Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Spe 1578 Pa PDF
Spe 1578 Pa PDF
ABSTRACT
This paper presents a method for calculating the producing rate of a well as a function of time following steam
stimulation. The calculations have proved valuable in both
selecting wells for stimulation alld ill determining optimum
treatment sizes.
The heat transfer model accounts for cooling of the oil
sand by both vertical alld radial conduction. Heat losses
for any number of productive sands separated by unproductive rock are calculated for the injection. shut-in and
production phases of the cycle. The oil rate increase caused
by viscosity reduction due to heating is calculated by
steady-state radial flow equations. The response of Sllccessive cycles of steam injection call also he calculated with
this method.
Excellent agreement is shown betweell calculated and
actual field results. Also included are the results of several
reservoir and process variable studies. The method is best
suited for wells producing from a multiplicity of thin sands
where the bulk of the stimulated production comes from
the unheated reservoir. The flow equations used neglect
gravity drainage and sall/ration changes within the heated
region.
INTRODUCTION
This paper presents a calculation method which can be
used to predict the field performance of the cyclic steam
stimulation process. The calculation method enables the
engineer to select reservoirs that have favorable characteristics for steam stimulation and permits him to determine how much steam must be injected to achieve favorable stimulation. While the calculation represents a considerable simplification of physical reality and the results
are subject to numerous assumptions which must be made
about the reservoir, it has been found that realistic calculations can be made of individual well performance following steam injection.
The duration of the stimulation effect will depend primarily on the rate at which the heated oil sand cools which,
in turn, is determined by the rate at which energy is removed from the formation with the produced fluids and
conducted from the heated oil sand to unproductive rock.
A complete mathematical solution to this problem is a
formidable task, and finite difference techniques would undoubtedly have to be used. The calculation method preOriginal manuscript received in Society of Petroleum Engineers office
July 8, 1966. Revised manuscript received Oct. 31, .1966. Pa~er (SPE
1578) was presented at SPE 41st Annual Fall Meetmg held m Dallas.
Tex., Oct. 2-5, 1966. Copyright 1966 American Institute of Mining,
Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers, Inc.
DECEMBER, 1966
casing radius; for insulated tubing. 1', may be roughly approximated as the inside tubing radius.
The average down-hole steam quality X i for the entire
steam injection period is then
X,
= X""'f -
_ 2r.DKr,
Q" -
.( T,-T +2
aD) I
r
--------~--------~-
(1)
-./VVVv
H EAT
CONDUCTION
OIL SAND
SHALE
OIL SAND
SHALE
OIL SAND
(2)
Heated Radills
During steam injection the oil sand near the well bore
is at condensing steam temperature L. the temperature
of saturated steam at the sand face injection pressure.
Pressure fall-off away from the well during injection is
neglected in this analysis. and T, is assumed to exist out
to a distance rio where the temperature falls sharply to
Tr, the original reservoir temperature. In reality, the temperature falls more gradually to reservoir temperature because of the presence of the hot water bank ahead of the
steam, but this is neglected to simplify the calculation.
The heated zone radius is calculated by the equation of
Marx and Langenheim: In the case of multisand reservoirs, if it is assumed that each sand is invaded uniformly
as though all sands had the same thickness h and were invaded by equal amounts of steam:
r.'
_ _ FLOW OF OIL,
WATER & GAS
, If,!
MQ'J"
= hM.
(3)
The function l. is plotted as a function of dimensionless time T = 4Kt,! h'(pC)] in Fig. 3. The use ofthis equation for multisand reservoirs also assumes that injection
times are sufficiently short and that interbedded shale is
sufficiently thick that no heating occurs at the mid-plane
of the shale during the injection period. Eq. 3 further assumes that the value of average density times heat capacity pC for the barren strata is the same as that for the
oil sands [(pC),h" Ie = (pC),].
For multisand reservoirs, a heated radius for each sand
r"i could be calculated assuming equal steam injection per
foot of net sand. An average heated radius rh could then
be computed from rio' = !h,r,,,'/!h,. Practically speaking.
the h ' for reservoirs consisting of more than three sands
of reasonably uniform thickness can be approximated by
using Eq. 3.
< <
IOr-----------------------------------------~
t
~
'"~-10 F
====:::;...-:
0.01 ';;;-----~--_;:_:--------__:__=_-----~~--------~
0.01
0.1
1.0
10
FIG.
