01/07/2021

Hesham Mokhtar Ali

Senior Reservoir Engineer
Water
Sweep Oil
Bank in/heshammokhtarali/

Agenda
 Introduction
 What is a “Waterflood”?
 How does it work?
 Value of Waterflooding
 Geological Aspects of Waterflooding
 Reservoir Rock Aspects
 Reservoir Heterogeneity and Permeability Variation
 Mobility & Mobility Ratio
 Recovery Processes
 Voidage Replacement
 Immiscible Displacement Processes
 Waterflooding Performance Analysis and Surveillance
 Managing and Optimizing Water Injection
 Case History: Water Injection

1
 01/07/2021

Reservoir Engineering, What's It?

 It’s a branch of petroleum engineering that applies scientific principles to the fluid flow through porous
medium during the development and production of oil and gas reservoirs to obtain a high economic
recovery.

 Activities:
 How much oil & gas is originally in place

 How much oil & gas is recoverable (RFs)

 What are the drive mechanisms for the reservoir

 What will future production rates from the reservoir be

 How can the recovery be increased economically

 What data are needed to answer these questions

Introduction
 Waterflooding is the most widely used injection process for oil recovery.

 Water injection was recognized as early as 1880 as a mechanism for oil recovery.

 Recognized enhanced oil recovery technique since early 1900’s.

 Fieldwide application began in the 1930s.

 Widespread engineering application began in the 1950s.

 It is the injection of water into a wellbore to push, or “drive” oil to another well where it can be produced

 Some oil reservoirs have natural water influx, which increases oil production

 Called “water drive” reservoirs or natural “waterfloods”

2
 01/07/2021

Recovery Techniques?
 Natural reservoir energy (primary
recovery)

 Improved recovery methods:

 Pressure maintenance (Gas

injection & Waterflooding)

 Thermal recovery

 Chemical flooding

 Miscible flooding

Oil Recovery Process

 Primary recovery
describes the
production of
hydrocarbons under
the natural driving
mechanisms present in
the reservoir.
 Secondary recovery
refers to the additional
recovery resulting from
the conventional
methods of water
injection and Oil recovery categories Target for different crude oil systems
immiscible gas
injection.

3
 01/07/2021

Oil Recovery Process

 Primary Recovery: Hydrocarbon production resulting from natural reservoir energy
 Rock and fluid expansion

 Solution gas drive

 Gravity drainage

 Water influx

 Conventional Improved Recovery (IR) or Secondary Recovery

 Injection of immiscible fluid
 Water injection

 Nitrogen injection

 Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) or Tertiary Recovery

 Using chemical, biological, or thermal action to improve oil recovery
 Steam, CO2, or hydrocarbon gas injection

 Polymer and/or micellar injection

 Microbe solution injection

Maximizing The Asset Value

 Techniques to identify opportunities:
 Well interventions: acid jobs, squeezes, recompletions, re-fracturing jobs

 Wells to shut in or re-activate

 Improved waterflood management

 Goal: Improve production/recovery efficiency. Oilfield Development

1 2 3 4

Cumulative production

Extend field lifetime

Payout time

4
 01/07/2021

Role of Water in the Oilfield

Water Water
• During production, oil is swept from the reservoir separation treatment
and replaced by natural or injected water that
supports the oil flow.

• However, water becomes a problem when the

amount of oil produced to the surface decreases Water Water
production injection
and surface water-treatment systems become
overloaded.

• As more water is produced at the surface than is

required for reinjection, treatment and disposal of
this excess produced water add to oil-production
costs.

Role of Water in the Oilfield

• Formation heterogeneity may lead to
premature breakthrough and
downhole water problems.

• Production and injection wells are

monitored and managed to minimize
the water/oil ratio, maximize vertical
sweep efficiency and optimize oil
production.

• Surface systems may be complex

and must be designed to manage
and treat the water volumes entering
and exiting the production system.

5
 01/07/2021

Waterflooding?
• Waterflooding or water injection, is a secondary recovery technique of increasing the oil production.
• Over time, the pressure in an oil reservoir slowly and steadily decreases and as a result the production
rate decreases.
• Why?
– Maintain Reservoir Pressure – Pressure Maintenance
– Increase Reservoir Pressure – Waterflooding
– Supplement Natural Water Influx
– Waterflood dominates processes
– Relative low cost
– General availability of water
– Ease of water injection
– High displacement efficiency of oil by water
• MANY (majority?) oil reservoirs are solution gas drive.
• Waterflooding can recover much of the oil left behind under “Primary” production, especially a solution
gas drive system.

Why Waterflooding?
Support the reservoir pressure (pressure maintenance).

Displace the remaining oil, and push it towards the production wells.

Eliminate more gas to release. Sg Kro

Increase recovery factor (RF).

Producer
Injector
Expected RF by
waterflooding:
Sweep Oil
Water
Bank

25-40 %OOIP

6
 01/07/2021

Value of Waterflooding
• Tables summarize the anticipated

production from capital investment and work

programs comprising the various elements

of this field development plan (FDP).

• When properly managed, the WF may

recover up to 50% of OOIP.

Recoverable Oil
• The amount of recoverable oil depends on the natural (primary) reservoir drive mechanism

• Solution Gas Drive

 Recovers 5% to 15% OOIP

 Leaving behind 85% to 95% of the OOIP

• Solution Gas Drive + Gas Cap Expansion

 Recovers 15% to 25% OOIP

 Leaving behind 75% to 85% of the OOIP

• Natural Water Drive

 Recovers 25% to 50% OOIP

 Leaving behind 50% to 75% of the OOIP

7
 01/07/2021

Estimation of Displaced Oil

• Floodable oil or oil in place at start of waterflood
• Different than original oil in place.
• Function of the oil that can be contacted/displaced by injected water.
• Factors Controlling Waterflood Recovery

N D  N * ED * E A * EV
• Oil in place at start of waterflood, N

• Displacement sweep efficiency, ED

• Areal sweep efficiency, EA

• Vertical sweep efficiency, EV

Factors Controlling Waterflood Recovery

N D  N * ED * E A * EV
• Oil-in-Place at the Start of Waterflooding
• It is a function of the floodable PV and the oil saturation.
• Floodable PV is highly dependent on the selection and application of net pay discriminators such as
permeability (and porosity) cutoffs.
• A successful flood requires that sufficient oil be present to form an oil bank as water moves.
• Areal Sweep Efficiency
• This is the fraction of reservoir area that the water will contact. It depends primarily upon the relative
flow properties of oil and water the injection-production well pattern used to flood the reservoir,
pressure distribution between the injection and production wells, and directional permeability.
• Vertical Sweep Efficiency
• Vertical sweep refers to the fraction of a formation in the vertical plane which water will contact.
• Displacement Sweep Efficiency
• This represents the fraction of oil which water will displace in that portion of the reservoir invaded by
water.

8
 01/07/2021

Controlling Parameters of Waterflood Recovery

• Oil saturation at the start of waterflooding, So
• Residual oil saturation to waterflooding, Sor (Sorw)
• Connate water saturation, Swc
• Free gas saturation at the start of water injection, Sg
• Water floodable pore volume, Vp , BBLS
• Oil and water viscosity, µo and µw
• Effective permeability to oil measured at the immobile connate water saturation, (ko)Swi
• Relative permeability to water and oil, krw and kro
• Reservoir stratification (Dykstra-Parsons coefficient, V)
• Waterflood pattern (symmetrical or irregular)
• Pressure distribution between injection and production wells
• Injection rate, BWPD
• Oil formation volume factor, Bo
• Economic considerations

Factors Affecting Waterflood Success

• Timing of flood – earlier is better

• Higher primary depletion (lower pressure) increases gas saturation

• High gas saturation decreases oil recovery

• Well spacing

• Tighter well spacing is better

• Increases EA and EV accelerates waterflood recovery

• Pattern selection

• Balanced patterns improve EA and WOR performance

9
 01/07/2021

Key Elements of a Successful Waterflood

• Shallower is better
• Cheaper drilling and operating costs
• Typically lower primary recovery
• Low energy oil (low oil FVF, Bo)
• Lower primary oil recovery
• Lower gas saturation
• Higher permeability is better
• Process the waterflood faster
• May utilize wider well spacing (cheaper)
• Low Permeability Variation
• High Moveable Oil Saturation
• Moderate to Low Oil Viscosity
• Favorable Relative Permeability
• Symmetrical Patterns
• Ability to Inject Large Volumes of Water

Geological Aspects of
Waterflooding

10
 01/07/2021

Measures of Geology on Waterflooding

• Heterogeneity - the permeability contrast due to variations of rock facies, reservoir layering, karsting,
fractures, etc.
– Dykstra-Parsons coefficient

• Anisotropy - frequently measured as the ratio of kmax/kmin, which is the preferred direction of fluid flow
resulting from depositional architecture, fractures, faults, etc.

• Drainability - which is the portion of the reservoir connected to the producers and can be produced via
primary depletion.

• Floodability - the portion of the reservoir connected to both the producer and injector and can be
produced via waterflooding.

Southern North Sea Correlated Well Logs

Lithostratigraphy Chemostratigraphy
• Ensure good lateral continuity of the
Infill wells Infill wells
Unit C Well E Well G Well E Well G
potential reservoir.
Unit 4-5
• Avoid any sealing structure elements Unit B

between injector and producers.

Unit 1-2-3

• For waterflooding, sound geological Unit A

channel palaeosol
flood
channel palaeosol
flood
plain plain

models need to be in place to

Are infill wells needed?
understand reservoir complexity.
Example of lateral correlation and facies distribution for 2 wells

11
 01/07/2021

Southern North Sea (logs & cores)

• Permian: Aeolian (define
Aeolian), logs show laterally
Muddy
correlatable clean dune and
sabkha
sand-sheet sandstone,
vertically alternated with
layers characterized by Sandsheet
muddy sabkha and fluvial
sandstone and silt.

• Heterogeneity needs to be
properly identified to predict
lateral and vertical baffles Dune apron
• Digenesis (define digenesis): Dune
There’s a digenetic effect Slip face
between the two wells in the
upper reservoir unit.
• The right well has better
properties & less kaolinite
(define kaolinite).

Waterflooding In Channel Systems

• 3D model of a turbidite Tortuous path(s) between
channel. producer and injector
• This picture shows the
complexity in geometry of
•Increased distance between wells
channel sands
•Decreased effective permeability
• Injected water and •Reduced connectivity
hydrocarbon will have a
•Pattern asymmetry
tortuous path to reach the
drainage point in the same •Uneven sweepout
sand body.
• Same concepts apply to
fluvial channels.

• Sweep-out problems –
uneven arrival of waterflood
fronts at production wells.

12
 01/07/2021

Reservoir Rock Aspects

Relative Permeability

13
 01/07/2021

Rock Permeability
• Rock property related to fluid flow
A.k  dP 
• Defined by Darcy’s Law q  
• Usually correlated with porosity
  dx 
• Directional

• Focus is on three permeabilities, kx, ky, kz

• Usually assumed kx & ky = kh

• kz is often referred to as kv

• In general, kv is NOT equal to kh

– correlations are often used to relate kv to kh

• If the rock is 100% saturated with a single fluid, and if the fluids do not interact with the rock, K is the
absolute permeability of the rock.

Permeability
• Absolute (Specific) Permeability
k A p
– k - fluid conductance capacity of a porous medium 100% q
saturated with a single fluid (md). L
– When the medium is completely saturated with one fluid.
0.001127 q Bo  L
k
• Effective Permeability A p
– When the rock pore spaces contain more than one fluid
– The permeability to a particular fluid when more than one fluid is keo A po
present, ko, kw, kg (md). qo 
o L
• Uses of effective and relative permeability
kew A pw
– Reservoir simulation qw 
– Flow calculations that involve multi-phase flow in reservoirs w L
– Estimation of residual oil (and/or gas) saturation keg A p g
qg 
g L

14
 01/07/2021

Relative Permeability
• For two or more fluids flowing simultaneously through a
porous medium, a relative permeability for each of the
fluids can be defined.

