Sie sind auf Seite 1von 23


Major Project
Report On

Parametric Study of
Chemical Enhanced Oil
Under the guidance
Dr. Jyoti Phirani
Submitted by
Ankush Gupta


It is not possible to prepare a project report without the assistance & encouragement of other
people. This one is certainly no exception.
On the very outset of this report, i would like to extend my sincere & heartfelt obligation
towards all the personages who have helped me in this endeavor. Without their active
guidance, help, cooperation & encouragement, i would not have made headway in the project.
I would like to convey my sincere gratitude to my project supervisor Dr. Jyoti Phirani for her
invaluable suggestions, constructive criticism, motivation and guidance for carrying out related
experiments and for preparing the associated reports and presentations. His encouragement
towards the current topic helped me a lot in this project work.



With the decline in oil discoveries during the last decades it is believed that EOR technologies will
play a key role to meet the energy demand in years to come.
As a part of this report we have understood the parametric variation of A Single Well Chemical
Tracer Method, which is an in situ method for measuring fluid saturations in reservoirs. The
measurement can be for residual oil saturation Sor.
In two parts of this report first, we analyzed the simulation results based on UTChem Simulator,
where we find out the Parametric Variation of Shut in Period, Injection Rate and Production Rate on
the Residual Oil Calculations.
In Second half of the report we analyzed the simulation results on the Schlumberger Eclipse
2013, where we perform the analysis of Tracer Tracking and Residual Oil Saturation Model.
Tracer tracking method is used to find out the salinity of the reservoir and the concentration of the
chemical substances. Whereas in Residual Oil Saturation Model we are analysing how the oil
saturation changes in the reservoir up to its residual oil saturation during the oil production.

The general mechanism of oil recovery is movement of hydrocarbons to production wells due
to a pressure difference between the reservoir and the production wells. The recovery of oil
reserves is divided into three main categories worldwide1, figure 1 illustrates these categories:

Figure 1: Recovery stages of a hydrocarbon reservoir through time

Oil production period mechanisms can be classified as primary, secondary and tertiary mechanisms.
By the development of production time reservoir pressure is dropping, so different methods are
used to control pressure and increase production. Most large oil fields are produced with some type
of secondary pressure maintenance scheme, such as water flooding, gas flooding etc.
Oil recovery mechanisms and their classifications are shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2: Oil Recovery Mechanisms


Enhanced Oil Recovery entails the injection of a fluid or fluids of some type into a reservoir. The
injected fluids and injected processes act as supplements to the natural energy present in the
reservoir to displace oil to a producing well. Also, the injected fluids interact with the reservoir
rock/oil system to create conditions favourable for oil recovery. These interactions include lowering
the interfacial tension, swelling of oil, viscosity reduction, wettability modification, or favourable
phase behaviour. The interactions are attributable to physical and chemical mechanism and to the
injection or production of thermal energy.
EOR refers to the recovery of oil that is left behind after primary and secondary recovery methods
are either exhausted or no longer economical.

Primary production is the first oil out, the easy oil. Once a well has been drilled and
completed in a hydrocarbon bearing zone, the natural pressures at that depth will cause oil
to flow through the rock towards the lower pressure wellbore, where it is lifted to the
surface. Recovery is usually between 10-15% of original oil in place.

Secondary recovery methods are used when there is insufficient underground pressure to
move the remaining oil. The most common technique is water flooding, which uses injector
wells to introduce large bodies of water into the reservoir for pressure maintenance and
sweeping of oil encountered by water as it moves through the reservoir. The recovery is
between 10-30% of original oil in place.

Tertiary process which is obtained after secondary recovery uses miscible gases, chemicals
and/or thermal recovery to displace additional oil after the secondary recovery process
become uneconomical.


The single well chemical tracer (SWCT) test is an in-situ method for measuring fluid saturations in
reservoirs. The measurement can be for residual oil saturation Sor, or for connate water saturation
Swc. In either case, the saturation measurement is carried out where one phase is effectively
stationary in the pore space, i.e., at residual saturation, and the other phase can flow to the
wellbore. The SWCT test method is primarily used to measure target oil saturations before initiating
enhanced oil recovery (EOR) operations, measure the effectiveness of EOR agents in a single well
pilot, or assess a field for bypassed oil targets.


1. Inject Formation water + Ester tracer into test zone.

2. Push ester carrying water further into zone with more formation water carrying a material
balance tracer.
3. Shut in well for a two six day reaction period.
4. Produce well and analyze returning water for tracer content.
5. Calculate SOr from separation between reaction product alcohol tracer and remaining ester

Figure 3: Steps involved in Single Well Chemical Tracer Test


The SWCT test for residual oil saturation is carried out by the injection and back production of water
carrying chemical tracers in a single well. The water used is normally from the formation to be
tested, and is often collected during the initial set up for the test.
This injected volume is divided into two parts. Part one is a volume of water that carries a small
concentration of an alkyl ester into the formation. Part two is a push volume, which pushes the ester
away from the wellbore 15-20 feet. A material balance tracer, normally an alcohol, is added to the
entire injection volume to differentiate it from the formation water being displaced.
The primary tracer is an alkyl ester. The esters used in SWCT testing are more soluble in oil than in
water. This solubility preference is expressed in the esters oil/water partition coefficient Ki,

Concentration of ester in oil


Concentration of ester in water at equilibrium

And retardation factor given by

No. of ester molecules in oil

No. of ester molecules in water

C eo Vc Sor

C ew Vc Sw
e eo or
C ew Sw

e K e or
1 Sor


e Ke

Ceo Concentration of ester in
oleic phase
Cew Concentration of ester in
Aqueous phase

Pore Volume

Sor Residual Oil Saturation


Water Saturation



The results we obtained for the effect of the partition coefficient are as follows in Figure 4 (a) (b) (c):

Figure 4-a:

Concentration Profiles for Ke = 1.79

Figure 4-b:

Concentration Profiles for Ke = 4.05

Figure 4-c:

Concentration Profiles for Ke = 6.31

It is clear that the calculated value of the Sor does not change with the value of partition coefficient
which is correct as the Residual oil saturation of the reservoir is independent of the value of Ke , as it
remains unchanged after the recovery process.


