Relative Permeability

Concepts
C.D. Adenutsi, Ph.D.
Department of Petroleum Engineering, KNUST
Office: Petroleum Building, PB 318
February, 2022
 Introduction
• When two or more fluids flow at the same time, the relative
permeability of each phase at a specific saturation is the ratio of the
effective permeability of the phase to the absolute permeability

𝑘𝑜
𝑘𝑟𝑜 =
𝑘

𝑘𝑔
𝑘𝑟𝑔 =
𝑘

𝑘𝑤
𝑘𝑟𝑤 =
𝑘
 Introduction

• 𝑘𝑟𝑜 = relative permeability to oil;

• 𝑘𝑟𝑔 = relative permeability to gas
• 𝑘𝑟𝑤 = relative permeability to water
• 𝑘 = absolute permeability
• 𝑘𝑜 = effective permeability to oil for a given oil saturation
• 𝑘𝑔 = effective permeability to gas for a given gas saturation
• 𝑘𝑤 = effective permeability to water at some given water saturation
 Introduction
• Since the effective permeabilities may range from zero to 𝑘, the relative
permeabilities may have any value between zero and one

• It should be pointed out that when three phases are present the sum
of the relative permeabilities (𝒌𝒓𝒐 + 𝒌𝒓𝒈 + 𝒌𝒓𝒘 ) is both variable and
always less than or equal to unity

• It has become a common practice to refer to the relative permeability

curve for the nonwetting phase as 𝑘𝑛𝑤 and the relative permeability for
the wetting phase as 𝑘𝑤 .
 Two-Phase Relative Permeability

• When a wetting and a nonwetting phase flow together in a reservoir

rock, each phase follows separate and distinct paths.

• The distribution of the two phases according to their wetting

characteristics results in characteristic wetting and nonwetting phase
relative permeabilities.
 Two-Phase Relative Permeability
• Since the wetting phase occupies the smaller pore openings at small
saturations, and these pore openings do not contribute materially to
flow, it follows that the presence of a small wetting phase saturation
will affect the nonwetting phase permeability only to a limited extent.

• Since the nonwetting phase occupies the central or larger pore

openings that contribute materially to fluid flow through the reservoir,
a small nonwetting phase saturation will drastically reduce the wetting
phase permeability
 Two-Phase Relative Permeability
• Fig. 1 presents a typical set of relative
permeability curves for a water-oil system
with the water being considered the
wetting phase.

• The range of water saturation is from the

initial water saturation (𝑆𝑤𝑖 ), to water
saturation at residual oil saturation
1 − 𝑆𝑜𝑟𝑤 .

• Oil relative permeability 𝒌𝒓𝒐 is highest

at 𝑺𝒘𝒊 and declines to zero at 𝟏 − 𝑺𝒐𝒓𝒘 . Fig. 1 Oil-water relative permeability curves.
 Two-Phase Relative Permeability

• Water relative permeability 𝒌𝒓𝒘

increases from zero at to its highest
value at 𝟏 − 𝑺𝒐𝒓𝒘 .

• Figure 1 shows the location of critical

water saturation (𝑺𝒘𝒄 ) .

• Critical water saturation is the level of

water saturation at which water starts to
flow in the reservoir.
Fig. 1 Oil-water relative permeability curves..
 Two-Phase Relative Permeability

• A gas-oil system is shown in Fig. 2.

• The range of gas saturation is from initial

gas saturation 𝑆𝑔𝑖 to gas saturation at
residual oil saturation 1 − 𝑆𝑜𝑟𝑔 .

Fig. 2 Gas-oil relative permeability curves.

 Two-Phase Relative Permeability
• Oil relative permeability (𝒌𝒓𝒐 ) is highest
at 𝑺𝒈𝒊 and declines to zero at 𝟏 − 𝑺𝒐𝒓𝒈 .

• Gas relative permeability (𝒌𝒓𝒈 )

increases from zero at to its highest
value at 𝟏 − 𝑺𝒐𝒓𝒈 .

• The critical gas saturation 𝑺𝒈𝒄 is the

level of gas saturation at which gas starts
to flow in the reservoir.
Fig. 2 Gas-oil relative permeability curves..
 Two-Phase Relative Permeability
• Theoretically, the critical saturation and the residual saturation
should be exactly equal for any fluid; however, they are not identical.