• The ratio of the effective permeability to a fluid at a given

saturation to a base permeability
keo
• Effective permeability is normalized to some base k ro 
permeability to calculate relative permeability. k
kew
• The common base permeabilities include: k rw 
 Absolute permeability (ka) k
 Effective non-wetting phase permeability at irreducible
wetting phase saturation, (keo)Swi keg
k rg 
k

Oil-Water Relative Permeability

• The base used to normalize the relative permeability kbase=(keo)swi
kro @ Swi
data is the effective oil permeability at the irreducible 100
water saturation.

• As water saturation increases, the relative 80

Relative Permeability (%)

permeability to oil decreases and the water relative Two-Phase Flow

Region
permeability increases until it reaches a maximum at
60
the residual oil saturation.
Oil Residual Oil
40 Saturation
End-points of a relative permeability curve:
• Irreducible water saturation, Swi
20 Irreducible
• Residual oil saturation, Sor Water krw @ Sor
• Relative permeability to oil, Kro at irreducible Saturation
Water
water saturation, (Kro)Swi 0
• Relative permeability to water, Krw at residual 0 20 40 60 80 100
oil saturation, (Krw)Sor Water Saturation (%)

15
 01/07/2021

Importance of Relative Permeability Data

• Relative permeability data affect the flow characteristics of the reservoir fluids.
• Relative permeability data affect the recovery of oil and/or gas.

100 100
Rock Type 2

Percent of Recoverable Oil

Rock Type 1
Relative Permeability (%)

80 80

60 60

40 40

20 20
Rock Type 1
Rock Type 2
0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 0 2 4 6 8 10
Water Saturation (%) Pore Volumes Injected

Relative Perm Applications

• What are the relative permeability data sets we need to use for the following situations?
– Water flooding an oil reservoir above the bubble point
– Production from an oil reservoir with a gas-cap and water aquifer
• Relative permeability data indicate the relative ability of oil and water to flow simultaneously in a porous
medium.
• These data express the effects of wettability, fluid saturation, saturation history, pore geometry, and fluid
distribution on the behavior of a reservoir system.
• Accordingly, this is probably the single, most important flow property which affects the behavior of a
waterflood.
• For water flooding an oil reservoir above the bubble point :
– Water-oil relative permeability
• For three phase flow :
– Water-oil relative permeability
– Gas-oil (or gas-liquid) relative permeability
– 3 phase relative permeability

16
 01/07/2021

Factors Affecting Effective and Relative Permeabilities

• Fluid saturations

• Geometry of the rock pore spaces and grain size distribution

• Rock wettability

• Fluid saturation history (i.e., imbibition or drainage)

Effect of Wettability
• Water-wet: Oil flows through 1.0 1.0

the middle of pore spaces

constricted by water that 0.8 0.8
wets the rock surface. Water
Kr, Fraction
Kr, Fraction

0.6 0.6
• Oil-wet: Water occupies the Oil Oil
middle of the pore spaces, 0.4 0.4
while the oil phase wets the Sor A
rock surface. 0.2 0.2
A
Swc Water Sor Swc Sor
• In a strongly oil-wet system, 0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
water is expected to flow
Sw (% PV) Sw (% PV)
easier than in a strongly
water-wet system. Strongly Water-Wet Rock Strongly Oil-Wet Rock
• The residual oil saturation
will be higher. Water-wet: Sw mostly > 20 % Oil-wet: Sw mostly < 15 %
At point A: Kro=Krw at Sw > 50 % At point A: Kro=Krw at Sw < 50 %

17
 01/07/2021

Effect of Saturation History

• Types of relative permeability curves 100
– Drainage curve

Relative Permeability, %
• Wetting phase is displaced by the non- 80
wetting phase, i.e., the wetting phase
saturation is decreasing. Imbibition
60 Drainage
• Migration of oil via cap rock into
reservoir.
40
– Imbibition Curve
• Non-wetting phase is displaced by Residual
20
wetting phase, i.e., the wetting phase Interstitial wetting non-wetting
saturation is increasing. phase saturation
phase
saturation
• Waterflooding in a water-wet reservoir. 0
0 20 40 60 80 100

Wetting Phase Saturation, % PV

Residual Oil Saturation to Water (Sorw)

• What’s left in the reservoir during/after the waterflood.
• Higher than the residual oil saturation (Sorw )
• A function of:
–Volume of water injected
–Reservoir heterogeneity
–Fluid mobility
–Operating practices for producers and injectors
–Saturation history
• Represents the minimum oil saturation for a water displacement process.
• This amount of oil is trapped by capillary forces.
• A function of:
• Wettability
• Pore structure
• Interfacial tension
• It’s the best we can hope to achieve in a waterflood.

18
 01/07/2021

Sources of Kr Data
• Laboratory measurement on representative core samples possessing appropriate reservoir wettability

a. Steady-state method

b. Unsteady-state method

• Use data from similar reservoir

• Mathematical models

• History matching

• Calculate from capillary pressure data

Normalization & Averaging Kr Data

1.0 1.0
3H 1.0 1.0
• All curves are combined and 0.9 3H
127
0.9
0.9
3H
3H
127
0.9
0.8 219 0.8
32
0.8 219 0.8
plotted on the same graph. 0.7 0.7 32
Kro

73 0.7 0.7
230
73
0.6 127 0.6 230
0.6 127 0.6
Krw

0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 (Kro)

(Krw)

0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4

• Normalization of saturations is 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3
0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
one way that these saturations 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
can be reduced to common 0 0.2 0.4 0.6
Sw, Fraction
0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
(Sw), Fraction
Laboratory data Smoothed curves
basis. 1 1
1.0 1.0 Krw actual Lab. data
Plug 219
0.9 Plug 32 0.9 0.9 Krw after De-normalization 0.9
Plug 230 0.8 Kro actual Lab. data 0.8
0.8 Average Krw* 0.8
Kro after De-normalization
• The relative permeability can 0.7 Average Kro* 0.7 0.7 0.7
Plug 219 0.6 0.6
0.6 0.6
Krw

Kro

0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5

then be de-normalized based on
Krw*

Kro*

0.4 0.4
0.4 0.4
0.3 0.3
0.3 0.3
the existing critical fluid 0.2 0.2
0.2 0.2
0.1 0.1
0.1 0.1
saturation. 0.0 0.0
0
0 0.2 0.4 Sw 0.6 0.8 1
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Sw*
The average normalized data Laboratory and de-normalized data

19
 01/07/2021

Rock Wettability

Rock Wettability
• It is the tendency of one liquid (oil or water) to preferentially spread over a solid surface, when multiple
fluids (oil, gas, water) are present

• In Hydrocarbon Reservoirs:

– Solid surface is reservoir rock (i.e., sandstone, limestone, dolomite or mixtures of each)

– Fluids are oil, water, and/or gas

• Most reservoir rocks are made up of minerals (silica and carbonates) that are naturally water-wet
• Most reservoirs are initially water-wet
• HOWEVER, reservoirs range from strongly water-wet, neutral-wet to strongly oil-wet.
• Therefore, the change must have occurred some time after oil accumulation
• Most common measures of rock wettability:
– Contact Angle test
– Amott Wettability test

20
 01/07/2021

Wettability
• The tendency of one fluid to adhere to a solid surface in the presence of other fluids.
• Oil and water are possible wetting phases.
• Many oil reservoirs were once considered to be water-wet; the prevailing wisdom is that most reservoirs
are mixed-wet.
• Mixed-wet: Some pores are water wet and other pores are oil wet.
• Only a small number of oil reservoirs are considered to be strongly water or oil-wet.
– water-wet systems are more prevalent in gas reservoirs
• Angle > 90o - oil-wet
• Angle < 90o - water-wet
• Angle ~ 90o - intermediate wettability

Imbibition vs. Drainage

• Imbibition:

– Fluid flow process in which the saturation of the wetting phase increases and the non-wetting phase
saturation decreases

– Mobility of wetting phase increases as wetting phase saturation increases.

– Waterflooding an oil reservoir in which the reservoir rock is preferentially water-wet

• Drainage:

– Fluid flow process in which the saturation of the non-wetting phase increases

– Mobility of non-wetting fluid phase increases as non-wetting phase saturation increases.

• Waterflooding an oil reservoir in which the reservoir rock is preferentially oil-wet

• Gas injection in an oil- or water-wet oil reservoir

• Pressure maintenance or gas cycling by gas injection in a retrograde condensate reservoir

21
 01/07/2021

Implications of Wettability
• Wettability affects the shape of the relative permeability curves.

– Oil moves easier in water-wet rocks than oil-wet rocks.

• Primary oil recovery is affected by the wettability of the system.

– A water-wet system will exhibit greater primary oil recovery.

• Oil recovery under waterflooding is affected by the wettability of the system.

– A water-wet system will exhibit greater oil recovery under waterflooding.

Production Performance
• Strongly Water-Wet Rock
– Large oil recovery prior to water breakthrough

WATER-OIL RATIO
OIL RECOVERY

– Relatively small increase in oil recovery post

breakthrough
– Water-cut increases sharply after water breakthrough
– Total oil recovery - independent of volume of water
injected and applied flooding pressure gradient CUMULATIVE INJECTION, PVI

• Strongly Oil-Wet Rock

WATER-OIL RATIO
OIL RECOVERY

– Lower oil recovery prior to water breakthrough

– Substantial increase in oil recovery post breakthrough
– Water-cut increases gradually after water breakthrough
– Total oil recovery - dependent on volume of water CUMULATIVE INJECTION, PVI

injected and applied flooding pressure gradient

22
 01/07/2021

Capillary Pressure

Capillary Pressure
• Capillary pressure can be qualitatively expressed as the difference in pressure existing across the
interface separating two immiscible fluids.

• Conceptually, it is perhaps easier to think of it as the suction capacity of a rock for a fluid that wets the
rock, or the capacity of a rock to repel a non-wetting fluid.

• Quantitatively, capillary pressure will be defined in this text as the difference between pressure in the oil
phase and pressure in the water phase.

• The pressure difference existing across the interface separating two immiscible fluids.

• It is usually calculated as: Pc = pnwt – pwt

– For water-gas system: Pc = pg - pw

23
 01/07/2021

Distribution of Fluids in Porous Media

• Phase distribution in rock is a
function of wettability.

Depth

Irreducible Water
• Wettability is the degree of Oil

Saturation
preference of the rock surface for
Residual Oil
each of the various fluid phases. Saturation
Producing
Completion OWC
• The distribution of fluids influences Water-Oil
the flow rate of each phase and Transition
Zone Prod. Water-Oil Contact
the oil recovery efficiency. Connate Orig. Water-Oil Contact
Water
• As the saturation of the non- Free Water Level
in Wellbore
wetting phase increases, it enters
smaller pores. 0 Saturation, % 100

Capillary Pressure and Fluid Distribution

– Gravity and capillary pressure
control the initial distribution of fluids. Oil Irreducible
Water
Saturation Po
– Gravity forces: distribute the fluid
based on density, where the less
Imaginary Pipe

dense phase locates on the top.

Pc
Height, ft
Transition Zone

– Capillary pressure: distribute the

fluid based on the wettability, Pw
causes wetting fluids to locate in
small pores and non-wetting fluids in Pc = Pct
Original Water- Oil Contact
large pores.
Free Water Level H pct
Pc = 0
– The relationship between capillary
pressure and height of the oil column Water Pressure, psi
in a reservoir is illustrated next

24
 01/07/2021

Fluid Distribution in a HC Reservoir

• Irreducible Water Saturation:
Swi - Minimum water saturation
Well
attainable when water is displaced by HC, water-free

Irreducible Water Saturation

another fluid.
• Connate Water Saturation: Top Transition Zone
D
Water saturation at reservoir
discovery (initial) conditions. HC and E
Mobile Water P
• Threshold Capillary Pressure:
Transition Zone T
– Pct - The pressure required to
overcome the capillary pressure
H
of the largest pores and force the
first small drop of non-wetting Observed HC-WC
fluid into the rock. (Pc = Pce)
• Water-Oil Transition Zone:
– The vertical zone of variable Free Water Level
water saturation between water- (Pc = 0) 0 Swir 100%
Sw
oil contact and the point above
this contact where the water
saturation is irreducible.

