Proper Simulation of Chemical-EOR Pilots—
A Real Case Study
A critical step in proper design and
optimization of any chemical-
enhanced-oil-recovery (CEOR) process
is appropriate and precise numerical
simulations. Addition of chemical
species to the material-balance
equations, along with finer resolution
requirements for CEOR simulations
compared with waterfloods, often
makes it impractical to run full-field
CEOR simulations to the required
accuracy. Sector models, by their
definition, are naturally suited for
modeling of pilots. This paper presents
a case study for appropriate simulation
of a CEOR pilot.
Introduction
Chemical flooding (polymer flooding,
surfactant/polymer flooding, and alkali/
surfactant/polymer flooding) has im-
proved significantly over the past de-
cade because of vast research efforts to
find practical solutions to specific field
applications, improvements in the man-
ufacturing and synthesis of new chemi-
cals, field trials, and implementations by
the industry.
Because of the complexity of CEOR and
the inherent uncertainties regarding suc-
cess of a particular CEOR process, exten-
sive evaluations are required before deci-
sions about full-field implementation can
be made.
Numerical simulations are critical in
CEOR evaluation and provide a realistic
performance estimate, assuming that the
underlying Earth model is reliable and ap-
propriately calibrated. Usually, chemical
floods are performed on candidate fields
with a successful waterflood history, but
This article, written by Special Publications Editor Adam Wilson, contains highlights
of paper SPE 179659, “Proper Simulation of Chemical-EOR Pilots—A Real Case
Study,” by Nariman Fathi Najafabadi, SPE, and Adwait Chawathe, SPE, Chevron,
prepared for the 2016 SPE Improved Oil Recovery Conference, Tulsa, 11–13 April. The
paper has not been peer reviewed.
For a limited time, the complete paper is free to SPE members at www.spe.org/jpt.
JPT • JANUARY 2017
CEOR simulations are more complex and
challenging compared with waterflood
modeling and history matching.
Sector-Model Generation
For the subject asset, which is a brown-
field, the primary requirement in CEOR
modeling is a representative, quality-
controlled waterflood-history-matched
full-field (or sector) model. Such a model
should replicate the field performance
(pressures and flow rates), at least on
an overall basis and, preferentially, on a
well-by-well basis. The model used for
this study had high well density, was suf-
ficiently reliable, and was used routinely
for field development and performance
prediction. The paper demonstrates the
preparation and use of a sector model
from this readily available waterflood full-
field model for a polymer-flood pilot area.
The area of interest (AOI) for the
pilot should be selected during an
alternatives-analysis phase by a multi-
functional team of field engineers and
scientists and CEOR subject-matter ex-
perts after a project-framing exercise. In
this case, this area is a seven-spot pat-
tern containing a central injector and
six surrounding producers. This is a
small area compared with the full-field
model. A local-grid-refinement (LGR)
option was considered to create a suf-
ficiently fine grid for CEOR simulation,
but the resulting model was still deemed
practically prohibitive.
It was then decided to use a sector
model containing the AOI in the middle
to evaluate the CEOR project. In order to
minimize the effect of boundary on the
AOI, one seven-spot pattern was added
in each direction surrounding the sec-
tor model to be studied. Generally, when
choosing the extent of the sector model,
one can leverage the presence of seal-
ing faults or other no-flow boundaries
to minimize the required sector-model
area. Unfortunately, in this case, there
were no sealing faults or no-flow bound-
aries in the immediate vicinity of the AOI.
Flow-diagnostics tools that use stream-
line simulations were used to ensure that
all the streamlines connecting to the
AOI are contained in the selected sector
model. This is an important step in en-
suring that all areas of the field in com-
munication with the AOI are included in
the sector model, which is critical for ob-
taining a representative CEOR forecast
with this model.
Boundary-Condition
Optimization
Although an attempt was made to mini-
mize the effect of the sector boundary
on the AOI by choosing a substantial-
ly larger sector model compared with
the AOI, it is still critical to recreate
the full-field model fluxes at the sector-
model boundary and evaluate the effect
of boundary conditions on the wells in
the AOI. There are many ways to repro-
duce the full-field model fluxes at the
boundary of the sector model:
◗ Adjust the contribution of the
wells on the boundary to the
sector model on the basis of a
corrected AOI of the boundary
wells.
◗ If the preceding technique is
not sufficient to reproduce the
fluxes, one can use material-
balance regions in the full-field
model to extract the fluxes at
the cells on the boundary of the
sector model. This information
can be used to tune injection/
production rate or bottomhole
pressure of pseudowells placed at
43
 the boundary of the sector model production histories that are very simi- sweep efficiency), polymer-concentration
to reproduce the full-field model lar to those of the same area/wells in the sensitivities were conducted using
fluxes. full-field model. appropriate injection-pressure and
◗ Pore-volume multipliers at the production-rate constraints.