• Critical saturation is measured in the direction of increasing

saturation, while irreducible saturation is measured in the direction
of reducing saturation.

• Thus, the saturation histories of the two measurements are different.

 Two-Phase Relative Permeability Correlations
• In many cases, relative permeability data on actual samples from the
reservoir under study may not be available, in which case it is
necessary to obtain the desired relative permeability data in some
other manner.

• Several methods have been developed for calculating relative

permeability relationships.

• Various parameters have been used to calculate the relative

permeability relationships, including:
1. Residual and initial saturations
2. Capillary pressure data
 Two-Phase Relative Permeability Correlations
• Most of the proposed correlations use the effective phase saturation
as a correlating parameter.
• The effective phase saturation is defined by the following set of
relationships:
∗
𝑆𝑜
𝑆𝑜 = 1
1 − 𝑆𝑤𝑖𝑟𝑟

𝑆𝑤 − 𝑆𝑤𝑖𝑟𝑟
𝑆𝑤∗ = 2
1 − 𝑆𝑤𝑖𝑟𝑟

𝑆𝑔
𝑆𝑔∗ = (3)
1 − 𝑆𝑤𝑖𝑟𝑟
 Two-Phase Relative Permeability Correlations

• 𝑆𝑜∗ , 𝑆𝑤∗ , 𝑆𝑔∗ = effective oil, water, and gas saturation, respectively

• 𝑆𝑜 , 𝑆𝑤 , 𝑆𝑔 = oil, water and gas saturation, respectively

• 𝑆𝑤𝑖𝑟𝑟 = connate (irreducible) water saturation

 Two-Phase Relative Permeability Correlations
• Wyllie and Gardner Correlation
 Two-Phase Relative Permeability Correlations
• Wyllie and Gardner have also suggested the following two expressions
that can be used when one relative permeability is available:

• Oil-Water System
𝑆𝑤∗
𝑘𝑟𝑤 = 𝑆𝑤∗ 2 − 𝑘𝑟𝑜 (10)
1 − 𝑆𝑤∗

• Gas-Oil System
𝑆𝑜∗
𝑘𝑟𝑜 = 𝑆𝑜∗ − 𝑘𝑟𝑔 (11)
1 − 𝑆𝑜∗
 Two-Phase Relative Permeability Correlations
• Torcaso and Wyllie Correlation
• Torcaso and Wyllie developed a simple expression to determine
permeability of the oil phase in a gas-oil system.

• The expression permits the calculation of 𝑘𝑟𝑜 from the measurements

of 𝑘𝑟𝑔 . The equation has the following form:

𝑆𝑜∗ 4
𝑘𝑟𝑜 = 𝑘𝑟𝑔 (12)
1− 𝑆𝑜∗ 2 1− 𝑆𝑜∗ 2
 Two-Phase Relative Permeability Correlations
• Pirson’s Correlation
• Pirson derived generalized relationships for determining the wetting
and nonwetting phase relative permeability for both imbibition and
drainage processes. The generalized expressions are applied for
water-wet rocks.

• For the water (wetting) phase

𝑘𝑟𝑤 = 3
𝑆𝑤∗ 𝑆𝑤 13

• The above expression is valid for both the imbibition and drainage
processes
 Two-Phase Relative Permeability Correlations
• For the nonwetting phase
• Imbibition
2
𝑆𝑤 − 𝑆𝑤𝑐
𝑘𝑟 𝑛𝑜𝑛𝑤𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 = 1− (14)
1 − 𝑆𝑤𝑐 − 𝑆𝑛𝑤

• Drainage
0.5
𝑘𝑟 𝑛𝑜𝑛𝑤𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔= 1 − 𝑆𝑤∗ 1 − 𝑆𝑤
∗ 0.25
𝑆𝑤 (15)

where 𝑆𝑛𝑤 = saturation of the nonwetting phase; 𝑆𝑤 = water saturation

𝑆𝑤∗ = effective water saturation as defined by Equation2
 Two-Phase Relative Permeability Correlations
• Corey’s Method
• Corey proposed a simple mathematical expression for generating the
relative permeability data of gas-oil system. The approximation is
good for drainage processes, i.e., gas-displacing oil

∗ 4
𝑘𝑟𝑜 = 1 − 𝑆𝑔 (16)

𝑘𝑟𝑔 = 𝑆𝑔∗ 2 − 𝑆𝑔∗ (17)

• where the effective gas saturation 𝑆𝑔∗ is defined in Equation 3.

