Laboratory Evaluation of Reservoir Rock Wettability (Old & New Methods)

Laboratory evaluation of reservoir
rock wettability
(old & new methods)
Amott
Lak
USBM
index
Abouzar Mirzaei-Paiaman, Ph.D.
Mirzaei1986@gmail.com MPMS
Norm.
water
frac. flow
Craig’s Modified
Craig’s
rules rules
Contents
 Introduction to wettability
 Techniques
 Contact angle
 Amott
 USBM
 MPMS (Mirzaei-Paiaman et al., 2013)
 Normalized water fractional flow
 Craig’s rules of thumb
 Modified Craig’s rules of thumb (Mirzaei-Paiaman, 2021)
 Lak wettability index (Mirzaei-Paiaman, 2021)
 Experiments
 Wettability in gas-liquid systems
2 Laboratory evaluation of reservoir rock

wettability, Abouzar Mirzaei-Paiaman, PhD
Wettability
 Preference of a solid to be in contact with one fluid rather than another
 A major parameter affecting fluids displacement, relative permeability,
capillary pressure, electrical properties and dispersion
 Types:
 Water-wet (hydrophilic)
 Oil-wet (hydrophobic)
 Mixed-wet
 Fractional-wet
 Neutral-wet (intermediate-wet)
 Applications:
 Assigning saturation tables to simulations models (kr, imbibition Pc)
 Assessing efficiency of secondary and tertiary recoveries
 Assessing potential of formation damage
 Formation evaluation and logging

Water-wet
 All pore walls (small, large) have a
tendency to be in contact with
water
 This is the original wettability

before oil migration from source
rock to reservoir rock
 After oil migration, wettability may

change depending on several
factors
 Favorable for recovery processes

(fractured and non-fractured rocks)
Oil-wet
 All pore walls (small, large)
have a tendency to be in
contact with oil
 After oil migration, wettability

has changed from water-wet to
oil-wet
 Oil has invaded all pores
 Not favorable for recovery

processes, especially fractured
rocks

Mixed-wet
 Small pores are water-wet,
whereas large pores are oil-wet
 After oil migration, wettability

of large pores has changed
from water-wet to oil-wet
 Oil has invaded large pores
 Not favorable for recovery

processes

Some hints
 The wetting phase:
 Occupies the smaller and dead-end pores
 Exists as a film covering the surfaces of the larger pores
 Remains continuous even at low saturations
 Will spontaneously imbibe into the sample
 The non-wetting phase:

 Is located in the larger pores
 Becomes discontinuous (as droplets) at lower saturations
 Has a higher chance of becoming trapped
 Has to be forced into the sample

Factors affecting wettability
 Crude composition (polar components)
 Formation water composition
 Mineralogy and surface charges
 Carbonate vs. sandstones
 Temperature
 Pore-network topology
 PSD
 PTSD
 Aging time
 Important in laboratory and restoration processes
 In reality millions of years
Wettability restoration (aging)
 SCAL tests
 Preserved native-state wettability
 Restored wettability
 Wettability restoration or aging aims to return wettability to
that of the reservoir
 Requires full water-wetness before aging begins (cleaning)
 Saturation with formation water
 Displacing formation water by crude until Swc
 Aging at reservoir temperature for a long time
 This time varies for each reservoir rock type
 Should be found experimentally

Contact angle
 Direct measurement of wetness
 Plain surfaces
 Measures the tendency of water/

oil to spread on solid surface
 Not applicable for cores

Indirect methods (inverse problem)
 Capillary pressure-based methods
 USBM
 Spontaneous and forced displacement volumes-based methods
 Amott
 Spontaneous imbibition rate-based methods

 MPMS (Mirzaei-Paiaman et al., 2013, 2017)
 Relative permeability-based methods
 Craig’s rules
 Modified Craig’s rules (Mirzaei-Paiaman, 2021)
 Lak wettability index (Mirzaei-Paiaman, 2021)
 Normalized water fractional flow

Amott
McPhee et al. (2015). Core Analysis: A Best Practice Guide

Amott

USBM
McPhee et al. (2015). Core Analysis: A Best Practice Guide

MPMS wettability index (Mirzaei-Paiaman et al.)
Ref.: Mirzaei-Paiaman et al., Energy & Fuels, https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/ef401953b