1614
2-1
Loss
DETERMINATION.
regions in the case of a multisand reservoir) after termination of steam injection is calculated from an approximate
energy balance around the region r" < I' < r h :
T,,"
+ (T,
T,
(4)
In Eq. 4, ~. and ~ are unit solutions of component conduction problems in the radial and vertical directions, respectively. 8 is a correction term which accounts for the
energy removed from the oil sand by the produced oil,
gas and water. If little energy is removed by the produced
fluids (the case of a low rate well), 8 can be neglected and
Eq. 4 reduces to a product solution for the average temperature of a series of right circular cylinders of radius
r" conducting three-dimensionally to initially unheated
rock. The development of Eq. 4 is given in the Appendix.
Values for V,' and ;;-, for the case of production from a
single sand may be read from Fig. 4. Relations from which
values of y, and Y, may be calculated are developed in
the Appendix (Eqs. A-8 and A-16).
ENERGY REMo\ED \\ITH
THE PRODUCED FLums
The quantity 8 in Eq. 4 accounts for the energy removed from the formation with the produced fluids and
is defined by:
If
I
8= 2
Hfdx
..
ZTrr,,'(pC),(L _ T..)' dlll1enslOnless .
(5)
I,
Hf
q""(H..,,
H,,), Btu/D
(6)
where
H"" = [5.61(pC)"
(7)
H" = 5.61 p,,[R,,(/lr - h r,.)
wv
0000
1356
I ... - P ... ,
(9)
when P" > p ... ,. and R".1' < R ... , R ... ,. = R" when p"", > p,,;
if R"., calculated by the above formula is greater than R,,,
then R"., = R"."
1.0
;:::-
0,8
r--.
~III ~
.........,
0.6
"'-
rh
"-
"
0.2
Vr
I
~
IIIII
I I III
_ _ 41l(t-t j )
Vz :8=---2-
IIIII I ~111 r
VZ -II~I~GL~ ~AI~~)
'"
0.1
p.,,,
DEeEMIlER, 1966
c,
, dimensionless
(10)
+ c,
The geometric factors c, and c, include the pattern geometry and the skin factor of the well. For preliminary engineering calculations if no change in permeability occurs,
suitable values can be calculated from the formulas given
in Table I, which assume that r" r, and r,r r,.
The effect of prior well bore permeability damage is accounted for by using the effective well radius r" in the relations (Table 1). The effective well radius is related to the
and skin factor S by the equation
actual well radius
r"
(11)
Implicit in the assumptions used to derive Eq. 10 is the
assumption that heating and fluid injection have a negligible effect on the permeability to oil. To adequately predict changes in the permeability to oil during the injection and production phases, prediction of two-dimensional,
three-phase behavior is required. The complexity of adding
these equations would undoubtedly necessitate the use of
finite difference techniques to arrive at a solution and are
beyond the scope of the simplified model proposed in this
paper. When swelling clays are present, steam might reduce the permeability, although cases of plugging attributable to steam injection in permeable unconsolidated sands
are apparently rare.
Influence and Significance of the Skin Factor
.......
1.0
"-.....
;;r
c,
System
10
10C
Radial-Pe Constant
8 - DIMENSIONLESS TIME
FIG. 4--S0LUTION FOR
For conventional heavy oil reservoirs which have sufficient reservoir energy to produce oil under cold conditions, the use of steady-state radial flow equations appears
to be adequate for predicting the oil production rate response to steam injection. These equations are inadequate
for tar sands and pressure-depleted reservoirs where the
bulk of the stimulated production must come from oil sand
which is actually heated rather than from the portion of
the reservoir that is still cold. The equations outlined in
the following section for this latter case will predict an unrealistically low rate response until the heated region itself
has become depleted or reduced in oil saturation.
",-
0.01
tj
Vr: 8=--2-
0.4
Il(!- l)
CALCULATlO~
'I, )
Radial-pi' Declining
U'
'I,'
2r,--
--"
(")
In -
Th
","
V, +-.
2 :J
re
In("I,")-'h
1615
r"
k - J ) In-=-.
S = ( -k
d
rtl
If kd is small relative to k and r"
large positive value.
(12)
> r".,
4,050
470
183
16
133
Depth. It
Section thickness, ft
Pre-stimulation
135
0.83
985
Stimulation
First Cycle
+ In rh/r".