 Relative Permeability from Capillary Pressure Data
• Wyllie and Gardner developed the following mathematical expression
for determining the drainage water-oil relative permeability from
capillary pressure data

𝑆𝑤
𝑆𝑤 − 𝑆𝑤𝑐
2
‫ 𝑤𝑆𝑑 𝑆׬‬Τ𝑝𝑐2
𝑤𝑐
𝑘𝑟𝑤 = 1 (18)
1 − 𝑆𝑤𝑐 ‫ 𝑤𝑆𝑑 𝑆׬‬Τ𝑝𝑐2
𝑤𝑐

1
1 − 𝑆𝑤
2
‫ 𝑤𝑆𝑑 𝑆׬‬Τ𝑝𝑐2
𝑤
𝑘𝑟𝑜 = 1 (19)
1 − 𝑆𝑤𝑐 ‫ 𝑤𝑆𝑑 𝑆׬‬Τ𝑝𝑐2
𝑤𝑐
 Relative Permeability from Capillary Pressure Data
• Wyllie and Gardner also presented two expressions for generating the
oil and gas relative permeabilities in the presence of connate water
saturation. The authors considered the connate water as part of the
rock matrix to give:
2 𝑆𝑜
𝑆𝑜 − 𝑆𝑜𝑟 ‫׬‬0 𝑑𝑆𝑜 Τ𝑝𝑐2
𝑘𝑟𝑜 = 1 (20)
1 − 𝑆𝑜𝑟 ‫ 𝑜𝑆𝑑 ׬‬Τ𝑝𝑐 2
0

1
𝑆𝑜 − 𝑆𝑜𝑟
2
‫ 𝑜𝑆𝑑 𝑆׬‬Τ𝑝𝑐2
𝑜
𝑘𝑟𝑔 = 1− 1 (21)
𝑆𝑔 − 𝑆𝑔𝑐 ‫ 𝑜𝑆𝑑 𝑜׬‬Τ𝑝𝑐2
where 𝑆𝑔𝑐 = critical gas saturation; 𝑆𝑤𝑐 = connate water saturation; 𝑆𝑜𝑟 =
residual oil saturation
 Relative Permeability from Capillary Pressure Data
• Corey observed that the plot of 𝟏Τ𝒑𝟐𝒄 versus effective water
saturation 𝑺∗𝒘 may produce or yield a straight line over a considerable
range of saturations.

• By applying this observation and making further simplifications, Corey

reduced Equations 20 and 21 to:

𝑘𝑟𝑜 = 𝑆𝑤∗ 4

𝑘𝑟𝑔 = 1 − 𝑆𝑤∗ 2 ∗
1 − 𝑆𝑤 2
 Relative Permeability Ratio
• Relative permeability ratio expresses the ability of a reservoir to
permit flow of one fluid as related to its ability to permit flow of
another fluid under the same circumstances.

• The two most useful permeability ratios are 𝑘𝑟𝑔 Τ𝑘𝑟𝑜 the relative
permeability to gas with respect to that to oil and 𝑘𝑟𝑤 Τ𝑘𝑟𝑜 the relative
permeability to water with respect to that to oil.

• Both quantities in the ratio are determined simultaneously on a

given system.
 Relative Permeability Ratio
• In describing two-phase flow
mathematically, it is always the relative
permeability ratio (e.g., 𝒌𝒓𝒈 Τ𝒌𝒓𝒐 or
𝒌𝒓𝒐 Τ𝒌𝒓𝒘 ) that is used in the flow equations.

• Because the wide range of the relative

permeability ratio values, the permeability
ratio is usually plotted on the log scale of
semilog paper as a function of the saturation.
•
• Usually, the central or the main portion of
the curve is quite linear. Fig. 4 krg/kro as a function of saturation.
 Relative Permeability Ratio
• Figure 4 shows a plot of 𝑘𝑟𝑔 Τ𝑘𝑟𝑜 versus
gas saturation.