Drainage and Imbibition Capillary Pressure Curves

• Capillary pressure varies with the fluid saturation of a rock, increasing
as the wetting phase saturation decreases.
• Accordingly, capillary pressure data are generally presented as a
function of wetting phase saturation.
• Drainage Process:
– Fluid flow process in which the saturation of the non-wetting phase Drainage (1)
increases Pc Imbibition (2)

– Mobility of non-wetting fluid phase increases as non-wetting phase

saturation increases Pd

• Imbibition Process:
– Fluid flow process in which the saturation of the wetting phase S
Sm
increases and the non-wetting phase saturation decreases i

– Mobility of wetting phase increases as wetting phase saturation 0 0.5 1.0

increases Sw

25
 01/07/2021

Effects of Reservoir Properties on Capillary Pressure

• Capillary pressure characteristics in reservoir are affected by

– Variations in permeability

– Grain size distribution

– Saturation history

– Contact angle

– Interfacial tension

– Density difference between fluids

Rock Types & Capillary Pressure Characteristics

• Curves shift to the right (i.e., larger Rock types Air-brine capillary pressure curves
160
water saturations at a given value 1550 mD
of capillary pressure) as the 1 1
140 2080 mD
permeability decreases. 2 2100 mD
120
• Displacement pressure increases 3
5000 mD
Capillary Pressure (psi)

420 mD
as permeability decreases. 2 100

• Minimum interstitial water saturation

5 Direction of
80 premeability increase
increases as permeability
decreases.
Average reservoir 60
3
40
1
Pc 5
2 20

3 0
1 10 100
3 0 Sw, %

3 0 Sw 1 The minimum Swi=7.2 % for #81 (k is

5 5000 mD). The maximum Swi=18.2 % for
#221 (k is 420 mD)
Reservoir

26
 01/07/2021

Averaging of Pc Data
• How do we determine which curve represents the average behavior of the reservoir to be waterflooded?
• Two methods are commonly used to resolve this problem:
– J-function
– Correlation with permeability

• Leverett J-Function
• It was developed by M. C. Leverett in an attempt to develop a universal capillary pressure curve.
• The dimensionless J-function relates capillary pressure to reservoir rock and fluid properties according to
the relationship.

• Capillary pressure is a function of porosity, permeability, and interfacial tension.

• A single set of capillary pressure curves may not be appropriate
• Transform capillary pressure curves with the Leverett J-function.

Averaging Pc Data Using Leverett J-Function

• A universal capillary pressure curve is impossible to generate because of the variation of properties
affecting capillary pressures in reservoir

• The Leverett J-function was developed in an attempt to convert all capillary pressure data to a universal
curve 10
Jc
9 Jmatch

0.22 Pc k Jn1

J ( Sw) 
8 Jn2

 cos  
Jn3
7
J-function

2
Example J-Function for 1
West Texas Carbonate 0
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00
Water saturation, fraction

27
 01/07/2021

Averaging Pc Data
• The normalized average capillary pressure curve 15
33
that can be applicable for the entire field. 134
221
3
81

Oil-brine Pc, Psia

10
226
• The generalized average normalized capillary Average
pressure data will cover all the hydraulic flow
units (HFU) in the field by converting the 5

normalized water saturation (S*w) to water

saturation (Sw).
0
0.1 1 10 100
S*w, %

Pc, psi 0.18 0.36 0.72 1.44 2.89 5.42 12.64 54.17
S*w, % 100.00 64.06 26.19 13.75 6.56 2.20 1.24 0.00

Sources of Pc Data
• The laboratory tests most commonly used are:
– Restored State (porous diaphragm) Method
– Centrifuge Method
– Mercury Injection Methods
• Most laboratory measurements are made using either air-brine or air-mercury systems.
• Consequently, the resulting data must be converted to actual reservoir conditions, taking into account
the difference between interfacial tensions of laboratory and reservoir fluids and the difference in
wettability effects of the fluids.
• This conversion can be made using the relationship.
• Capillary pressure at reservoir conditions

( cos  ) R
PcR  PcL
( cos  ) L

28
 01/07/2021

Capillarity & Wettability: Summary

• Capillarity: rock pulls up liquid against gravity

• Depends on:

- Interfacial tension: keeps bubble in shape

- Wettability: fluid that is wetting the rock

- Pore size distribution: small pores pull up fluid higher

• Capillary pressure curve: describes how much wetting fluid can be pulled up, against gravity

• In reservoir: capillarity leads to transition zone above hydrocarbon/water contact

• Entry pressure: OWC (logs) is above FWL (from wireline pressures)

• Capillary pressure curve can be measured in the lab, and converted to field conditions

• From this: saturation / height curve; compare with log derived saturations

Reservoir Heterogeneity

29
 01/07/2021

Reservoir Heterogeneity
• Large Scale Heterogeneity due to:
• Reservoir
compartmentalization Sealing or Non-Sealing Faults?
• Presence of Faults Vertical Communication?
• Presence of Fracture High or Low
Permeability? Reservoir
clusters Quality Varies?
Fractures?
• Small Scale Heterogeneity due to:
• Shape and size of the
sediments
• Deposition history of the Layer 1
sediments Layer 6
• Subsequent changes due to Layer 2
digenesis and tectonics. OWC Layer 7 Layer 7 Layer 3
La
La ye
ye r 5 Layer 4
• Heterogeneity is the most difficult Localized vs. Regional Features
r 6
attribute to quantify but has the Layer 5
Pay vs. Non-Pay? Aquifer Extent?
greatest effect on the efficiency of the Layer 6
WF processes.

Permeability Variation
• In a layered reservoir, permeability variation (heterogeneity) between the layers has a major impact on
actual (and predicted) waterflood performance.

• Relatively high permeability zones often result in premature water breakthrough & bypassed oil.

• Some of these waterflood effects are hard to predict prior to water injection.

• Vertical heterogeneity is often greater than horizontal heterogeneity.

• Two primary measures of permeability variation:

– Dykstra-Parsons coefficient of permeability variation

– Lorenz coefficient of heterogeneity

30
 01/07/2021

Dykstra-Parsons Permeability Variation

• Dykstra & Parsons defined a coefficient of permeability variation, V:

– K50 = mean permeability = permeability value with 50% of the

cumulative sample distribution
– K84 = permeability at 84.1% of the cumulative sample distribution
• V is not a unique property, i.e. you could have various distributions
with the same value of V
• V ranges from zero to one.
– V approaches 0 for a completely uniform system
– V approaches 1 for a completely heterogeneous system

• Can be used to help define layering for the reservoir description

• Layers may show up as different straight lines
• Straight lines represent a log-normal distribution
• These layers can then be modeled with various analytical or numerical techniques

Dykstra-Parson Plot
• A waterflood is to be conducted in a field where the injection
patterns approximate a five-spot.
• A permeability cutoff is to be calculated to determine the net
pay which contributes to the waterflood and to determine
floodable pore volume for waterflood management purposes.
• The following information is given:
– Pwi = 6,000 psi Swc = 37%
– Pwf = 400 psi Sorw = 24%
– µo = 2.6 cp
– µw = 0.6 cp
– WOR Economic Limit = 30:1

• Oil/Water Relative Permeability data

Air permeability cumulative distribution plot (aka Dykstra-
Parson plot), oil permeability versus air permeability transform
• Dykstra-Parsons Plot -Air Permeability

31
 01/07/2021

Dykstra-Parson Plot

Ko @ Swi vs Kair from SCAL Dykstra-Parsons Plot - Oil Permeability

Mobility & Mobility Ratio

32
 01/07/2021

Mobility & Mobility Ratio

• Mobility: the ratio of the effective permeability to the viscosity.
 k   A
For oil:
qo   o  *   * P2  P1 
• Further, given that k is the absolute permeability and kro is the
 o   l 
relative permeability.
kw kk rw
• Water mobility is w  
w w
ko kk ro
• o  
o o
Oil mobility is

k of rock to fluid
• The mobility of the water must be sufficiently low and that of the Mobility 
Fluid viscosity
oil sufficiently high to provide a reasonably high areal sweep
efficiency and thus economically viable improved oil recovery.

Significance of Mobility Ratio

• Mobility ratio is a key element in the design of a waterflood.
k
  displacing
D   
• Mobility ratio is defined as a ratio of the mobility of the
displacing fluid to the displaced fluid. M 
d  k 
• It is the principal indicator used to determine sweep   displaced

efficiency.

• Often waterflooding pattern performance is represented

 kk 

graphically as a function of mobility ratio.  rw 
   
w 

k 
M  w
• Mobility is a function of saturation. 
 rw o
   kk

 k ro  w
• Water relative permeability is taken at average water  o  ro 
saturation behind the flood front while oil relative permeability   
 o 
is taken at oil saturation ahead of the front.

33
 01/07/2021

Mobility Ratio
• For a piston-like displacement process, oil flows 10
at initial water saturation ahead of the front and

Water-Oil Mobility Ratio

Oil-wet
water flows as residual oil saturation behind the
front. Water-wet
1.0

• M < 1 considered “favorable”

0.1
• M > 1 considered “unfavorable”

0.01
0.1 1.0 10 100 1000
Oil Viscosity, cp
M = 1 Neutral Water and oil move equally well

M < 1 Favorable Oil will move easier than water

M > 1 Unfavorable Water will move easier than oil

Significance of Mobility Ratio

• M > 1: unfavorable mobility ratio
– Water can flow through the rock better than oil.
– The water behind the front moves faster than the oil ahead of the front.
– As a result, the water does not displace the oil as efficiently as it advances towards the production well.
– To obtain the desired oil productivity, a pattern having more producers than injectors is recommended.
– In general, sweep efficiency and oil recovery decrease as mobility ratio increases.
• M = 1, the mobilities of oil and water are the same.
– The resistance to flow in the reservoir is identical for both phases.
• M < 1: favorable mobility ratio
– Oil flows more easily through the formation than water.
– The water moves more slowly than the oil leading to higher water saturations behind the front.
– As a result, the water sweeps the oil towards the producer more efficiently resulting in improved oil
recovery.
– When waterflooding with a favorable mobility ratio, a pattern that has more injectors than producers is
recommended.
– It improves a waterflood’s sweep efficiency.
– Mobility ratios in waterflooding projects commonly range from 0.02 to 2.0.

34
 01/07/2021

Recovery Processes

Oil Reservoir Drive Mechanisms

• Solution-gas drive
• Gas-cap drive
• Water drive
• Combination drive

• Gravity-drainage drive

35
 01/07/2021

Energy Sources
Primary Energy Source
• What is the principle source of energy for oil and gas reservoirs during depletion?
• Rock and fluid compressibility
• Pressure reduction yields expansion
• Rock expansion
• Oil, water, and gas expansion
• Fluids expelled from pore space

Primary Depletion
• Primary reservoir drive mechanisms
• Rock and fluid expansion
• Gas evolution
• Gas-cap expansion
• Natural water influx
• Reservoir pressure declines during primary depletion

Reservoir Energy Sources

 Expansion (P>Pb) and liberation of solution gas

 The expansion of the gas from a free gas cap.

 Influx of aquifer water (adjacent or underlying aquifer)

 Expansion of reservoir rock and compression of pore volume

 Expansion of original reservoir fluids

• Free gas

• Interstitial water

• Oil, if present

• Gravitational forces

36
 01/07/2021

Solution Gas Drive Reservoir

Reservoir type Pr>Psat (Pb)
 Only oil phase exists at original conditions.

Main source(s) of reservoir energy

 Liberation and expansion of dissolved (solution) gas

Reservoir behavior characteristics

 Reservoir rock expansion and liquid expansion (oil and original water)
are main sources of reservoir energy in oil reservoirs above Pb. Pr<Psat (Pb)
 NO free gas (original gas cap) present above the Pb.
 Pressure reduction below Pb of oil causes evolution and expansion of
dissolved (solution) gas.
 Liberated dissolved gas may segregate from oil phase under gravity
forces and form a secondary gas cap. Formation of secondary gas
cap is controlled by gravitational segregation of gas and oil.