= S,
S + In relr",
1n r,/rh
; c:, = -----'---
In rJf",
To obtain the oil rate as a function of time. It IS necessary to know the unstimulated productivity index J, and
the static reservoir pressure p, as a function of the cumulative fluid withdrawals. Then the stimulated oil rate q"h
can be calculated:
J J,.
:'P. STB/D
(14)
= u,,'(pC)J1N, (T,,," -
T,.)
(13)
qoh =
(15)
An approximate method of taking this energy into account is to add it to that injected during the succeeding
cycle while assuming that injection takes place into a reservoir that is at original temperature T,. This additional
energy will result in new cycles having a larger heated radius for the same injection time and steam injection rate.
The major assumption involved in this approximation is
that interbedded shale and overburden and underburden
are at initial reservoir temperature at the beginning of
each cycle. This is a conservative assumption since calculated heat losses for cycles after the first will be higher
than those actually observed. A more optimistic analysis
would assume that all of the energy remaining, including
that in the shale, is added to the energy injected on the succeeding cycle.
Second Cycle
19.2
800
55
354
288
47,813
53,700
30,400
18.1
770
46
487
378
80,803
79,140
47,600
Steam injected, MM Ib
RESULTS
MATCH OF FIELD TEST PERFORMANCE
WITH CALCULATIONS
400,----------------------------------,
>-
~ 300
........
....
III
~200
......
: 100....
(5
OLi__
~~_LilWLll
200
__
400
~~
__________
600
800
__
1000
YARIABLE
STUDIES
_.-
~-.
--
---+~~--+-
./
...
I-
...
VI
oct
ar::
-'
'/
[7
~-+-
::::>
IO-J
-'
w
>
~
......
w
1'1
Static
Index
(M bbl)
Pressure (psio)
(B/D/psi)
0
100
200
300
400
490
410
330
250
170
0.312
0.281
0.256
0.231
0.206
,
,
o lOOOr---,---,---,----,---,---,---,----,--,
T rw= 0.25 FT
I
Cold
Productivity
Cumulative
Ojl Production
--
I
PERF. RADIUS = 0.25 IN.
~ 800r-----+---+---+----~- -+--+---.+--,
~
~ 600r----+--1-+-"<--+--~---+----L--~.. - ,
-_.
._-_._,
,
I
'--"'---
Ti
i
I,
400f---+--++-~""'
;:)
'"
....
~
i
10
200r----+-~+---~--~--~~~---
STEAM
INJ
""'~;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;:;:;:::::d
i
(5
NO. OF HOlES/FT
FIG. 6--EFFECTIVE \VELL RADIUS FOR PERFORATED CASED HOLE
(AFTER MUSKAT').
DECEMIIEII.1966
Reservoir Characteristics
Depth, It
Section thickness, ft
Net sand thickness, ft
Well A
(Fig. 7)
Well B
(Fig. 9)
867
546
3,000
200
67
335
7
Number of sands
Well C
(Fig. 10)
Well D
(Fig. 11)
3,740
200 to 1 ,088
234
18
4,000
1,400
467
36
Reservoir temperature,
of
at 300F
Skin factor
Effective well radius,
ft'
97
100
120
125
900
13
20 to 60
4010 1,000
1 to 6
133
8
70
3
0.45
0.00176
0.00176
0.25
30
300
99
230
0.128
0.35
63
1.0
1.0
1,000
0.3
0.57
600
0.5
0-1.0
6.9
40
16.6
42 to 126
Pre-stimulation
soo
Stimulation
Steam injected, MM Ib
Wellhead injection
surface conditions
Pressure, psig
440
780
770
Temperature, of
450
520
518
Steam quality,
dimensionless
1.0
0.95
0.95
Injection time, days
21
80
55
Shut-in time, days
13
4
5
*Includes effect of well completions, perforations, etc., jf any.
1,500
600
0.95
18 to 54
viscosity. However, it is not obvious how much less incremental oil will be produced over the entire cycle length
since the lower heat removal rate with the produced fluids
will cause stimulated production to last longer for the lighter oil. If there were no heat losses from the heated portions
of the oil sands, the increased cycle length for the lower
viscosity oil should give the same incremental oil recovery
as for the heavier oil although at a reduced stimulated rate.
Consequently, heat losses to unproductive rock are important in evaluating the effect of oil viscosity on incremental oil recovery.