• It has become common usage to express

the central straight-line portion of the
relationship in the following analytical
form:

𝑘𝑟𝑔
= 𝑎𝑒 𝑏𝑆𝑔 (22)
𝑘𝑟𝑜

Fig. 4 krg/kro as a function of saturation.

 Relative Permeability Ratio
• The constants 𝑎 and 𝑏 may be determined
by selecting the coordinate of two different
points on the straight-line portion of the
curve and substituting in Equation 22

• Point 1: at 𝑆𝑔 = 0.2, the relative

permeability ratio 𝑘𝑟𝑔 Τ𝑘𝑟𝑜 = 0.07

• Point 2: at 𝑆𝑔 = 0.4, the relative

permeability ratio 𝑘𝑟𝑔 Τ𝑘𝑟𝑜 = 0.70
Fig. 4 krg/kro as a function of saturation.
 Relative Permeability Ratio
• Imposing these points on Equation 22,
gives:
• 0.07 = 𝑎𝑒 0.2𝑏
• 0.70 = 𝑎𝑒 0.4𝑏

• Solving simultaneously,
• Intercept 𝑎 = 0.0070
• Slope 𝑏 = 11.513

𝑘𝑟𝑔
= 0.0070𝑒 11.513𝑆𝑔
𝑘𝑟𝑜 Fig. 4 krg/kro as a function of saturation.
 Factors Affecting Relative Permeability
• The factors that affect or could affect relative permeability curves
include
• (1) fluid saturation,
• (2) fluid saturation history,
• (3) Wettability,
• (4) injection rate,
• (5) viscosity ratio,
• (6) interfacial tension,
• (7) pore structure,
• (8) temperature and
• (9) heterogeneity.
 Factors Affecting Relative Permeability
• Fluid Saturation
• Relative permeabilities are strongly
dependent on fluid saturations.

• The higher the fluid saturation, the higher

the relative permeability to that fluid.

• In general, relative permeabilities are

nonlinear functions of fluid saturation

Fig. 5 Effect of fluid saturation on rel perm curves

 Factors Affecting Relative Permeability
• Saturation History (Hysteresis)
• Fig. 6 shows typical relative permeability
curves for drainage and imbibition.

• The imbibition non-wetting phase relative

permeability curve (hollow triangle) is
generally lower than the drainage curve
(hollow circle) at the same saturations.

• The imbibition wetting phase relative

permeability curve (solid triangle) is slightly
greater than the drainage curve (solid
circle).
Fig. 6 Relative permeability hysteresis
 Factors Affecting Relative Permeability
• These differences can easily be explained.
• During drainage, the non-wetting phase
flows through the large pores displacing the
wetting phase along the way.
• Therefore, the relative permeability to the
non-wetting phase will be high during
drainage.
• That of the wetting phase also will be high
because it starts from 1 and decreases as
the non-wetting phase begins to occupy
some of the pores that were previously
occupied by the wetting phase.
Fig. 6 Relative permeability hysteresis
 Factors Affecting Relative Permeability
• During imbibition, some of the non-wetting
phase will be trapped in the large pores.

• This reduces the cross-sectional area of the

medium occupied by the connected non-
wetting phase.

• As a result, the imbibition relative

permeability to the non-wetting phase is
reduced compared to that during drainage.

Fig. 6 Relative permeability hysteresis

 Factors Affecting Relative Permeability
• Because of capillary trapping of the non-
wetting phase during imbibition, the
wetting phase is forced to occupy and flow
through pore sizes that are larger than it
would otherwise have flowed if there was
no trapping of the non-wetting phase.

• This forcing of the wetting phase to flow

through larger pores than it would
otherwise have done in the absence of
trapping enhances the relative
permeability of the wetting phase on the
imbibition cycle compared to the drainage
cycle.
Fig. 6 Relative permeability hysteresis
 Factors Affecting Relative Permeability
• Wettability
• Relative permeability curves are markedly
affected by the wettability of the medium.
• Craig proposed the following:

Fig. 7 Effect of wettability

 Factors Affecting Relative Permeability

• These rules of thumb are applicable only to

systems that show a strong preferential
wettability to either water or oil.