Solution-Gas Drive in Oil Reservoirs

• Original (Primary) Gas Cap - gas cap that exists in
the reservoir at initial conditions (prior to any
production). Wellbore

• Secondary Gas Cap - gas cap formed during

development of the reservoir.
• Liberated solution gas may be pulled into a producing
well at high oil production rates.
Secondary
gas cap
• Liberated solution gas may move up-structure and
form a secondary gas cap if:
• Low oil producing rates
• Low oil viscosity
• High oil density
• High reservoir dip angle
• High permeability

37
 01/07/2021

GOR & Rs for a Solution-gas Drive Reservoir

• The produced gas oil ratio (GOR) at any
particular time is the ratio of scf of
TOTAL gas being produced at any time
to the STB of oil being produced at that
same instant.
• Hence, the name instantaneous GOR.

GOR Rsi
Rsb

• Point-1: Krg = 0, GOR = Rsi = Rs Rso

• Point-2: Sg<Sgc
• From 2 to 3: GOR = Rs
• Point-3: the free gas begins to flow Instantaneous vs. solution GOR

Combination Depletion & Displacement

• Depletion is often assisted by natural water drive
– you get displacement, but with declining pressure
• Weak or dead aquifers are often supplemented with peripheral
water injection
– you get displacement; pressure depends on voidage replacement
rates

Injection well
• Pattern flood:
– better pressure maintenance for low permeability
– more appropriate for low dip
– high rate when qcrit is low

• Down-dip peripheral:
– fewer wells
– better sweep when gravity stable

38
 01/07/2021

Reservoir Pressure Trends

100
• Strong water drive reservoirs will
probably exhibit an effective support
Water drive
80

Reservoir pressure, %original

to the average reservoir pressure.
• Most likely, solution gas drive
60
reservoirs (no initial gas can and no
effective water aquifer) will show a Gas-cap drive
40
rapid decline in the average reservoir
pressure specially if the wells are
producing at higher rates. 20
Solution
-gas drive
0 0 20 40 60 80 100
Cumulative oil produced, % STOIIP

Properties Favorable for Oil Recovery

 Gas-cap drive oil reservoirs  Gravity drainage oil reservoirs
 Favorable oil properties – High reservoir dip angle
 Large ratio of gas cap to oil zone – Favorable permeability distribution
 High reservoir dip angle – Large fluid density difference
 Thick oil column – Low withdrawal

 Water drive oil reservoirs  Volumetric gas reservoir

– Large aquifer – Low abandonment pressure
– Low oil viscosity  Water-drive gas reservoir
– High relative oil permeability – Large aquifer
– Little reservoir heterogeneity and stratification – Low reservoir heterogeneity and stratification

39
 01/07/2021

Voidage Replacement

Voidage Replacement
• The injection to production ratio on a pattern or field-wide basis is frequently referred to the Voidage
replacement ratio (VRR).
• Reservoir Voidage is measured at reservoir conditions and includes oil, water, and free gas production.
• The free gas production should not be assumed negligible.
• Failure to account for free gas in the Voidage computation can be a major flaw in computing total
reservoir Voidage.
• Surface volumes converted to subsurface values
• Voidage and VR are some of the most significant parameters in managing waterfloods:
– Voidage replacement ratio (VRR)
– Injection-withdrawal ratio (IWR)
– Injection-replacement ratio (IRR)
• Many waterfloods have a target VRR~1

40
 01/07/2021

Voidage Replacement
• The VRR is the sum of the water injection and natural water influx divided by reservoir Voidage,
measured at reservoir conditions.
• Monthly reservoir Voidage, evaluated at reservoir conditions:

• If VRR ≥ 1.0, the reservoir pressure is being maintained or increased for the month.
• If VRR < 1.0, reservoir pressure declines for the month.
• When computing the reservoir Voidage, it should not be assumed the free gas term is negligible without
making appropriate calculations.
• Due to leaking faults, poor cement casing bond, discontinuous sands, a gas cap, or an inactive aquifer, it
is common to lose some of the injected water to areas outside of the floodable PV.
• The volume of water lost varies from reservoir to reservoir, but it is 10 to 50 % of the IW is lost.
• Therefore for computing effective injection volumes, the actual injection needs to be reduced by the
estimated percentage of water lost out of zone.
• In the absence of other information, it can be assumed that 20 to 30 % is lost.

Immiscible Displacement in
Porous Media

41
 01/07/2021

Immiscible Displacement Theory

• Waterflood displacement governed by:

– Fractional flow equation (Leverett 1941)

– Frontal advance equation (Buckley–Leverett 1942)

– Welge tangent method of analysis (Welge 1952)

• These models are important in waterflooding:

– Some models can be used to estimate performance

– Front stability

– Breakthrough time

– Sweep efficiency

– Post breakthrough water cut

Development of Fractional Flow Equation

• The fractional flow equation is a qualitative model used to determine the fraction of the total fluid flow

that is water at a particular location and time in a linear reservoir waterflood.

• This model provides insight into the immiscible waterflood displacement process and the relative effects

of different rock, fluid, and operational properties on displacement efficiency.

• The time at which a fractional flow value applies at a given location is obtained by determining the

saturation history for that location.

42
 01/07/2021

Analysis of Fractional Flow Equation

• The fractional flow equation for linear immiscible displacement in porous media is shown below in field
units.

1.127 x 10 3 A ko  Pc 
1   0.433   sin  
qt  o  L 
fw 
 w ko
1
o k w
Gravity term
Capillary term

• This equation expresses the fraction of the total flowing stream that is water.
fw = 1 (100% water flowing, no oil flowing)
fw = 0 (100% oil flowing, no water flowing)

Fractional Flow Equation

• It is a model used to determine the water fraction
of the total fluid flow at a particular location and
time in a linear reservoir waterflood.
0.001127 A ko   Pc 
• It provides insight into the immiscible waterflood 1   0.433   sin  
displacement process and the relative effects of qt o   L 
fw 
different rock, fluid, and operational properties on  w ko
displacement efficiency. 1
o k w
• The location and time for a fractional flow value
are obtained by determining the saturation
history for that location.
• The frontal advance equation is used to
determine the movement of these fluid fronts.
0.001127 A ko  Pc
• Capillary pressure term (usually ignored)
qo  qw  o  L
• Gravity term 0.001127 A ko
0.433   sin  
qro  qrw  o

43
 01/07/2021

Fractional Flow Equation- Horizontal reservoir

• The fractional flow equation is simplified for:
1
– The reservoir is horizontal.
fw 
 w k ro
– Gravity and capillary pressure are ignored.
1
 o k rw
• This equation is evaluated for a point in the reservoir at a point in time.

• This explicitly defines a water saturation.

• Taking the water saturation and entering the relative permeability curves
provides kro and krw.

• Oil and water viscosities for the average reservoir pressure are obtained
from laboratory data or correlations.

Fractional Flow
• Oil & water rates from the generalized form of Darcy’s
kk ro A  p 
qo   .001127 *  o  0.4335 o sin  
o  x 
kk rw A  p 
qw   .001127 *  w  0.4335 w sin  
w  x 

• Oil & water rates from the generalized form   0.001127 kk ro A   Pc 
1    *   .4335 sin   
 qt  o   x 
of Darcy’s fw  
  w k ro 
 1 
k 
 rw o

• For a horizontal system & neglecting capillary
pressure  
 1 
fw   
1   w k ro 
 k  
 rw o 

44
 01/07/2021

Fractional Flow
• fw & WORr (reservoir conditions): • fw & WORs (surface conditions):

 qw   WOR r   qw   BwWOR s 
fw     fw    
 qw  qo   WOR r  1   q w  q o   BwWOR s  Bo 
• Alternatively:
• Alternatively:

 qw   f   Qw   Bofw 
WOR r      w  WOR s      
 qo   1  f w   Qo   Bw(1  fw) 

• Relationship between WORr & WORs:

 qw   QwBw   Bw 
WOR r         WOR s 
 qo   QoBo   Bo 

Factors Affecting Fractional Flow of Water

• Effects of each variable on
Effect on Fractional Flow of
fractional flow of water Increased Value of Term
Water

Injection rate Increase

Capillary pressure gradient Increase
Permeability to oil Decrease
Ko/kw Decrease
Cross sectional area Decrease
W /o Decrease
Fluid density difference Decrease
Dip angle Decrease

• Assuming a positive reservoir dip angle.

45
 01/07/2021

Fractional Flow Equation

• The fractional flow equation relates the fraction of displacing fluid (water) in the total fluid stream in the
two-phase flow water zone.
• According to Darcy’s equation, the flow rate of water at any location in the reservoir and, in particular, the
water zone is:

• The total reservoir throughput rate, qt , is the sum of the oil and water flow
rates, and it is equal to the water injection rate, iw.

• Thus, the fraction of water flowing in the total stream, fw:

• To obtain a high displacement efficiency, ED, and an efficient waterflood, it is required that the
fraction of water flowing at any reservoir location be minimized.

• We want fw to be as small as possible at a particular value of water saturation.

Fractional Flow Equation

• The fraction of water flowing at any point, x , in a linear flow system.

  0.001127 ko A   Pc 
1    *   0.4335 sin   
    
fw   
qt o x
  w k ro 
 1 
k rw  o
 

• It incorporates all factors which affect the displacement efficiency of a waterflood project;
– Fluid properties µo, µw, ρo, ρw, Pc
– Rock properties ko, kw, So, Sw
– Total throughput rate iw
– Pressure gradient dp/ds
– Structural properties of the reservoir, α, direction of flow.

• If the total flow rate is constant, and if fluid properties can be assumed constant (i.e., Not functions of
pressure), it is important to note that fraction flow is a function only of saturation.

46
 01/07/2021

Controls of Fractional Flow Equation

• Up-dip displacement of oil by water leads to a lower fw and better displacement.

– The displacement improves as the angle of dip increases.

• Down-dip displacement results in a larger fw and poorer displacement.

– The displacement becomes less efficient as the down-dip angle increases.

• The capillary pressure gradient increases fw and results in lower displacement.

• A large density difference (ρw-ρo) improves up-dip recovery but decreases down-dip recovery.

• Improved oil recovery results from a small water mobility, kw/µw , or a large oil mobility, ko/µo.

• Increasing the rate improves the efficiency of a down-dip flood but causes lower efficiency in an up-dip
flood.

Controls of Fractional Flow Equation

• Wettability
• Formation Dip and Direction of Displacement
• Capillary Pressure
• Oil and Water Mobilities
• Injection Rate
• Variations of Fractional Flow Equation

47
 01/07/2021

Effect of Relative Permeability & Viscosity

• Effect of Relative Permeability:
– Fractional flow of water, fw is a function of permeability ratio and viscosity
ratio.
– This fractional flow model is a function of ko/kw which is a function of Sw.
• Effect of Viscosity Term: 1
fw 
– As o increases, fw increases resulting in poorer displacement.  w k ro
1
– As w increases, fw decreases resulting in improved displacement.  o k rw
• Effect of Wettability:
– In a water wet system, the fractional flow of water, fw , increases as capillary
pressure gradient increases.
– In an oil wet system, the fractional flow of water, fw , decreases with
increased capillary pressure gradient.

1-D Immiscible Displacement Models

• Effect of Wettability on Fractional Flow
Water-wet Oil-wet

kr oil kr water

S cw water S or oil
S cw S or

0 1 0 1
Sw Sw
Water-wet Oil-wet
1 1

fw
fw
S cw S or
S cw S or

0 1 0 1
Sw Sw

48
 01/07/2021

Example 1: Fractional Flow Equation Description

• Create a table of terms of the fractional flow equation and indicate the effect of increasing the value of
each term will have on the fractional flow of water for up dip displacement.