boundary of the sector model are Grid-Size Optimization
another way of adding pressure To mitigate the numerical-dispersion Conclusions
support and mitigating the problem, it is recommended to have CEOR simulations are more complex
boundary effects. approximately 15 cells between wells and tend to be more computational-
Using these techniques can help estab- for numerical simulation of CEOR using ly expensive compared with water-
lish the appropriate boundary condition single-point upstream fully implicit nu- flood simulations. The complexity in
that results in backward boundary- merical reservoir simulators. To keep CEOR simulations is because of addi-
condition optimization, meaning that, the artificial mixing in check, it is rec- tional material-balance equations (for
if the boundary conditions of the sector ommended to use cell sizes on the order the chemicals) that need to be solved,
model are close enough to those of the of 30 ft or smaller. These are simply while the computational burden is the
full-field model, initializing the sector rules of thumb and should be tested for result of the finer grid resolution that
model to initial conditions (of the full- every reservoir and process. Choosing is required to mitigate numerical dis-
field model) and simulating the history a practical cell size for a given problem persion and artificial chemical dilution,
of the field should result in saturation requires balancing the level of accura- plus smaller timestep requirements of
and pressure distributions and injection/ cy required and the simulation runtime CEOR models because of highly non-
that can be afforded, given the number linear phase behavior and rheology of
of simulations needed to optimize the the chemicals. Thus, CEOR simulations
SI METRIC slug design and perform required sensi- are a trade-off between numerical ac-
CONVERSION FACTORS tivity simulations. curacy and computational expediency.
The list below includes SI metric A detailed study was performed to Massively parallel computing, dynamic
conversion factors for common evaluate various process and reservoir LGR, and sector modeling are potential
engineering units. parameters affecting the optimal grid options to achieve the trade-off success-
acre × 4.046 873 E+03 =m2
size for polymer and surfactant/polymer fully. This paper focused on sector mod-
acre × 4.046 873 E-01 =ha processes. A tool was then developed eling and explained its challenges and
acre-ft × 1.233 489 E+03 =m3 that could provide an educated initial its analysis and resolution options. For
ampere-hr × 3.6* E+03 =C
Å × 1.0* E-01 =nm guess for the appropriate grid size for successful CEOR modeling,
°API 141.5/(131.5+°API) =g/cm3 the process of choice. After the grid- ◗ Ensure that the sector-model
atm × 1.013 250* E+05 =Pa
bar × 1.0* E+05 =Pa optimization exercise for the problem at boundary conditions (fluxes and
bbl × 1.589 873 E-01 =m3 hand was performed, it was concluded pressure) adequately mimic full-
Btu × 1.055 056 E+00=kJ
Ci × 3.7* E+10 =Bq that a 5×5 grid refinement (in the x- and field performance.
cp × 1.0* E-03 =Pa • s y-direction) is required for appropriate ◗ Get the grid resolution right, a
cycles/sec ×1.0* E+00=Hz
dyne × 1.0* E-02 =mN simulation of this polymer flood. The critical step that ensures that
eV × 1.602 19 E-19 =J performed level of refinement puts the o The reservoir sweep is honored.
ft × 3.048* E-01 =m
ft2 × 9.290 304* E-02 =m2 cell size count of the sector model close o The chemicals perform per
ft3 × 2.831 685 E-02 =m3 to 400,000 cells. laboratory expectations in the
°F (°F-32)/1.8 =°C
°F (°F+459.67)/1.8 =K reservoir.
gal (U.S. liq) × 3.785 412 E-03 =m3 Polymer-Flood Study o There is a reasonable trade-off
hp × 7.460 43 E-01 =kW
hp-hr × 2.684 520 E+00=MJ The two important design parameters between simulation accuracy
in. × 2.54* E+00=cm for a polymer flood are processing rate and expediency.
in.2 × 6.451 6* E+00=cm2
in.3 × 1.638 706 E+01 =cm3 and (endpoint) mobility ratio. The higher ◗ Set aside repopulating the fine-
kip × 4.448 222 E+03 =N the polymer viscosity, the lower the end- grid properties by running Earth-
knot × 5.144 444 E-01 =m/s
ksi × 6.894 757 E+03 =kPa point mobility ratio and, thus, the better modeling work flows on the fine-
kW-hr × 3.6* E+06 =J the sweep efficiency. On the other hand, grid models.
lbf × 4.448 222 E+00=N
lbm × 4.535 924 E-01 =kg processing rate (defined as the fraction Even if the fine-grid properties are in-
mL × 1.0* E+00=cm3 of the reservoir pore volume that can be herited from the coarse grid, the flow-
mho × 1.0* E+00=S
mile × 1.609 344* E+00=km flooded on an annual basis) may also be field heterogeneity of the fine-grid mod-
oz (U.S. fl) × 2.957 353 E+01 =cm3 proportional to the endpoint mobility els could be very different from that of
psi × 6.894 757 E+00=kPa
psi2 × 4.753 8 E+01 =kPa2 ratio. Processing rate is a very important the coarse-grid models. The effect of
sq mile × 2.589 988 E+00=km2 parameter for project economics, and the this difference on the recovery efficien-
stokes × 1.0* E-04 =m2/s
ton × 9.071 847 E-01 =Mg higher the processing rate, the higher the cy predicted by the models is a func-
ton (metric) × 1.0* E+00=Mg net present value of the CEOR project. tion of how displacement and sweep ef-
tonf × 8.896 444 E+03 =N
tonne × 1.0* E+00=Mg To find the polymer concentration ficiencies are affected by the numerical
*Conversion factor is exact.
that optimizes both processing rate and dispersion/artificial mixing and flow-
endpoint mobility ratio (best achievable field heterogeneity, respectively. JPT

44 JPT • JANUARY 2017