• In general, one cannot infer the wettability

of a porous medium based solely on the
relative permeability curves.

Fig. 7 Effect of wettability

 Factors Affecting Relative Permeability
• Pore Structure
• Morgan and Gordon have presented results
that show that rocks with large pores and
correspondingly small specific surface areas
have low irreducible water saturations that
leave a relatively large amount of pore space
available for multiphase flow.

• Therefore, for such rocks, end point relative

permeabilities are high and a large
saturation change may occur during two
phase flow. Fig. 7 Effect of pore structure (a) sandstone with
large, well-connected pores with k = 1314 mD
 Factors Affecting Relative Permeability

• Rocks with small pores have larger specific

surface areas and larger irreducible water
saturations that leave less room for
multiphase flow.

• As a result, the end point relative

permeabilities are lower and the saturation
range for two phase flow is smaller than in
rocks with large pores.

Fig. 7 Effect of pore structure (b) sandstone with

small, well-connected pores with k = 20 md
 Factors Affecting Relative Permeability

• Rocks having some relatively large pores

connected by small pores have a large
surface area, resulting in high irreducible
water saturation and relative permeability
behavior that is similar to rocks with small
pores only.

Fig. 7 Effect of pore structure (c) sandstone with a few large

pores connected with small pores with k = 36 md
 Three-Phase Relative Permeability
• Direct experimental determination of three-
phase relative permeability properties is
extremely difficult and involves rather
complex techniques to determine the fluid
saturation distribution along the length of
the core.

• For this reason, the more easily measured

two-phase relative permeability
characteristics are experimentally
determined.

• Three-phase relative permeability is plotted Fig. 8 Three phase relative permeability

on a ternary diagram as shown in Fig. 8
Three-Phase Relative Permeability
• Three phase relative permeabilities are not routinely measured in
the laboratory as two phase relative permeabilities
•.

• Instead, three phase relative permeabilities are usually calculated

from two phase relative permeability data using various relative
permeability models.
Three-Phase Relative Permeability Correlations
• Wyllie’s Correlation
• Wyllie proposed the following equations for three-phase relative permeabilities
in a water-wet system:

𝑆𝑔2 1 − 𝑆𝑤𝑐 2− 𝑆𝑤 + 𝑆𝑜 − 𝑆𝑤𝑐 2

𝑘𝑟𝑔 = 23
1 − 𝑆𝑤𝑐 4

𝑆𝑜3 2𝑆𝑤 + 𝑆𝑜 − 2𝑆𝑤𝑐

𝑘𝑟𝑜 = (24)
1 − 𝑆𝑤𝑐 4
4
𝑆𝑤 − 𝑆𝑤𝑐
𝑘𝑟𝑤 = (25)
1 − 𝑆𝑤𝑐

• Equations 23-25 apply to a cemented sandstone, vugular rock, or oolitic

limestone
Three-Phase Relative Permeability Correlations
• Stone’s Model I
• Stone developed a probability model to estimate three-phase relative
permeability data from the laboratory-measured two-phase data.

• Stone suggested that a nonzero residual oil saturation, called

minimum oil saturation, 𝑺𝒐𝒎 exists when oil is displaced
simultaneously by water and gas.

• It should be noted that this minimum oil saturation 𝑺𝒐𝒎 is different

than the critical oil saturation in the oil-water system (i.e., 𝑺𝒐𝒓 ) and
the residual oil saturation in the gas-oil system, i.e., 𝑺𝒐𝒓𝒈 .
Three-Phase Relative Permeability Correlations
• Stone introduced the following normalized saturations:

𝑆𝑜 − 𝑆𝑜𝑚
𝑆𝑜∗ = , 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑆𝑜 ≥ 𝑆𝑜𝑚 (26)
1 − 𝑆𝑤𝑐 − 𝑆𝑜𝑚

𝑆𝑤 − 𝑆𝑤𝑐
𝑆𝑤∗ = , 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑆𝑤 ≥ 𝑆𝑤𝑐 (27)
1 − 𝑆𝑤𝑐 − 𝑆𝑜𝑚