The effect of initial oil viscosity is shown in Fig. 9 for
Well B of Table 4. These results indicate more than a 50
per cent increase in incremental oil recovered for a 1,000cp oil over a 40-cp oil.
iii 1.8
c:a
'.....
~
1.6
1.4
CI:
:E 1.2
t;;
'..... 1.0
o
4.
0.8
...:E
...
CI:
~<:
Ow
CI:::l
u..:c(
CI:>
Oz 0.8
~O
z~
-c(
W-A
C)::l
z~
1.6
1.2
0.4
\
\'
:I:ti
CI:
0..
0.0
I
i
i
1
1.
i
,
1000
-T--t--'-
~
0.5
..."'al
I
II
I
J.
.1
OIL VISCOSITY - CP
.1
100
Ii
0.0
~ r-- 1
-0.4
0.4
40
0.6
CI:
U
c(-
uJJ
2.0
-'
~~0.4
Oal
~ ~ 0.3
-+-- L
__~,_;~
-"11F---+--t----+-~____t__-~-~
"'0
~
i= 02
~
.
... co:
co:
u
0.1 f--i-----j
I
I
DATA:!m
~ABl~ 4
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
.......
-'
CD
CD
2.0
-~-.--------.--
----~
IX
---
-------
m s/h n =1500
i=
<I:
1.6
....<I:
~
on
.......
-'
(5
-'
1.2
m s/h n =1500
ms/h n = 500
.S
<I:
....~
CONCLUSIONS
I. The simplified calculation method presented herein
can match history for conventional heavy oil wells and
can be used with confidence to make preliminary field selection and process variable studies for these cases. Steadystate radial flow equations, while adequate for predicting
steam stimulation response for most conventional heavy
oil wells, should not be used for tar sands and depleted reservoirs. For these cases the bulk of the oil production
comes from the region actually heated rather than from the
unheated region.
2. Process variables studies using the calculation show
that (a) wells having a high skin factor prior to stimulation
will respond most favorably to steam stimulation; a permanent rate improvement results if heating removes a portion
of the skin; (b) low produced gas-oil and water-oil ratios,
high steam injection rate, high sand-shale ratio, thick sands
and high original oil viscosity benefit the stimulation effect;
(c) thick sections require a proportionately greater energy
input to achieve a given incremental oil-steam ratio; (d)
flashing of produced water which causes rapid cooling
and deterioration of the stimulation response can be avoided by back-pressuring the well early in the producing
cycle. This will permit more incremental oil to be produced
than would be attained if drawdowns were maximized
throughout the entire cycle.
'::This is true while the heated radius Th is still much smaller than
the drainage radius reo As rh becomes nearly equal to rtJ, productivity
increases rapidly with increasing Tit again.
Z
....
IX
0
0
200
150
250
100
50
mst;/h - M LB STEAM/FT OF GROSS INTERVAL
300
Case
Method of BackPressuring
(Well Q594)
Pump limited
No bock-pressure
35,000
17,000
1619
NOMENCLATURE
r,
rd
r,
=
=
=
C,
C"
=
=
c,,,
C.'
hi
= enthalpy
r.
r,
rw
R"
Rw
R"" =
DV" ,
Btu/lb
hi.
Sk
S =
S, =
I
t, =
1',,,"
T, =
T, =
=
=
v" v,
v" V, =
V =
Xi =
X,,,,(
Yo =
=
z=
Y,
average downhole steam quality during mJeclion phase, Ib vapor/lb liquid plus vapor
wellhead steam quality, Ib vapor/lb liquid plus
vapor
hypothetical thickness used in Eq. A-14, ft
zero order Bessel function of the second kind
first order Bessel function of the second kind
vertical distance from bottom of lowest sand
in interval, ft
N.~
~
;=1
h,
/30 =
8
7i =
dimensionle~s time
_
_
2
_
$, = eTerfc hiT) +--;=\I T -
v ....
~~',--(
r~)
r?r
(Jr
= volumetric
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors wish to express their appreciation to Esso
Production Research Co, for permission to publish this
paper. Also, the comments and help of A. R. Hagedorn
and A. G. Spillette are gratefully acknowledged.