MPMS water wettability index
 Measurement of spontaneous imbibition rate of water
into an oil-saturated core at Swc
 Strongly water-wet core (after cleaning)
 System with unknown wettability
Oil
production Slope=Xw,ref
Slope=Xw
A=
A*t^0.5
Ref.: Mirzaei-Paiaman et al. (2013), Energy Fuels 27, 12, 7360–7368
MPMS oil wettability index
 Measurement of spontaneous imbibition rate of oil into a
water-saturated core at Sor
 Strongly oil-wet core (after treatment)
 System with unknown wettability
Water
production Slope=Xo,ref
Slope=Xo
A*t^0.5
MPMS oil wettability index

Normalized water fractional flow (Ferreira et al.)
Ref.: Ferreira et al. (2017), SPE 188260

Craig’s rules of thumb
kr=ke/ko@Swc
Ref.: Mirzaei-Paiaman (2021), Fuel, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2020.119623

Limitations of Craig’s rules
 First rule is generally accurate
 Second rule generally is not accurate and fails, in
particular in:
 Oil-wet rocks with high Swc: crossover saturation is
>50%
 Water-wet rocks with high Sor: crossover saturation
is <50%
 Third rule is generally poor and inaccurate

Modified Craig’s rules (Mirzaei-Paiaman)

Modified Craig’s 2nd rule
 WW: crossover saturation to the right of RCS

 OW: crossover saturation to the left of RCS
Hint
 No need to Craig’s 3rd rule
 Craig’s 1st rule and modified Craig’s 2nd rule are sufficient

Quantitative analysis (Lak wettability index)
It combines Craig’s 1st rule and modified Craig’s 2nd rule

From Craig’s 1st rule From modified Craig’s 2nd rule
CS: crossover
saturation
Ikr1 ranges from -0.5 to +0.5 Ikr2 ranges from -0.5 to +0.5
Lak wettability index (Ikr) ranges from -1 to +1
-1: Strongly oil-wet

+1: Strongly water-wet
Ikr>0: water-wet
Ikr<0: oil-wet
Verification experiments
 Twenty USS relative permeability tests were performed
 Group 1: cleaned cores, no aging known water-wet samples
 Group 2: aged cores known oil-wet samples
 Objective: to check
 Craig’s rules
 Modified Craig’s rules
 Lak wettability index
 Normalized water fractional flow method

FZI-star (FZI*) for rock quality

GHE* template (Ahvaz field, Bangestan)
1.E+07 GHE*10
1.E+06 GHE*9
1.E+05 GHE*8
GHE*7
1.E+04
Permeability (mD)
GHE*6
1.E+03
GHE*5
1.E+02
GHE*4
1.E+01
GHE*3
1.E+00 GHE*2
1.E-01 GHE*1
1.E-02 GHE*6 data

GHE*5 data
1.E-03
GHE*4 data
1.E-04
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 GHE*3 data
Porosity (fraction) GHE*2 data

FZI-star values
Group 1 Group 2

TEM-function

TEM-function for dynamic rock typing

TEM-function to study dynamic rock quality
 TEM curves show a wide range of dynamic characteristics

TEM-function for Group 2
 TEM curves show a wide range of dynamic characteristics

Group 1 (water-wet samples)
 Crossover saturations < 50% (Craig’s 2nd rule shows oil-wetness)
 Crossover saturations > RCS (Modified Craig’s 2nd rule shows
water-wetness)
Ref.: Mirzaei-Paiaman (2021), Fuel,

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2020.119623
37
 Normalized water fractional flow technique shows water-wetness

38

Group 2 (oil-wet samples)
 Crossover saturations > 50% (Craig’s 2nd rule shows water-wetness)
 Crossover saturations < RCS (Modified Craig’s 2nd rule shows oil-
wetness)
Ref.: Mirzaei-Paiaman (2021), Fuel,

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2020.119623
40
 Normalized water fractional flow technique shows oil-wetness