𝑆𝑔
𝑆𝑔∗ = (28)
1 − 𝑆𝑤𝑐 − 𝑆𝑜𝑚
Three-Phase Relative Permeability Correlations
• The oil-relative permeability in a three-phase system is then defined
as:
𝑘𝑟𝑜 = 𝑆𝑜∗ 𝛽𝑤 𝛽𝑔 29

• The two multipliers 𝛽𝑤 and 𝛽𝑔 are determined from:

𝑘𝑟𝑜𝑤
𝛽𝑤 = 30
1 − 𝑆𝑤∗

𝑘𝑟𝑜𝑔
𝛽𝑔 = (31)
1 − 𝑆𝑔∗
Three-Phase Relative Permeability Correlations
• where
• 𝑆𝑜𝑚 = minimum oil saturation;
• 𝑘𝑟𝑜𝑤 = oil relative permeability as determined from the oil-water two-
phase relative permeability at 𝑆𝑤 ;
• 𝑘𝑟𝑜𝑔 = oil relative permeability as determined from the gas-oil two-
phase relative permeability at 𝑆𝑔

• The difficulty in using Stone’s first model is selecting the minimum

oil saturation 𝑺𝒐𝒎 .
Three-Phase Relative Permeability Correlations
• Fayers and Mathews suggested an expression for determining 𝑆𝑜𝑚
𝑆𝑜𝑚 = 𝛼𝑆𝑜𝑟𝑤 + 1 − 𝛼 𝑆𝑜𝑟𝑔 (32)

• With
𝑆𝑔
𝛼 =1− (33)
1 − 𝑆𝑤𝑐 − 𝑆𝑜𝑟𝑔

• where 𝑆𝑜𝑟𝑤 = residual oil saturation in the oil-water relative

permeability system
• 𝑆𝑜𝑟𝑔 = residual oil saturation in the gas-oil relative permeability
system
Three-Phase Relative Permeability Correlations
• Aziz and Sattari pointed out that Stone’s correlation could give 𝒌𝒓𝒐
values greater than unity. The authors suggested the following
normalized form of Stone’s model:

𝑆𝑜∗ 𝑘𝑟𝑜𝑤 𝑘𝑟𝑜𝑔

𝑘𝑟𝑜 = (34)
1 − 𝑆𝑤∗ 1− 𝑆𝑔∗ 𝑘𝑟𝑜 𝑆𝑤𝑐

• where 𝑘𝑟𝑜 𝑆𝑤𝑐 is the value of the relative permeability of the oil at
the connate water saturation as determined from the oil-water
relative permeability system.
 Three-Phase Relative Permeability Correlations
• Stone’s Model II
• It was the difficulties in choosing 𝑆𝑜𝑚 that led to the development of
Stone’s Model II.

• Stone (1973) proposed the following normalized expression:

𝑘𝑟𝑜𝑤 𝑘𝑟𝑜𝑔
𝑘𝑟𝑜 = 𝑘𝑟𝑜 𝑆𝑤𝑐 + 𝑘𝑟𝑤 + 𝑘𝑟𝑔 − 𝑘𝑟𝑤 + 𝑘𝑟𝑔 (35)
𝑘𝑟𝑜 𝑆𝑤𝑐 𝑘𝑟𝑜 𝑆𝑤𝑐
 Assignment 1
• Given:
• Swc = 0.30; Sgc = 0.06; Soc = 0.35 for unconsolidated-well sorted sand
• Generate the drainage relative permeability data by using:
• a. The Wyllie-Gardner correlation
• b. Pirson’s correlation
• c. Corey’s method
 Assignment 2
• From a 𝑘𝑟𝑔 Τ𝑘𝑟𝑜 versus 𝑆𝑔 plot the following datasets were deduced.

𝑘𝑟𝑔
• Find the coefficients of the following relationship: = 𝑎𝑒 𝑏𝑆𝑔
𝑘𝑟𝑜
 Home Work
• Briefly discuss the effect of the following on two phase relative
permeability:

• a. pressure
• b. temperature
• c. viscosity
• d. injection rate
• e. interfacial tension