@
= porosity, fraction
by the time required for flow along the bedding plane,
:= oil saturation, fraction.
The rate of movement of a particular oil saturation, t+
()
“dz
~ , , can be determined by plotting UOcalculated
k, is the permeability in the vertical direction and h,,
fr~rn Eq. 3 vs saturation, taking slopes to determine is the thickness in the vertical direction.
duJdSo and dividing by porosity, as indicated in Eq.
4. The amount of oil drained from each region during Example Problem
the time since passage of the front can be calcu- The utility of this simple model can be illustrated by
lated by graphical integration of a plot of height vs predicting recovery by gas drive and gravity drain-
saturation. age for an actual resewoir.
As a first approximation, the time for oil to flow
downdlp in the thin layer along the base of the Given: Average reservoir properties as presented in
formation can be neglected, as can the volume of Tables 1 and 2.
..-, . ~mt p-?e ~~ceeds
od m ttus layer. H the displacer%... Solution: Using Eq. 1 and the average reservoir prop
one-half the critical rate, oil tends to accumulate erties given in Tables 1 and 2, the critical ra’= foi
rather than flow away along the bottom of the inter- Hawkins is calculated to be 0.173 cu ft/D-sq ft. Since
val. More accurate calculations also require consid- the average actual rate of 0.036 cu ft/D-sq ft is only
eration of the thickness of the transition zone arising 21 percent of the critical rate, the simplified model
fr~m capillary effects above this layer of oil, especially should apply. Using Eq. 2, the average gas saturation
if the sands are less than 10 ft thick. just above L5e ga~.ei! c~ntac~ is found to be 45 per-
Recoveries calculated by. .thl~
:. + - m;fi1- nre
te-hl.+- --- quite cent by the Welge procedure, and the actual rate of
sensitive to the values of relative permeabdity to oil frontal movement is found to be
at very low oil saturations. Conventional laboratory
data can be extended to low oil saturations by plot- (0.0365)(365) = ~06ft,yr
Uac ~“~ I
JOURNAL OF PETROLEUK1TECHNOLOGY
xdx dx
cases reveals that the dominant displacement force q,. df = k lC. ro P(I
—— .-
arises from the viscous pressure gradients exerted on L+(l – Stri – .$Or) 2ko It,, 1 – -l’ 2
the oil by water flowing in the layer under the oil. . . . . . . . . . . . . (8)
For practical purposes, the time required for mobile
oil to rise by gravity from the water layer can be con- Integrating Eq. 8, we obtain
sidered instantaneous compared with the time re-
quired for it to flow through the oil layer along the
bedding planes to the producing wells.
The Mathematical Model = k “’”Po[- x–ln(l-x) ]--$-,
2k. P,.
Consider a cross-section of sand containing viscous
oil as shown in Fig. 4. Assume that water underruns . . . . . . . . . . . . (9)
the oil because it is more dense than oil, and assume in which W,, is the total water production in dk-
that the water layer is of constant thickness. At a placeable pore volumes. Water influx is found by
patiicular time, the fraction of the total thickness w,. = w,, + x. Cumulative oil recovery, Nj,, in dis-
occupied by water is x and the fraction occupied by placeable pore volumes is equal to x. After break-
oil is 1 – x. 0]1 and water flow horizontally with through, the instantaneous produced water-oil ratio is
the viscous pressure generated by the invading water. given by
It is assumed that as oil is produced, the water layer
1
moves’ vertically upward with no resistance. The
average oil flow rate along the length is one-half the
oil production rate since no oil enters the inflow face
qtr
—=
q.
k....
2ko }1,,
ILO
() x
m–z”””
(10)
Given:
SW, = 0.11
and s 0.20
or =
p.50 Cp
=
APO= ()%
k~(l–
~.L
x)’”””””’
(6)
k
w = 0.4 Cp
k. = 1.0 darcy
0.25 darcy
=
w, To
in which k,,.,. is the effective permea~llitY to W’ater Substituting the above data into Eq. 9 provides the
at residual oil saturation. following
Produced oil is replaced by water moving vertically
upward, so
we =
(5o) (0.25) ~_ ~ –ln(l– x)]+ *
(2) (0.4) (1)
q. =+ L$(l – SW, –s.,). . . . (7) = – 15.7 in (1 – x) – 15.2X.
By assuming that the pressure drop is the same A table may now be prepared relating x, the fraction
through the oil and water layers, equating (5) to (6). of the thickness invaded (or recovery in percent of
solving for qo, eliminating qo with Eq. 7 and group- displaceable oil), to water influx and produced water-
ing variables, we obtain oii ratio (Table 4).
ZONE
wmn
... .” mmn
.. . . . . . m!
. . ..
WATERZW
q02
~.
WATERLAYSU q W2
v
Fig. 3-Mechanics of water underrunning and coning. Fig. 4-Model for water underrunning.
= 0.02519 ft/D.
The time for water to advance the remaining 2,500
f~is
1
TOTAL i
injected updip at about three times the critical rate AREA
until the front had advanced one-half the length of =A
the model. Injection was stopped and the position of
the water bank was recorded at various times as it
segregated downdip. The scaled time required for
water to reach the outflow end was 79 years, which
compares well with a value of 60 years calculated by Fig. &Model for gravity segregation of water.
the mathematical model. The clifferences between
calculated and observed results are in the direction AS lNJ~N CEASES
one would predict because unscaled capillary forces 1
,n tie ~xper;m,enta] mode! would maintain too high
GAS AND 16.5’
a water saturation in the gas flow path and restrict %!#l?ER
— CONNATEWATER
b \ —
movement of gas updip. We conclude that the time o —
for segregation in a reservoir would be more closely (
approximated by results from the mathematical K = o.1 DAR~
model.
Control of Coning
Physical Description of the Problem
When gas exists in sands above the oil producing 16.5’
interval of a well, the pressure drawdown associated
with production of oil causes the gas-oil contact to !jOoo’
o~
“cone” down into the producing interval. Since
Muskat and Wyckoff’” presented their analytical Fig. 7—Shapes of water-gas fronts.
1151
that a liquid such as stock-tank oil can be injected injection rates, q,, many times the net oil production
down the annulus thr:u~h perforations in the casing rate. From a practical viewpoint. the size of the bar-
into the gas cone. The inJected oil flows into the reser- rier will usually be limited either by the distance
voir as shown and drains down. filling the cone to between perforations or by the rate at which liquid
foml a liquid barrier. This barrier impedes flow of is injected to form the barrier. Within the above con-
gas into the productive interval and permits produc- straints, it is frequently possible to approximate the
tion of more oil from the reservoir for a given volume performance of a fluid barrier by assuming that it is
~f ~a~. This !iquid barrier increases the effective well- a fixed horizontal barrier having a radius equal to Ah
., -~-...= ●.lle
h The
bore radius and controls coning. much like a fixed ana located just duwvV ~wl..,----- ~n~rv~l.
rv=rfnratd
horizontal barrier discussed by Karp et ol. corresponding oil production reference rate is then
Muskat and Wyckoff’” gave the following equation calculated by substituting Ah of Fig. 8 into Eq. 15
for approximating the maximum rate at which a well in place of r,c:
can produce oil without coning. *
..C4
JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY