University of Zakho ‫زانکۆیا زاخۆ‬

College of Engineering ‫کولیژا ئەندازیاری‬

Petroleum Engineering Dep ‫پشکا پەترۆل‬
3rd Stage ‫قۆناغا سیێ‬

Experiment No. 1
PVT sampling methods

Lecturer Mr. Alaa

Student’s name: Zaeem Khalat Ilyas

Group: 1

1
List of contnets

Aim of the expeirment…………………………………………………

Introduction………………………………………………………………

Downhole samplin…………………………………………………………

Surface sampling…………………………………………………………..

Wellhead sampling………………………………………………………

Flash liberation …..………………………………………………………

differential liberation…………..………………………………………...

Bubblepoint Determination…………………………………………….

Reservoir-to-Surface Volume Relations……………………………….

Example………………………………………………………………….

Conclusion ………………………………………………………….

Refrences………………………………………………………………….

2
Aim of experiment:

The aim of this experiment is to collect samples of the fluid from the well
and then do a PVT analysis for them in order to have samples repersiting
the fluids in it’s initioanl conditions inside the reservoir using the three
methods of sampling which are going to be discussed in report.
Introduction

Successful PVT analysis requires that fluid samples represent the original
hydrocarbon in the reservoir. Unlike coring and logging programs, which
are performed routinely throughout reservoir development, fluid sampling
for PVT analysis must occur soon after the exploration wells are drilled in
order to characterize the original reservoir fluid. Once the reservoir
pressure falls below the bubblepoint, gas comes out of solution and will
accumulate to a critical saturation in the rock pores before flowing to the
well. Similarly in a gas condensate well, oil begins to condense once the
pres-sure falls below the dewpoint. The oil in a gas condensate, moreover,
may never reach a critical saturation and flow. In either case, the
composition of the fluid entering the wellbore differs from its original
state. Sampling procedures depend on whether the reservoir is saturated
(its pressure equals the bubblepoint) or undersaturated (its pres-sure is
above the bubblepoint).1 Before sam-pling the well, reservoir engineers
use corre-lations to estimate the bubblepoint from well test data such as
the initial and present reservoir pressures, reservoir temperature, oil and
gas gravities, and stabilized produc-tion GOR at surface.

Most wells must be conditioned before sampling because the initial

pressure draw-down with production alters the nature of the fluids around
the wellbore. The goal of conditioning is to ensure that fluid entering the
wellbore is identical to the original reservoir fluid. This is accomplished
by producing the well at successively lower rates until the GOR stabilizes.

3
 Methods of collecting fluid samples

Reservoir fluids can be sampled down-hole or at the surface.

Downhole sampling employs a sampler tool that

is run with a pressure gauge on either wireline or
slickline (right). After low-ering the sampler to the
top of the produc-ing zone, the sample chamber is
opened by a clock (for slickline tools) or an electric
sig-nal from surface (for wireline tools). The oil
flows slowly into the tool at constant pres-sure to
avoid gas coming out of solution. A piston seals
the chamber and the tool is brought to surface. A
minimum of three samples should be collected to
ensure that at least one is valid.

Downhole samples are validated initially in the

field and later in the PVT lab by measur-ing the
sample's bubblepoint and checking that it is less
than the sampling pressure. Another check is to
compare the bubble-points of the three or so
collected samples if they agree then the samples are
considered representative. If the measured
bubblepoint exceeds the downhole sam-pling
pressure, then the sample container has leaked oil
or collected free gas.

Figure I : Sampler tool for downhole sampling. After the

well has been properly conditioned, the sampler is
lowered to the desired depth and activated to collect a
sample. Once filled, a piston seals the chamber and the
tool is retrieved. At least three bottomhole samples should
be collected.

4
In surface sampling, samples of separator gas and oil are collect-ed
simultaneously along with rate measure-ments and recombined to form a
reservoir fluid sample (above). Between two and four 10- or 20-liter
samples of gas, depending on the GOR, and 600 cm3 of oil are collected.

Figure II: Surface sampling

The advantage of surface sampling is that it easily provides large fluid

samples, but the GOR used to recombine the oil and gas samples must be
accurately measured.

5
Wellhead sampling:

The wellhead sampling manifold is a mobile sampling system for

collecting high-pressure fluid samples at the wellhead during well testing
operations. Six 15,000-psi conventional or single-phase bottle units are
plumbed into the common manifold. Each sample cylinder has its own
block and bleed valves; the drain and purge tank is common to all. The
sampling line is rigged to a single sample port at the wellhead for taking
up to six high-pressure fluid samples in quick succession without having
to make or break high-pressure connections.

Single phase surface samples may be obtained directly from the wellhead
or from the choke manifold for oil and gas condensates, if the flow is in
single phase. When the conditions for wellhead sampling are satisfied, this
can be most reliable, efficient and cost-effective way to sample.
 

6
Flash liberation and differential liberation

In a pressure-volume-temperature (PVT) lab, researchers employ an

arsenal of instruments to determine reservoir fluid behavior and properties
from oil and gas samples. Their goal is to simulate what takes place in the
reservoir and at the surface during pro-duction. A central aspect of PVT
analysis is how gas evolves from oil when presssure falls below the
bubblepoint. Researchers use two processes to describe this flash
liberation and differential liberation.