41

Wettability in gas-liquid systems
 Liquid is normally wetting phase
 Gas in nonwetting phase
 In some applications changing wettability from liquid-wet

to gas-wet is beneficial
 Enhancement of well deliverability in gas-condensate reservoirs
 Recovering well deliverability is water-blocked gas wells
 Enhancing capillary trapping of CO2 (geological sequestration)
 Accelerating gravity drainage in gas-invaded zone of NFRs

Wettability alteration from liquid-wet to gas-wet
Ref.: Li and Firoozabadi, 2000 SPEREE 3(2), 139-149

Modified Craig’s 2nd rule for gas-liquid systems
 Gas-wet: crossover saturation to the right of RCS

 Liquid-wet: crossover saturation to the left of RCS

Laboratory Evaluation of Reservoir Rock Wettability (Old & New Methods)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Laboratory Evaluation of Reservoir Rock Wettability (Old & New Methods)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Laboratory evaluation of reservoir

2 Laboratory evaluation of reservoir rock

3 Laboratory evaluation of reservoir rock

 This is the original wettability

 After oil migration, wettability may

 Favorable for recovery processes

 After oil migration, wettability

 Oil has invaded all pores

 Not favorable for recovery

5 Laboratory evaluation of reservoir rock

 After oil migration, wettability

 Oil has invaded large pores

 Not favorable for recovery

6 Laboratory evaluation of reservoir rock

 The non-wetting phase:

8 Laboratory evaluation of reservoir rock

10 Laboratory evaluation of reservoir rock

 Measures the tendency of water/

 Not applicable for cores

11 Laboratory evaluation of reservoir rock

 Spontaneous imbibition rate-based methods

12 Laboratory evaluation of reservoir rock

McPhee et al. (2015). Core Analysis: A Best Practice Guide

14 Laboratory evaluation of reservoir rock

McPhee et al. (2015). Core Analysis: A Best Practice Guide

Ref.: Mirzaei-Paiaman et al., Energy & Fuels, https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/ef401953b

Ref.: Mirzaei-Paiaman et al. (2013), Energy Fuels 27, 12, 7360–7368

Ref.: Ferreira et al. (2017), SPE 188260

20 Laboratory evaluation of reservoir rock

Ref.: Mirzaei-Paiaman (2021), Fuel, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2020.119623

Ref.: Mirzaei-Paiaman (2021), Fuel, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2020.119623

Ref.: Mirzaei-Paiaman (2021), Fuel, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2020.119623

 WW: crossover saturation to the right of RCS

Ref.: Mirzaei-Paiaman (2021), Fuel, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2020.119623

Ref.: Mirzaei-Paiaman (2021), Fuel, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2020.119623

Lak wettability index (Ikr) ranges from -1 to +1

-1: Strongly oil-wet

 Group 1: cleaned cores, no aging known water-wet samples

 Group 2: aged cores known oil-wet samples

Ref.: Mirzaei-Paiaman (2021), Fuel, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2020.119623

30 Laboratory evaluation of reservoir rock

1.E-02 GHE*6 data

31 Laboratory evaluation of reservoir rock

32 Laboratory evaluation of reservoir rock

33 Laboratory evaluation of reservoir rock

34 Laboratory evaluation of reservoir rock

 TEM curves show a wide range of dynamic characteristics

 TEM curves show a wide range of dynamic characteristics

Ref.: Mirzaei-Paiaman (2021), Fuel,

Ref.: Mirzaei-Paiaman (2021), Fuel, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2020.119623

Ref.: Mirzaei-Paiaman (2021), Fuel, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2020.119623

Ref.: Mirzaei-Paiaman (2021), Fuel,

Ref.: Mirzaei-Paiaman (2021), Fuel, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2020.119623

Ref.: Mirzaei-Paiaman (2021), Fuel, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2020.119623

 In some applications changing wettability from liquid-wet

Ref.: Mirzaei-Paiaman (2021), Fuel, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2020.119623

Ref.: Li and Firoozabadi, 2000 SPEREE 3(2), 139-149

44 Laboratory evaluation of reservoir rock

 Gas-wet: crossover saturation to the right of RCS

You might also like