1.127 x 10 3 A ko   Pc 
1   0.433   sin  
qt o   L 
fw 
 k
1 w o
o k w Increased Value of Term Effect of on fw
qt Increase
ko Decrease
ko/kw Decrease
A Decrease
w/o Decrease
Pc/L Increase
 Decrease
 Decrease

Displacement Theory
• To study the mechanism of immiscible fluid
displacement, assume the following flow system: Plane and cross-section views of a linear strip of the
reservoir
1. Linear Flow (1-D flow)
2. At water breakthrough at the outlet face, the
areal sweep and vertical sweep will be 100% –
that is, 100% volumetric sweep at initial water
breakthrough.
3. The gas saturation is zero.
4. The connate water saturation is immobile.
5. The oil and water density are constant which
means oil and water (and reservoir rock) are
assumed to be incompressible.

49
 01/07/2021

Displacement Theory
• Fluid flow and displacement behavior directly Water injection into a linear strip
between the injector and producer wells within a Containing oil and immobile connate water
single layer of constant thickness, h, porosity, µ ,
and permeability, (kro)Swi.
• Flow is linear (1-D) within the strip whose width
is w.
• It will be shown later that the methods
developed for computing ED in a linear flow can
easily be adapted to other geometries having
radial, elliptical flow, or irregular flow.
• Water injection into an oil reservoir containing
only oil and immobile connate water is initially
considered.

The Displacement Process

• Piston Like Displacement
– Idealized perfect displacement of oil to residual saturation by the displacing water phase.

• Front of the flood front the oil saturation is

So = 1 - Swi 1
• Behind the flood front
1 - Sor
• So = Sor and Sw = 1 – Sor

• Waterflooding displaces oil by pushing it to

the producer.
Sw

• In an ideal setting it would be a piston-like Water Oil

displacement.

• Ideally perfect displacement of oil would

S
lead to complete residual saturation by the wi
displacing water phase. Connate water
0

Distance

50
 01/07/2021

The Displacement Process

• Leaky Piston Like Displacement
– A more realistic model of the displacement process.
– Water displaces oil in a manner that a majority of the oil is displaced ahead of the front.
– The remaining oil is swept out by the water moving behind the flood front.

‘Leaky piston’

1 - Sor

Water
Initial oil
Injected saturation Oil
water
bank
Swi
Connate water

Distance

Linear Displacement Below Pb (Trapped Gas Re-dissolved)

• Below the Pb, a free gas Water Unaffected
Oil bank
saturation exists in the pore bank reservoir
1
spaces. Trapped gas
Saturation

• Initial
• As the reservoir pressure Oil
Water free gas
increases to a level above the Pb,
gas will go back into solution with Connate water
0
the oil.
Distance
• Waterflood response will not
occur until this condition,
known as fill-up, has occurred.
•
• The more depleted the reservoir,
the longer the time to fill-up,
and therefore, the longer the
time to waterflood response.

51
 01/07/2021

Why Displacement Is Not Ideal or “Piston-Like”

• Gravity
– Water may under run (slump); gas may override.
• Permeability variations
– Layering
We want ideal displacement
– Areal heterogeneities 1.0
• Fractures & faults

Hydrocarbon Produced
• Adverse mobility ratio
– Fingering We get “real”
displacement
• Relative permeability & fractional flow
• Geometry
– Well placement

Cumulative Injection 1.0

1-D Immiscible Displacement Models

• Buckley-Leverett

– Equation for 1-D immiscible displacement

– For water displacing oil, the equation determines the velocity of a plane of constant water saturation
traveling through a linear system.

– Incompressible fluids

– Linear displacement

– Original solution technique was trial-and-error

– Diffuse flow; fluid saturations are uniformly distributed with respect to thickness

– Displacement occurs at very high injection rates so that the condition of vertical equilibrium is not
satisfied and the effect of the capillary and gravity forces are negligible

52
 01/07/2021

Frontal Advance Equation

• The fractional flow equation relates the fraction of oil and water flowing at any point in the reservoir to the
fluid saturation at that point.

• However, a complete waterflood analysis requires that we know the saturation distribution of the various
phases at any given time as well as the manner in which this distribution changes with time.

• The frontal advance equation will provide this information.

• It is desirable to develop a procedure which will allow the determination of water saturation and oil
saturation with distance in a linear flow system.

• The formula for computing water saturation in the water invaded portion of the linear system is referred
to as the Frontal Advance Equation.

Frontal Advance Equation

• Waterflood saturation distribution

• In a linear reservoir prior to breakthrough

• With no free gas or mobile connate water

53
 01/07/2021

1-D Immiscible Displacement Models

• Welge’s Solution Average Sw behind floodfront @ BT

– Graphical
Producing water cut @ BT
– Integrates the saturation distribution from the injector to
the flood front

Sw @ floodfront
– Line from starting Swc & tangent to fractional flow curve
– Water saturation distribution prior to breakthrough
– Water saturation distribution at, and after breakthrough

Welge’s Solution
• Usually, the most desirable water saturation is the average saturation in the water swept portion of the
reservoir, Sw.

• It is this average value that will be used to

compute ED.

• This shows the water saturation at three

different periods, t1, t2, and tbt .

• Swf and Sw are constants.

54
 01/07/2021

1-D Immiscible Displacement Models

• Displacement Efficiency: ED
– Decrease in So (water swept zone), divided by Soi
– Prior to water breakthrough

 Decrease in Oil Saturation in Water Swept Zone  dSo

ED   
 Oil Saturation at the Start of Waterflooding  So

 (1  Swc)  (1  S wbt)   ( S wbt  Swc) 

E Dbt    
 (1  Swc)   (1  Swc) 
– After water breakthrough
 ( S w  Swc ) 
ED   
 (1  Swc ) 

Buckley-Leverett Conclusions
• Fractional flow and its extension to Buckley-Leverett theory is fundamental to waterflooding.

• Sensitivities to the following should be understood:

– Water injection rate
– Layering
– Heterogeneity
– Dip
– Mobility ratio

• Performing early Buckley-Leverett analysis is strongly recommended, even when numerical simulation
is the final tool of choice

55
 01/07/2021

Development of the Buckley-Leverett Model

• Buckley-Leverett frontal advance model is used in conjunction with the fractional flow equation for the
prediction of immiscible displacement performance in a linear system.
• The fractional flow equation is used to calculate the fraction of the total flow stream that is water, at any
point in the reservoir, assuming that the saturation at that point is known.
• The frontal advance equation is used to determine the velocity of propagation of a particular water
saturation through a linear system.
Assumptions
• Displacement is linear
– Fluid flow in one direction only. This does not exclude the effect of gravity on this flow direction.
– The 1-dimensional model does not consider flow streamlines.
– Model represents an element of symmetry between injector and producer of a line drive.
• Incompressible fluids
– Steady state conditions with constant pressure differential between injection and production wells.
qt = qi = qo + qw

Derivation Procedure
• The objective of the Buckley-Leverett model is to develop a relationship between frontal advance rate
and the fractional flow model. dx
o x

• From material balance:

Accumulation = inflow - outflow qi

A
qt
Water Oil

 W  (qt f win  qt f wout )t +

Water

• From consideration of the changes in saturation,

fw fw - dfw
we obtain:
W =  A x Sw
qt f w t   A x S w
fw fw
in out

 x  5.615 qt  f w 
    
 t  S w A 
 w  Sw
S dx

56
 01/07/2021

Welge’s Calculation for Average Water Saturation

• To determine the displacement efficiency, ED, it is necessary to be able to calculate the average water
saturation in the reservoir.
• This average water saturation is of interest at breakthrough and after breakthrough.

• At water breakthrough  A x S wbt  A x S wc

– The total water in the system equals the
  Wi
connate water plus the injected water.
5.615 5.615
1
• Combination of previous equation with the S wbt  S wc 
Buckley-Leverett equation results in  df w 
 
• That is, the intersection of the tangent line on the  w  S wf
dS
fraction at flow curve at fw = 1 gives the average
water saturation behind the front at breakthrough
 df w  1 0
S wbt   
 dS w  S wf S wbt  S wc

Welge’s Calculation for Average Water Saturation

1.0

• At the instant of breakthrough, when the flood

front reaches the producing well, the average
0.8
water saturation behind the front is Sw, and the
water saturation at the producing well is Swf.
• The average water saturation behind the front at
0.6
breakthrough is sometimes labeled Swbt.
• The average water saturation behind the flood fw
front remains constant during a waterflood until 0.4
water breakthrough occurs.

0.2

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Sw Swbt

57
 01/07/2021

Welge’s Average System Saturation Calculation

• Given a fractional flow curve, calculate the average water saturation in the system at water breakthrough.
• Calculate the average saturation of a system that has already broken through and is producing at 94% water.
1.0 1.0

0.8 0.8

0.6 0.6

fw fw
0.4 0.4

0.2 0.2
Swbt Sw
= 0.72 = 0.74
0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0 0.2 0.4 Sw 0.6 0.8 1.0
Sw

Information From the Fractional Flow Curve

1.0 SwBT Average reservoir
Fraction of water fw=1 water saturation
flowing at the 1
at breakthrough
flood front
0.8

fWF Tangent point

0.6
fW

fW
0.4

0.2

0
0 Swi 1-Sor Sw at the
0.0 Sw
flood front
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
SW

58
 01/07/2021

Example: Fractional Flow Curve

FRACTIONAL FLOW CURVES
S wBT
1

0.95

0.9

• Fractional Flow Curve: 0.85

0.8

1. Sw = 55% 0.75

0.7

0.65
2. fw = 82.5%

FRACTION OF WATER FLOWING

0.6

0.55

3. S wBT = 63%
0.5

0.45

 S wi 0.63  0.2
0.4

S
E D  wBT   0.5375
0.35
4.
1  S wi 1  0 .2
0.3

0.25

0.2

0.15

0.1

0.05

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80
WATER SATURATION (%)

Predicting Waterflood Performance

Using Buckley-Leverett

59
 01/07/2021

Description of Buckley-Leverett Method

• Buckley-Leverett method is a classical prediction method.
• The method does not require the use of a numerical simulator or even a computer.
• The calculations can be made in a few hours with, at most, a hand-held calculator.
• The method, as with other classical methods, quickly provides a first estimate of the performance of a
single pattern element.
• This performance can then be scheduled in accordance with the conversion of a field from primary to
secondary recovery
• This method is concerned primarily with the mechanism of oil displacement by water in a linear system
when predicting waterflood performance.
• The fractional flow and frontal advance models are used in the Buckley-Leverett method for predicting
waterflood performance in a linear system.

Assumptions of Buckley-Leverett Model

• Linear and steady state flow
• Immiscible displacement
• Single layer system of constant thickness
• Incompressible fluids
• Constant total flow rate
• Vertical equilibrium
• Initial fluid distributions are uniform with only mobile gas
• Trapped gas saturation estimated
• Linear homogeneous reservoir with constant rock and fluid properties

60
 01/07/2021

Buckley-Leverett Modeling Approach

• This method concerned primarily with efficiency of oil displacement by water in a linear system when
predicting waterflood performance.

• Buckley-Leverett frontal advance model used in conjunction with fractional flow equation.

• Frontal advance equation used to compute the saturation distribution in a linear system as a function of
time.

• We have seen that the distance, x, that a given water saturation, Sw, has traveled in time, t, can be
calculated:
5.615 qt t  df w 
x  
A  dS w  S w

Buckley-Leverett Modeling Approach

• This distance is proportional to the slope of the fractional flow curve at the saturation of interest.
• Therefore, using the slope of the fractional flow curve at a number of saturations, it is possible to
calculate the saturation distribution in the reservoir as a function of time.
• Additionally, the saturation distribution can be used to predict oil recovery and required water injection on
a time basis.
• Using assumption of incompressible flow, this information can be converted to an oil production rate.

• The main contribution of this model is to provide an understanding of the displacement behavior in that
portion of the reservoir contacted by the injected water. When flow is not linear or significant areal or
vertical heterogeneities exist that alter coverage, modifications to the model must be made, or a different
model that addresses those concerns must be used.