In flash liberation, a sudden pressure drop causes gas to come out of

solution, which then remains confined with the oil that is left. In
differential liberation, gas comes out of solution as pressure is gradually
decreased, but is removed from the oil. When reservoir pressure drops
below the bubblepoint, flash liberation dominates. Gas comes out of
solution and initially remains in the pores in contact with the oil.
Meanwhile, single-phase oil continues to flow into the well, although it
has a slightly different composition than that of the original reservoir
fluid. When enough gas accumu-lates to reach the critical gas saturation, it
begins to flow. Since gas is less viscous and flows faster than oil, the gas
liberation now becomes differential.

Gas liberation occurring in the tubing is considered flash liberation

because the agitation of the flow keeps the two phases in contact with each
other. Flash liberation also dominates in the separator, where a sudden
pressure drop releases more gas from the oil while the two remain in
contact. Flash and differential liberation are recre-ated on a small scale in
the lab using high-pressure, high-temperature PVT cells, positive
displacement mercury pumps and precision thermometers and pressure
gauges. When introduced to a sample-filled cell, mercury compresses the
fluid; when withdrawn from the cell, it allows the sam-ple to expand.
Bubblepoint Determination

Bubblepoint Determination The bubblepoint is determined during a flash

liberation test on a small amount of reservoir fluid (about 100 cm3),
sampled downhole or recombined from surface gas and oil samples taken
7
from the separator. After transferring the sample to a high-pres-sure cell
maintained at reservoir tempera-ture and above reservoir pressure, the cell
pressure is decrementally decreased by removing mercury from the cell.
For each volume change, cell pressure is recorded.
Upon reaching the bubblepoint, gas comes out of solution and any
subsequent mercury removal causes small pressure reductions. This
transition is well marked on a pressure-volume graph of the data (below).

Figure III

The bubblepoint is crucial for understand-ing how hydrocarbons behave in

the reser-voir and indicates the probable drive mecha-nisms. For example,
if the reservoir pressure is initially at the bubblepoint, a gas cap almost
certainly exists that will expand, push-ing oil toward the well and
increasing recov-ery to 40 percent of the oil in place.

Reservoir-to-Surface Volume Relations

Besides the bubblepoint, there are three important parameters derived

8
from flash and differential liberation tests that relate surface volumes to
reservoir volumes and thus help determine the amount of hydrocarbons.
These are the oil and gas formation volume factors, Bo and Bg, and the
solution gas-oil ratio, Rs .

Bo-The oil formation volume factor equals the volume of oil that must be
with-drawn from the reservoir to produce one barrel of stock-tank oil2 at
standard surface conditions of 14.7 pounds per square inch absolute (psia)
[1 atmosphere] and 60°F [15.5°Q. It is expressed as reservoir barrels per
stock-tank barrel [res bbl/STB or res m3/stock-tank m3]. The oil in place
in STB is:

where geologic, logging and core analyses provide estimates of reservoir

volume V, water saturation Sw, and porosity 0. This manner of estimating
reserves is called the volumetric method.

• Bg —The gas formation volume factor equals the volume of gas in the
reservoir that will produce one cubic foot at surface under standard
conditions. It is expressed as reservoir barrels per standard cubic foot [res
bbl/scf or res m3/std m3]. The standard vol-ume of gas in place is:

• Rs-The solution gas-oil ratio is the vol-ume of gas at standard conditions

that dis-solves into one STB of oil under reservoir conditions expressed as
standard cubic feet per stock-tank barrel [scf/STB or sm3/stock-tank m3].
The amount of gas in scf is:

Example*:
The following example guides you on how to use and interpret the data from
Differential Liberation test. The reservoir temperature is T= 200 °F and the bubble
point pressure is 3330 psia.

9
The essential data obtained from the differential liberation experiment, performed on
the same oil sample as CCE test, are listed in the following table:

RESULTS OF ISOTHERMAL DIFFERENTIAL LIBERATION AT

200 °F
After the pressure drop from 2700 to 2400 psia, column 2 of the table indicates that 0.0466
volumes of gas are taken off from the cell at the lower pressure and at 200°F. These gas volumes
vg (small v) are measured relative to the unit volume of bubble point oil, as are all the relative
volumes listed in the table. After each stage, the incremental volume of liberated gas is expanded to
standard conditions and re−measured as Vg relative volumes (column 3). Column 4 is simply the
cumulative amount of gas liberated below the bubble point expressed at standard conditions.
Dividing values in column 3 by those in column 2 (Vg/vg) gives the gas expansion factor E
(column 5). Thus the 0.0466 relative volumes liberated at 2400 psia will expand to give 6.9457
relative volumes at standard conditions and the gas expansion factor is therefore 6.9457/.0466 =
149.05. Knowing E, the Z-factor of the liberated gas can be determined by explicitly solving the
following equation:
Z = 35.37 × [P/(E × T)]
Z = 35.37 × [2400 × (149.05 × 660)] Z = 0.863

Conclusion
Tests of the oil reservoir are usually collected early in the well's
production life and sent to a laboratory for PVT analysis. Sampling's goals
are to collect samples from producing wells or surface facilities.
1
0
To assess the system's type, volumetric and phase behavior, and
composition, the samples should represent the system in the reservoir at its
starting conditions.
The findings of the PVT study are needed for reservoir engineering and
forecasting, as well as laboratory experiments on increased oil recovery
(EOR).

Three ways were discussed in our report where can be used to get the
samples in a successful way which were:
1. Bottomhole (Downhole) Sampling
2. Wellhead Sampling
3. Surface Recombination Sampling

References:
1-Reservoir engineering: the fundamentals, simulation, and management
of conventional and unconventional recoveries. By Iqbal, Ghulam M.,
Satter, Abdus.

2- PVT analysis for oil reservoirs by Henri Freyss, Paul Guize

1
1