~,
ill
(A-3)
t = t,
0< r< r
v, = 0
t = t,
r> r
v,. = 0
t? t,
"
(A-4)
r __ "
Ct::
If the thermal properties do not vary with r, the temperature solution for r < r,. is'
if'
v, = .... '
REFERENCES
e-b'!fi,(y)J,,(ry/r,,)dy
y' [J, (y) Y n (y) - in (y) Y, (y)]'
(A-5)
=2...
Eq. A-5 reduces to:
....y
(f)
v,,
e-I>'II"J,(y)J,,(ry/r,.)dy
(A-6)
o
The average of I', from 0 to r" is given by:
OVERBURDEN
---;---
----f------1---
APPENDIX
DERIVATION OF EQUATIONS
NEGLIGIBLE ENERGY REMOVAL
WITH PRODUCED FLUIDS
V v,
v~
DECEMBER, 1966
--t I
---t---I
I
I
(A-l)
where v, and v~ are unit solutions of component conduction problems in the rand z directions, respectively. Similarly, an integrated average temperature for the heated
regions may be computed:
v= V v, ~~
12
(A-2)
UNDERBURDEN
FIG. 12-GEOMETRIf. ApPROXIMATION OF MULTIPLE
SAND,SHALE SEQUENCE.
1621
h, = thickness of sand j
I, = thickness of shale j
e- h'''''},(y)dy
Vr =
00
-b" "-
--
Vr
(A-7)
III
Eq.
The average temperature V, can then be found by integrating over all th~ in.dividual sands:
Bl+hl
F,
S,
(-ITl),
(A-8)
Sf.
/:=0
1'(1.5
yr. k!
1'(2
k)T'( 1
k)
k) 1'(3
N.,
~
;=1
F,dz
/
k)
F,
IN.,
~
~;'
_
(A-lO)
[( ITI)"
W, +
-- W, erl U.' , - W, ert-;=-
(2
k) (3
]
k)
(A-II)
.1',.
where
U', = B",
W;
B"
If
4a( I -
(t
il'v,
ill',
ilz' =
Tt
( )_,0
all
~ I all
v. t"z .
'j
v,
(A-12l
=
0, t
>
t, as
j'
('
2\/-:rl'it
(A-l3)
2yat
+ ert z
2\/at
+ h" -
2y'at
- _B,
+ el-I
B.,
2v'at
+ ii., -
+ . . . . .]
2v'al
2v'at
= B,_, + h + i
= 0
h =h +y
i, =-~ I, - y (if i, < 0,
j _,
j _,
If significant energy is removed with the produced fluids, some account should be made for this energy removal.
Consider an energy balance taken on the sum of the thicknesses of the originally heated regions Z and radius rio:
t
Zr.r,,'(pC)l~
Z-:rr,,' (pC), V -
1622
H,dx -
H.., (A-17)
ti
(A-16)
1]
Bm - ji",
(A-14)
where B,
B
W.,-Iw) +
"
t,) .
-Cf)
~w
--=- [exp( -
\I
+ iim - B"
+ h" - Bm
W, = B"
IV, = B,., - B"
+ ii, -
yw
VW
v,
B,
TI'I! m=ln=l
Hence, Eq. A-8. together with Eqs. A-lO and A-II. form
the solution for V,. A plot of
\'s b' is given in Fig. 4.
VZ
[W
W.
W, ert, ' + w, erl ,-
N.
-----:--c-.--
yw
(A-l5)
m= 1
vz
II,
2
S,,=
~
;=1
B,
(A-9)
S'tl
N,
1,12
V= V -
Hldx
t,
Z-:rr,,' (pC),
(A-19)
Ii
= V(I -
Combining Eq. A-20 with Eqs. A-I7 and A-IS. and dividing by Z.".r,,'(pCl, gives
= V - 2 V8 - V(l - 8) (I which simplifies to E4. 4.
Of several approximations for H, which were tried, the
one used here gave best agreement with field data. Note
that for the limiting case where conduction IS negligible
-7 1), this approximation gives:
v,
v,vol
and Eqs. A-I7, A-IS and A-20 reduce to Eq. A-2.17 may
be considered an effective driving force for conduction
which takes into account the effect of temperature reduction due to the removal of energy by the produced fluids.
The definition of 8 from Eq. 5 combined with Eqs. A17 through A-19 gives Eq. 4. By Eqs. A-19 and 5:
DECEMBER, 1 .. 66
(A-20)
8)
(v,v,
T,,," = T,.
(A-22)
***
)623