• When applying this method to various patterns, a constant areal efficiency, EAbt, is estimated as
discussed previously and is assumed fixed after breakthrough.

61
 01/07/2021

Predicting Waterflood Performance With BL Method

• The method for predicting waterflood performance with Buckley-Leverett can be divided into three
groups of calculations to represent the three basic stages of the displacement process.

– Initiation to fill-up

– Fill-up to breakthrough

– Breakthrough to watered out

• After these steps are performed, the results can be plotted to help visualize the waterflood performance
prediction.

• The calculation procedure of these three stages is presented next.

Stage 1 - Initiation to Fill-Up

Step 1
• Calculate water injection rate, I, using equation appropriate for
pattern being modeled. If the pattern to be modeled is composed of
V p  7758  A h   
layers, use an average permeability for the system. V p S oi
Step 2 OIP 
• Calculate pattern pore volume and oil in place using following Bo
equations
Step 3 1.127 x 10 3 k o   Pc 
1   0.433   sin  
• Calculate fractional flow and plot fractional flow curve fw  qt  o  L 
 w ko
1
Step 4 o k w
• Determine saturation of flood front, Swf, by taking a tangent from
initial saturation, Swi, on the fractional flow curve.
• Also determine fractional flow at flood front, fwf and average
saturation behind the front at breakthrough, Swbt.

62
 01/07/2021

Stage 1- Initiation to Fill-Up

Swbt
Step 5 1
• Estimate areal efficiency at breakthrough, EAbt, using
methods shown in previous chapter

Fractional Flow of Water, fw

Step 6 fwf
• Calculate amount of water to be injected in order to fill
gas saturation in swept and unswept areas with either
water or oil.
• Following equation is used:


Wif  V p E Abt S gi  S grs   1  E Abt S gi  S gru   0
0 Swc Swf
Water Saturation, % PV

Stage 1 - Initiation to Fill-Up

Step 7
• Calculate the fill-up volume in un-swept region using following equation

V fu  V p 1  E Abt  S gi  S gru 
Step 8
• The time required for fill-up can now be calculated as follows

Wif
t f 
I

63
 01/07/2021

Stage 2 - Fill-Up to Breakthrough

Step 1
• Calculate amount of water injection to breakthrough.
• This can be calculated with one of two possible equations
– Assuming displaced oil fills the gas volume in un-swept region


Wibt  V p E Abt S wbt  S wi  
– Assuming injected or displaced water fills gas volume in un-swept region

 
Wibt  V p E Abt S wbt  S wi   V fu

Stage 2 - Fill-Up to Breakthrough

Step 2
• Calculate amount of water that was injected from fill-up to breakthrough.

Wibt  Wibt  Wif

Step 3
• The amount of time required for injection until water breaks through can now be calculated using
following equation W
ttb  ibt

Step 4 I
• Calculate cumulative oil production assuming no water production until breakthrough. Wibt
• This can be calculated with one of two possible equations.
N pbt 
Bo
– Assuming that displaced oil fills gas volume in un-swept region

– Assuming that injected or displaced water fills gas volume in un-swept region
Wibt  V fu
N pbt 
Bo

64
 01/07/2021

Stage 2 - Fill-Up to Breakthrough

Step 5
N pbt
• Calculate recovery at breakthrough using RECbt 
OIP
Step 6
• Model assumes incompressible flow.
• Because of this, water injection rate dictates oil production rate.
• In order to calculate surface oil flow rate, convert water injection rate (res bbl/d) to oil rate at surface
conditions from fill-up to breakthrough
I
qo 
Bo

Stage 3 - After Breakthrough

Step 1
• Divide saturation range (from saturation of flood front at breakthrough to 100% water flowing) into equal
saturation increments.
• These represent the incremental saturation at production well.

S wor  S wf
S w 
Step 2 N
• Calculate value of fractional flow curve, fwn, the derivative of fractional flow, f´wn, and the pore volumes
water injected, Qin, for these calculated (after breakthrough) producing saturation steps

 1 
Qin    E Abt

 wn 
f

65
 01/07/2021

Stage 3 - After Breakthrough

Step 3
Qin  Qin  Qin 1
• Calculate incremental amount of water injected and time
after breakthrough using following equations V p Qin
t n 
Step 4 I
• Calculate average water saturation after breakthrough

S wn  S wn 
Qin
1  f wn 
Step 5
E Abt
• Calculate cumulative oil produced. This can be
calculated with one of two possible equations.
N pn 
V p  
E Abt S oi  1  S wn  S grs   V fu 
– Assuming displaced oil fills gas volume in un-swept Bo
region

– Assuming injected or displaced water fills gas

N pn 
V p  
E Abt S oi  1  S wn  S grs  
volume in un-swept region Bo

Stage 3 - After Breakthrough

Step 6
N pn
• Next, calculate amount of oil recovered using equation RECn 
below OIP

Step 7
• Water production rate, oil production and WOR can now be N pn  N pn 1
qon 
calculated
t n
I Bw  qon Bo
qwn 
Bw
qwn
WORn 
qon

66
 01/07/2021

Example: Buckley-Leverett Performance Prediction

Reservoir Properties
• Use Buckley-Leverett waterflood prediction Lease area (acre) 9.183
Sand thickness (ft) 30
method to calculate water performance of a
Porosity (%) 18
unit pattern. Swi (%) 15
Sgi (%) 15
• Pattern is element of a line drive that can be Bw (RB/STB) 1.02
Bo (RB/STB) 1.24
thought of as a rectangular reservoir kro @ Swi 0.830
krw @ Sor 0.630
• Calculate Viscosity oil, (cp) 3.10
Viscosity water, (cp) 0.70
– Oil production rate vs time kave (md) 14.64
Sor (residual %) 15
– Water oil ratio vs time Pressure, p (psi) 900
Areal Sweep (EA, %) 72
– Cumulative production vs time Well radius, rw (ft) 0.25
Distance injector to producer, d (ft) 2000
Distance between injectors, a (ft) 200

Example: BL Performance Prediction

• Stage 1 Initiation to Fill-Up
– Step 1 - Calculate water injection rate 1.0
– Step 2 - Calculate pattern PV and oil in place
– Step 3 - Calculate and plot fractional flow curve
– Step 4 - Determine Swf and fwf at water 0.8
breakthrough and calculate S
wbt

Sw krw kro fw 0.6

0.150 0.000 0.830 0.000
0.200 0.010 0.700 0.060
0.300 0.030 0.520 0.204 fw
0.400 0.070 0.340 0.477 0.4
0.450 0.090 0.280 0.587
0.500 0.130 0.220 0.724
0.550 0.170 0.170 0.816 0.2
0.600 0.220 0.130 0.882
0.650 0.270 0.090 0.930
0.700 0.330 0.060 0.961 0
0.800 0.500 0.010 0.996 0 0.2 0.4 Swf 0.6 0.8 1.0
Sw Swbt
0.850 0.630 0.000 1.000

67
 01/07/2021

Example: BL Performance Prediction

• Stage 1 - Initiation to Fill-up
– Step 5 - Estimate areal sweep efficiency at breakthrough
– Step 6 - Calculate volume of water needed to fill-up the as saturation
– Step 7 - Calculate fill-up volume in un-swept region
– Step 8 - Calculate time to fill-up.
• Stage 2 - Fill-up to breakthrough
– Step 1 - Calculate volume of water injection to breakthrough
– Step 2 - Calculate volume of water injected from fill-up to breakthrough
– Step 3 - Calculate time to breakthrough
– Step 4 - Calculate cumulative oil production
– Step 5 - Calculate recovery at breakthrough
– Step 6 - Calculate oil production rate at surface conditions

Example: BL Performance Prediction

• Stage 3 - After breakthrough 1.00

– Step 1 - Divide saturation range into

saturation elements 0.95
– Step 2 - Determine fwN, fwN, and Qin
after breakthrough for each of these 0.90
saturation values
fw 0.85

0.80

0.76

0.70
0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85
Sw

68
 01/07/2021

Example: BL Performance Prediction

EAbt = 0.72000 Vo = 384694
 Sw = 0.0175
• Stage 3 - After breakthrough n Swn fwn (dfw/dSw)n Qin
bt 0.500 0.724 2.069 0.348
– Step 3 - Calculate incremental water injected 1 0.518 0.759 1.873 0.384
– Step 4 - Calculate average water saturation 2 0.535 0.790 1.701 0.423
3 0.553 0.818 1.538 0.468
– Step 5 - Calculate cumulative oil producer 4 0.570 0.844 1.384 0.520
– Step 6 - Calculate oil recovery 5 0.588 0.867 1.239 0.581
6 0.605 0.887 1.102 0.653
7 0.623 0.905 0.974 0.739
8 0.640 0.921 0.855 0.842
9 0.658 0.935 0.745 0.967
10 0.675 0.948 0.643 1.120
11 0.693 0.958 0.550 1.309
12 0.710 0.967 0.466 1.547
13 0.727 0.974 0.390 1.847
14 0.745 0.981 0.323 2.229
15 0.762 0.986 0.265 2.720
16 0.780 0.990 0.215 3.345
17 0.797 0.993 0.174 4.128
18 0.815 0.996 0.142 5.058
19 0.832 0.998 0.119 6.051
20 0.850 1.000 0.014 6.902

Example: BL Performance Prediction

N Swn fn dfw/dSw Qin Qin tn
bt 0.500 0.724 2.069 0.348
• Stage 3 - After breakthrough 1 0.518 0.759 1.873 0.384 0.037 230.5
2 0.535 0.790 1.701 0.423 0.039 243.2
– Step 7 - Calculate water and
3 0.553 0.818 1.538 0.468 0.045 281.0
oil production rates and 4 0.570 0.844 1.384 0.520 0.052 326.8
WOR 5 0.588 0.867 1.239 0.581 0.061 382.8
6 0.605 0.887 1.102 0.653 0.072 451.9
7 0.623 0.905 0.974 0.739 0.086 538.0
8 0.640 0.921 0.855 0.842 0.103 646.2
9 0.658 0.935 0.745 0.967 0.125 783.7
10 0.675 0.948 0.643 1.120 0.153 960.3
11 0.693 0.958 0.550 1.309 0.190 1189.2
12 0.710 0.967 0.466 1.547 0.237 1488.7
13 0.727 0.974 0.390 1.847 0.300 1882.8
14 0.745 0.981 0.323 2.229 0.383 2401.4
15 0.762 0.986 0.265 0.720 0.490 3076.3
16 0.780 0.990 0.215 3.345 0.626 3925.3
17 0.797 0.993 0.174 4.128 0.782 4909.1
18 0.815 0.996 0.142 5.058 0.930 5837.5
19 0.832 0.998 0.119 6.051 0.994 6234.7
20 0.850 1.000 0.014 6.902 0.851 5336.8

69
 01/07/2021

Example: BL Performance Prediction

N Npn RECn qon qwn WORn Time
bt 0.633 67501 0.31 49.442 0.000 0.000 2182
• Calculate water-oil ratio 1 0.646 70410 0.32 12.617 45.970 3.644 2413
2 0.658 73116 0.34 11.124 47.784 4.296 2656
WORn = qwn/qon 3 0.671 75828 0.35 9.653 49.573 5.136 2937
4 0.683 78548 0.36 8.322 51.191 6.151 3263
5 0.695 81275 0.37 7.125 52.647 7.389 3646
6 0.707 84011 0.39 6.053 53.949 8.913 4098
7 0.719 86755 0.40 5.100 55.108 10.807 4636
8 0.732 89505 0.41 4.257 56.133 13.187 5283
9 0.744 92262 0.42 3.517 57.032 16.215 6066
10 0.757 95021 0.44 2.873 57.815 20.123 7027
11 0.769 97777 0.45 2.317 58.491 25.242 8216
12 0.781 100519 0.46 1.842 59.069 32.071 9705
13 0.793 103229 0.48 1.439 59.558 41.377 11587
14 0.805 105876 0.49 1.102 59.968 54.393 1398
15 0.816 108410 0.50 0.823 60.307 73.232 17065
16 0.827 110745 0.51 0.595 60.585 101.833 20990
17 0.836 112754 0.52 0.409 60.810 148.573 25900
18 0.843 114267 0.53 0.259 60.993 235.407 31737
19 0.846 115121 0.53 0.137 61.141 446.396 37972
20 0.847 115312 0.53 0.036 61.264 1705.487 43309

Example: BL Performance Prediction

50
RECOVER, % OGIP

0.5
40
qo, STB/D

0.4
30
0.3
20
0.2
10
0.1
0
0 10 20 30 40 0
0 10 20 30 40
TIME, thous and days
TIME, thous and days

50
WOR, STB/STB

1600
200
qw, STB/D

40
800
20
400
0 0
0 10 20 30 40 0 10 20 30 40
TIME, thous and days TIME, thous and days

70
 01/07/2021

Waterflood Performance
Efficiency

Displacement Theory
• At a particular time in the life of a project, the oil displaced ND due to waterflooding can be computed
according to the following equation.

• Oil which is displaced can be predicted at any time in the life of a waterflood if the following information
is known:

– Oil-in-place at start of the waterflood, N

– Areal sweep efficiency, EA
– Vertical sweep efficiency, EV
– Displacement sweep efficiency, ED

71
 01/07/2021

Performance Efficiencies

• Displacement efficiency (ED)

• ED is the value of water saturation at the point where the
S wBT  S wi
tangent line to the fractional flow curve has a value fw = 1.0. ED 
• (See Frontal Advance Theory, information from the fractional flow 1  S wi
curve.)

Areal Sweep Efficiency (EA)

• Fraction of the horizontal plane of the reservoir that is behind the flood front at a point in time
• Factors affecting EA
– Mobility ratio Areal Sweep Efficiency (EA)
– Well spacing Producer
– Pattern geometry
– Areal heterogeneities

• Pattern geometry influences areal EA

sweep efficiency

• Correlations exist for common Water invaded

area
pattern geometries as a function
of mobility ratio.

Injector

72
 01/07/2021

Vertical Sweep Efficiency

• Vertical (invasion) sweep efficiency is defined as the cross-sectional area contacted by injection water
divided by the cross-sectional area enclosed in all layers behind the farthest waterflood front.
• Vertical sweep efficiency is influenced most significantly by mobility ratio and the vertical variation of
horizontal permeabilities.

INJECTION PRODUCTION

EI =

Waterflood Performance Efficiencies

• The basic objective of waterflooding is to inject water and, as a result, displace oil to producing wells
• The performance of a waterflood can be evaluated in terms of recovery efficiency (E R).
• The amount of oil recovered due to waterflooding can be determined at any time during a waterflood
project using the following terms:
N p  NE R
N p  N ED E A EI
• Recovery efficiency is defined as the fraction of initial in-place oil recovered from the reservoir.
• Recovery efficiency can be calculated from displacement efficiency, areal sweep efficiency, and vertical
sweep efficiency.
volume of oil recovered
ER 
volume of in  place oil at start of project

ER  ED E A EI

73
 01/07/2021

Displacement Efficiency
• Laboratory Work:
– Laboratory work with core samples can be used to estimate displacement efficiency for a reservoir.
– Laboratory work and conclusions developed from laboratory results often represent ultimate
displacement efficiency and should be used with caution.
• This model can be used to determine displacement efficiency using the following equation.
S wbt  S wi
ED 
1  S wi

• Linear Flow Models:

– The water saturation in the reservoir has increased by (Swbt - Swi) and the oil saturation has
correspondingly decreased by an equivalent amount.
– This saturation change is a measure of efficiency of the displacement process.
– The displacement efficiency of a waterflood is maximized by minimizing the fractional flow of water as
a function of water saturation.

Displacement Efficiency
• Because of this relationship between displacement efficiency and fractional flow, analysis of the
fractional flow equation indicates the effect which various reservoir and operational variables will have
on displacement efficiency.

1.127 x 10 3 A  ko    Pc 
1     0.433   sin  
fw 
qt  o    L 
 w ko
1
o k w

• Displacement efficiency is maximized by minimizing fractional flow of water at a given water saturation.

74
 01/07/2021

Example: Displacement Efficiency Calculation

• Given a fractional flow curve, determine the displacement efficiency of the system.
Swi is 0.20. 1.0
Step 1
• Draw a tangent to the curve starting from the Swc (or
Swi) value. 0.8

Step 2
• Determine the value of the average saturation at
0.6
breakthrough, Swbt, at the intersection of the tangent on
fw = 1.0 line.
fw
Step 3 0.4
• Calculate displacement efficiency.
S wbt  S wi
ED  0.2
1  S wi
0.72  0.20
ED   0.65 0
1  0.20 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Sw

Case History
Water Injection

75
 01/07/2021

Reservoir Description
 Sandstone reservoir interbedded with silt and shale strikes.

 Reservoir rock properties summary:

 Average net pay thickness: 15 m (50 ft)

 Average porosity: 24 % PV

 Average permeability: 400 mD

 Lithology description: well-cemented, well-sorted SS, laterally changes to silty/shaly sand

Routine Core (RCAL) Data

• Due to changing of the upper part to silty/shaly facies, the RCAL data encounters two clusters of k < 10
mD.
• However, the two main clusters, the clean sand interval, exhibits a k>100 mD up to 1200 mD.

10000
HU-1

1000 HU-2
HU-3
HU-4
100 HU-4
K, mD

10
HU-3

0.1 HU-2

0.01
HU-1
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
Phi, fraction

76
 01/07/2021

Laboratory Screening Studies

• The basic laboratory studies for waterflooding included:

– Mercury Injection Capillary Pressure (MICP): Pore Size Distribution

– Wettability

– Capillary pressure

– Relative Permeability

– Formation/source water quality: Fluid-fluid compatibility testing

– Injectivity studies: Fluid-rock compatibility testing

Pore Throat Size Distribution (PDS)

1.0 1.0
99 131
• From MICP data (5 plugs), the normalised 0.8 0.8

0.6 0.6
Distribution functions

Distribution functions

PDS function displayed graphically to 0.4 0.4

0.2
identify pore throat size groupings. 0.0
0.2

0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 0.0

0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100

• The data showed that we probably have an

Pore Throat Radius, microns Pore Throat Radius, microns

1.0 1.0
141 156
uni-modal pore throat size which reduces 0.8 0.8
Distribution functions

0.6 0.6
Distribution functions

the possible unexpected deviation in flood 0.4 0.4

0.2
0.2

performance. 0.0
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
0.0
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Pore Throat Radius, microns Pore Throat Radius, microns

1.0
170
0.8
Distribution functions

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Pore Throat Radius, microns

77
 01/07/2021

Water-Oil Capillary Pressure Data

200
• High reservoir quality introduces a 126
136
higher permeability, lower Swi, a thinner 143
154
oil-water transition zone. 150

Capillary Pressure (Psig)

170

100

50

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Sw (%Pore Volume)

Relative Permeability Data

Average De-normalized
1
Krw

• The results prove water-wet Kro

SAMPLE : 81
reservoir. 0.8
SAMPLE : 81

• Amott wettability Index ranges from SAMPLE : 137

SAMPLE : 137
0.43 to 0.7, which confirms moderate 0.6
Kr or fw

SAMPLE : 157
to highly water-wet rock. SAMPLE : 157

0.4
Average Min Max
(krw)Sor 0.142 0.127 0.1525
Swi 0.336 0.217 0.438 0.2
Sor 0.233 0.17 0.29

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Sw, % PV

78
 01/07/2021

Buckley-Leverett Results
• Fractional flow at flood front, fwf=0.92 1
fw
• Average saturation at the front at , 0.9
Swf=0.67 Kro
0.8 Krw

Average Sw behind front 0.7

69 % PV
at BT, Swbt
0.6

Oil recovery at BT, 0.5

23 %

fw
RECbt
0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

Sw

Water Analysis Results

• Water analysis results for surface samples.
Formation Source
pH at 70 F 7.42 7.26
SG 1.0259 1.021
Resistivity, ohm-m at 70 F 0.2 0.236
TDS (mg/l) 35789 29084
NaCl Salinity (mg/l) 30925 23923

100000
10000
1000
100
mg/l

10
1
0.1
0.01

79
 01/07/2021

Final Fluid-Fluid Compatibility

• Water-water compatibility comprises of the analysis of the precipitation at 8 different conditions of
injection pressure & rate at reservoir temperature.

• The analysis reports the change in precipitation of following compounds with the % of the injected water:

– Barite, BaSO4,

– Calcite CaCO3,

– Strontium Sulphate (SrSO4)

– Iron Hydroxide Fe(OH)3,

– Fluorite CaF2,

– Siderite, FeCO3, and

– Gypsum, CaSO4.2H2O

Fluid-fluid Compatibility Testing

8 Barite, BaSO4, ppm
• The maximum precipitation of Barium 4000 bbl/day, 2500 psi, 195 F
4000 bbl/day, 2500 psi, 205 F
7
Sulphate ≈ 4 ppm at 50 %IW.
4000 bbl/day, 4500 psi, 195 F
4000 bbl/day, 4500 psi, 205 F
8000 bbl/day, 2500 psi, 195 F
6
Scale, ppm

8000 bbl/day, 2500 psi, 205 F

8000 bbl/day, 4500 psi, 195 F
5 8000 bbl/day, 4500 psi, 205 F

2
0 17 33 50 67 83 100
• The maximum precipitation of % of Water Injection
Calcite, ppm
Calcium Carbonate ≈ 7 ppm at 50 16 4000 bbl/day, 2500 psi, 195 F
4000 bbl/day, 2500 psi, 205 F
%IW. 14 4000 bbl/day, 4500 psi, 195 F
4000 bbl/day, 4500 psi, 205 F
12 8000 bbl/day, 2500 psi, 195 F
8000 bbl/day, 2500 psi, 205 F
Scale, ppm

10 8000 bbl/day, 4500 psi, 195 F

8000 bbl/day, 4500 psi, 205 F
8

0
0 17 33 50 67 83 100

80
 01/07/2021

Fluid-fluid Compatibility Testing

1.2 Celestite, ppm
4000 bbl/day, 2500 psi, 195 F
• The maximum precipitation of Strontium 4000 bbl/day, 2500 psi, 205 F
Sulphate (SrSO4) ≈ 0.2 ppm at 50 %IW. 4000 bbl/day, 4500 psi, 195 F
4000 bbl/day, 4500 psi, 205 F

Scale, ppm
0.8
8000 bbl/day, 2500 psi, 195 F
8000 bbl/day, 2500 psi, 205 F
8000 bbl/day, 4500 psi, 195 F
0.4 8000 bbl/day, 4500 psi, 205 F

0
0 17 33 50 67 83 100
• The maximum precipitation is ≈ 8 ppm at % of Water Injection
50 %IW. Ferric Hydroxide, ppm
100 4000 bbl/day, 2500 psi, 195 F
4000 bbl/day, 2500 psi, 205 F
4000 bbl/day, 4500 psi, 195 F
4000 bbl/day, 4500 psi, 205 F
8000 bbl/day, 2500 psi, 195 F
8000 bbl/day, 2500 psi, 205 F

Scale, ppm
8000 bbl/day, 4500 psi, 195 F
8000 bbl/day, 4500 psi, 205 F
10

1
0 17 33 50 67 83 100
% of Water Injection

Water Susceptibility
• Core plugs are saturated with synthetic formation brine and then permeability to that brine is determined
at a low flow rate.

• The flow rate is increased and permeability is recorded against increasing flow rate. If permeability
reduction is observed above a certain flow rate (critical velocity).

• Another core plug is saturated and permeability to synthetic formation brine is determined at a low flow
rate.

• This is followed by filtered injection brine.

81
 01/07/2021

Fluid-rock Compatibility Testing

Formation/Injection water mixing ratios

Mixing ratio
3
• Injection Mixtures:
2

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
%
• Three assigned flow rates based on simulation runs: FW IW
– 4000 STB/D = 45.99 ml/min
– 7000 STB/D= 80.49 ml/min
– 10,000 STB/D = 114.979 ml/min

• After base parameter measurements, the core sample was then loaded into the core holder at reservoir
conditions.
• Apply the three flow rates by injecting 100 PV from the wellbore to formation direction at every mixing
ratio (80:20 & 50:50 & 20/80 Formation : Injection water).

Fluid-rock Compatibility Results

600 Sample-1

• The analysis exhibits no large reduction in the 500

Sample-2
Water Permeability, mD

Base Perm-1
400 Base Perm-2
effective permeability; maximum 8 % at 20:80
300
Formation: Injection Water mixing ratio.
200

• Damage<20 % reduction in permeability is 100

0
considered, by majority of operators, as (80:20) (50:50) (20:80)
Formation : injection water mixing ratio
ACCEPTED damage. 10%
8% Sample-1 Sample-2
Permeability reduction
relative to base, mD

6%
4%
2%
Base Permeability
0%
-2%
-4%
-6%
-8%
-10%
(80:20) (50:50) (20:80)

Formation:injection water mixing ratio

82
 01/07/2021

Compatibility Conclusions
• Major scales in all scenarios are CaCO3 & BaSO4.
• Maximum scale amount are observed at 80/20 mixing ratio of Kharita.
• Scale tendency of CaCO3 higher than BaSO4 in all mixing ratios.
• Scale index of CaCO3 & BaSO4 having positive value more than other scales.
• Reduction of production rate to 4000 B/D show lowering in scale amount in all scenarios than of
8000 B/D.

• Therefore, a suitable scale inhibitors for CaCO3 & BaSO4 is essential to overcome scale
deposition.
• No alarm ratio of mixing the two waters at which the scales become a risk issue.
• In general, the high P & T seems to decrease the scaling tendency of Barite (BaSO4) & Calcite (CaCO3).

Sulfate Reducing Bacteria (SRB)

• SRB testing has been conducted for surface samples of formation

• Procedure: ASTM D4412-84 (re-approved 1990).

• Formation water showed Nil SRB count.

• Therefore, No risk of Sulfate Reducing Bacteria or microbial corrosion.

83
 01/07/2021

Injectivity (Step Rate) Testing

• Injectivity testing results: 4600 0.7

• Average Reservoir Pressure is ±2170 4400 0.65

Fracture initiation
psi 4200 0.6
Average Pressure gradient

Injection BHP, psi

Gradient, psi/ft
• Injection rate up to 5500 bbl/d 4000
0.62 psi/ft
0.55

• Average WHP is 1350 psi 3800 0.5

• Average BHP is 4050 psi 3600 Average Pressure gradient 0.45

0.51 psi/ft
• Injectivity index is ±2.5 b/d/psi 3400 0.4

3200 0.35

3000 0.3
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000

Injection rate, STB/D

Waterflooding Process Major Components

Equipment:
 High Pressure Pumps (Injection of Water)
 Low Pressure Pumps (Drive and Booster)
 Tanks (Settle, Skimmer & Storage)
 Chemical Injection Pumps
 Filtration Unit

Requirements:
a. Injection Rate / Pressure (Optimum)
b. Injection Water Quality
- TSS < (??), Micron
- Bacteria / Foam Inhibitor, Oxygen Scavenger, etc.

84
 01/07/2021

Running Waterflooding Station

1 2 3
Low pressure Pumps Settling Tanks Skimmer tank

4 5 6
Low pressure Pumps Filtration Units Storage Tanks (1,000 BBL)

7 8
High pressure Pumps Chemical Injection Skids

Running Water Flooding Station

1- Low pressure Pumps (2 Pumps) (5,000 B/D at 60 Psi).
 Booster pumps to drive water from water sump into 3 settling tanks (1,000 BBls capacity each).

2- Settling Tanks (3 Settling Tanks) (1,000 BBL capacity each).

 Give the necessary time required for the stream to settle and separate water from solids and oil
associated.

3- Skimmer tank (500 BBL)

 To collect the oil separated from the settling tanks and transfer it back to Kuwait energy system.

4- Low pressure pumps (2 Pumps) (5,000 B/D at 60 Psi).

 Pumps main function is to transfer the water at the settling tanks to the filtration units.

85
 01/07/2021

Running Water Flooding Station

5- Filtration Units (2 Units):
 To remove any scale or solids before injecting the produced water into the well, the filter can handle
up to 5,000 B/D and are equipped with a back wash system and automatic valves.

6- Storage Tanks (2 Tanks) (1,000 BBL capacity each)

7- High pressure Pumps (2 Pumps) (700 to 3,000 Psi WP Up to 5,000 B/D)

 High pressure pumps main objective is to deliver and inject the filtered water into the well.

8- Chemical Injection Skids (6 Skids) (each skid combined with 2 pumps and 2 tanks):
 Main function is to inject various chemicals such (biocide, corrosion inhibitor, scale inhibitor and poly
electrolyte)

Managing and Optimizing

Water Injection

86
 01/07/2021

Waterflood Surveillance
• Engineering aspects of a waterflood do not end with the completion of an initial engineering and
geological report, an economic evaluation of project profitability, or management approval of an AFE.

• Actual performance usually does not agree with predicted performance.

• These difference can frequently be attributable to the use of "average data" rather than data which is
specific to a particular geological layer or a particular area of the field.

• Forecasts also differ from actual production performance due to the lack of accurate fluid saturations So,
Swc , Sg , Sor , rock properties (kro, krw, wettability), and geological descriptions (stratification,
permeability distribution, V , rock continuity).

• Further, even if forecasts are made utilizing an accurate data base, the production forecasts ca differ
from actual behavior due to operational considerations.

Reservoir Surveillance
• Production performance of a centered 5-spot pattern.
• Production and allocated injection versus time.
So, how to analyze the WF performance?

87
 01/07/2021

Voidage Replacement Ratio (VRR)

• The VRR is defined as being the sum of the water injection and natural water influx divided by reservoir
Voidage, measured at reservoir conditions.
• VRR is usually evaluated on a monthly basis.
• In many instances, natural water influx is negligible; however, in some instances it may be important.
• Monthly reservoir Voidage, evaluated at reservoir conditions

Water/Oil Ratio (WOR) Plot

• A common tool used to evaluate reservoir
performance and forecast ultimate recovery is a
semi-log graph of WOR vs. cumulative oil
production.
• WOR is plotted on the log scale and cumulative
oil production (Np).
• The graph can be extrapolated to higher WOR
values to estimate ultimate recovery.
• At very high WOR values, the data points bend
upward and form a vertical line as the reservoir
is completely swept to a residual oil saturation
and maximum waterflood recovery is achieved.

88
 01/07/2021

X Plot
• Ershaghi and Omoregie suggested an alternate method of analyzing waterflood performance.
• Their method is a graphical technique which is referred to as an plot.
• They recommend plotting X vs. cumulative production where:

• X plot is a more accurate method of plotting waterflood data for

extrapolation purposes.
• For actual fractional flow, fw, data greater than 0.5 (WOR > 1.0),
a linear relationship between X and Np may develop when
applied on a well-by-well basis.
• Extrapolation of these data permit an estimate of future recovery
as a function of X and fw.

Recovery Factor vs. Hydrocarbon PV Injected

• A useful tool in waterflood analysis is a coordinate graph of oil recovery factor versus hydrocarbon pore
volumes of water injected.
• Hydrocarbon pore volume, HPV, is simply net pore volume multiplied by the initial oil saturation at the
time of field discovery.

• A graph of RF vs. Wi/HPV (hydrocarbon

pore volumes of water injected), Wi is
cumulative injection.

89
 01/07/2021

Pressure Transient Testing

• The performance of injection wells and production wells is of major importance in waterflooding
operations.
• It is important that a complete testing program be used before and during injection to determine the
condition of the reservoir.
• A number of parameters including formation flow capacity, formation damage, average reservoir
pressure, and formation parting pressure can be determined from a properly designed and analyzed
test.
• In general, the major objectives of a testing program are to monitor changes in formation damage,
reservoir pressure, and parting pressure gradients.
• The pressure tests which are most frequently conducted in a waterflood surveillance program include:
– Buildup
– Falloff
– Step rate
– Hall plot

Step Rate Test

• To realize maximum injectivity without fracturing the reservoir, it is
necessary to have a reliable method of determining the fracture
pressure.
• Fracture gradients are generally known for most areas, but the
actual fracture pressure in a given reservoir can vary from well to
well.
• Further, the fracture pressure can vary with time and operating
conditions within a given well largely due to reservoir pressure.
• As reservoir pressure declines, formation parting pressure (FPP)
decreases.
• Conversely, as reservoir pressure increases during fill-up, the
FPP increases.
• The parting pressure will often increase with injection during the
early life of a flood.
• An approximate fracture pressure can also be obtained from the
instantaneous shut-in pressure following a stimulation treatment;
this is approximate, however, and as noted previously, the
pressure can change for a number of reasons.

90
 01/07/2021

Click to edit Master

Hall Plot title style
• The Hall plot is used to evaluate well injectivity problems as a result of near wellbore condition
changes which could happen due to:
• Wellbore damage or plugging
• Well stimulation, such as acidizing or fracking (intentional)
Interpretation of Hall Plot
• Formation fracturing (non-intentional !)
• Water leakage; behind the casing

• Applications of the Hall Plot:

• Identify Injectivity problems, using trends of

injection history data (injection volumes and
injection wellhead pressure)
• Quantify wellbore skin factor without interrupting
injection operations.

Injector Analysis – Hall Plot

• Skin analysis technique for injection wells
• Y-axis = Hall coefficient = Σ (Δpressure x Δ days)

• OFM Variables required:

• Cumulative Monthly Injected Water Volume
• Water Injection Pressure (Monthly)

• Diagnostics:
• 1 = Damaged well
• 2 = Gradual plugging in well
• 3 = No change, no plugging, no damage
• 4 = Stimulated well or sudden channeling

91
 01/07/2021

Injector Analysis – Hall Plot Slopes

• In this field example, all injectors are
shown on the same graph.
• Steeper slopes mean more resistance
to injection .

• The more the deviation to the up-

left means more damage and the
need for stimulation.

Injector Analysis – Example (Gulfaks-B)

High resistance to flow
Low injectivity index

• Field case with 5 injectors

Low resistance to flow

High injectivity index

• Well C4 has the highest cumulative water injected due

to low Hall’s coefficient.

92
 01/07/2021

Water Injection Evaluation

• OFM plotting water injection water injected data: Rate
• Water injection rate
• Injection WHP
WHP
• Cumulative water injected.

• Hall coefficient:
High resistance to flow
• Initially, it showed normal injectivity. Low injectivity index

• That was a good indication for improved injectivity index

• Hall coefficient is typically used to evaluate injector
performance.
Low resistance to flow
High injectivity index

Waterflooding Incremental Recovery

• Predict rate in case of natural depletion (base
case)
• Estimate at 40% annual decline.
• Predict the future performance of the flow rates
after injection (using oil schedules).
• Compare between the two scenarios.

• Without injection:
• EUR: 12.6 MMSTB (03/2030)
• Remaining reserve: 3.9 MMSTB

• With injection:
• EUR: 15.8 MMSTB (03/2030)
• Remaining reserve: 7.1 MMSTB

93
 01/07/2021

Conclusions
• Waterflooding is the widely used applied secondary recovery technique worldwide.

• Factors are controlling waterflood recovery: N, ED, EA, and EV.

• Reservoir heterogeneity and permeability variations are critical parameters while waterflooding design.

• The significant rock properties to waterflooding: relative permeability, capillary pressure, and wettability.

• Favorable mobility ratio (M < 1) is preferred for improved waterflood’s sweep efficiency.

• For effective reservoir pressure maintenance, VRR is required to be ≥ 1.0.

• The fractional flow equation is the fundamental relationship for immiscible displacement processes like
waterflooding.

Thank You

94