The results we obtained are as follows in figure 5(a) (b) (c):

Figure 5-a:

Concentration Profiles for Shut in Period = 0.9 days

Figure 5-b:

Concentration Profiles for Shut in Period = 1.4 days

Figure 5-c:

Concentration Profiles for Shut in Period = 1.9 days

The Calculated value of Sor is remains constant with the effect of Shut in Period which is the correct
case till the duration of shut in period is less than the duration of reproduction of tracer mixture. We
will see the effect of long duration of shut in period over the reproduction time of tracer mixture in
next part of our project work.


The results we obtained are as follows in figure 6(a) (b) (c) (d):

Figure 6-a:

Concentration Profiles for Production Rate = 851.36 ft / day

Figure 6-b:

Concentration Profiles for Production Rate = 2751.36 ft / day

Figure 6-c:

Concentration Profiles for Production Rate = 4851.36 ft / day

Figure 6-d:

Concentration Profiles for Production Rate = 6251.36 ft / day

As we increased the production flow rate, the calculated value of Sor comes out to be different and
calculated value of Sor increases with the increasing production rate but up to a limit of production
rate. Because during production the ester transport from the oleic phase to aqueous phase thats
why there is retardation comes between alcohol and ester which help us to find out the Sor value.
The higher the production rate the higher will be the ester transport from oleic phase to aqueous


Total amount of IBA injected =

Total Flow Rate Concentration Days


/ ft
1556.478 day
1435 ppm 0.465873 days 0.0283 gppm

29447.52943 g

Figure 7: Concentration Profiles for IBA Cumulative Production

Total amount of IBA out

Area under the curve Conversion factor
/ ft
902151.8565 ft 3 ppm 0.0283 gppm

25530.89754 g
IBA Loss

29447.52943 25530.89754
3916.63188 g
This loss is because after the complete simulation of 3.9 days, there still some amount of IBA
remains inside the reservoir. as it clear from the contour profile given below.

Figure8: Contour Profiler of IBA remaining in reservoir at the end of 3.9 days


The Tracer Tracking option has a wide variety of reservoir modelling applications. In the case of
tracers defined to exist in the water phase, it may be used, for example, to determine the movement
within the reservoir of water injected into any number of injection wells or to predict the variations
in salinity or concentration of other chemical species in the water produced from the reservoir.

The reservoir sample is of 40cm x 1cm x 1cm. where we are analysing tracer tracking. Its grid
diagram showed as below in figure 9:

Figure 9: Grid diagram of 40x1x1 cm reservoir sample at the end of the run

There is a 20 hour simulation run started on 1 Jan 1990.

Initial Conditions:

137.802 bar,


71 0C

Reservoir porosity


Reservoir Permeability

2000 mD

Oil Saturation


Connate Water Saturation


Connate Gas Saturation


Boundary Conditions
Bottom Hole Pressure at production well

137.8 bar

Reservoir Volume Rate at injection well

10 rcc / hr

The Water injection rate is 0.00024 sm3 / day and its cumulative profile is shown below in figure :

Figure 10:

Tracer Injection Rate in Reservoir Sample = 0.00024 sm / day

Figure 11:

Tracer Cumulative Injection Rate in Reservoir Sample

The gas started to produce in the reservoir with the flow rate of 0.036 sm3 / day.

Figure 12:

Gas Production Rate in Reservoir Sample = 0.036 sm / day

Oil Saturation Profile after 20 hr of simulation is shown as below:

Figure 13:

Oil Saturation profile in grid after 20 hr simulation run


Here we show how the oil saturation varies in a reservoir till its Residual oil saturation value for the
simulation run of 7 years.

The reservoir is 7 ft x 7 ft x 3 ft in dimensions and its grid diagram is given below:

Figure 14:

Grid Diagram of 7x7x3 ft reservoir

Initial Conditions
The well is primarily as Gas Well at the depth of 8335 ft.
Reservoir Temperature

160 0F,


8400 psia

Reservoir Porosity


In X direction

500 mD

In Y direction

200 mD

In Z direction

50 mD

Oil Saturation


Water Saturation


Oil Production Rate

12000 stb / day

Gas Injection Rate

12000 stb / day

Reservoir Permeability:

Boundary Conditions

The oil saturation varies with time and over the 7 years of time span it is shown as below at different
time steps in figure 15:

Figure 15 a: Oil Saturation Map Profile initially at day = 01-01-1991

Figure 15 b: Oil Saturation Map Profile initially at day = 01-01-1992

Figure 15 c: Oil Saturation Map Profile initially at day = 12-31-1992

Figure 15 d: Oil Saturation Map Profile initially at day = 12-31-1993

Figure 15 e: Oil Saturation Map Profile initially at day = 12-31-1994

Figure 15 f: Oil Saturation Map Profile initially at day = 12-31-1995

Figure 15 g: Oil Saturation Map Profile initially at day = 12-30-1996

Figure 15 h: Oil Saturation Map Profile initially at day = 12-30-1997

Here, the residual oil saturation values reached in 1 grid block as it is near the injector well.
And now, we will check the coming value of Sor by the help of Single Well Chemical Tracer Test
in next part of our project.


At the end of this project it was concluded that

The EOR methods are useful for the better production of oil from reservoirs and they are the
future of the alternative source of energy, but the problem is still there in the implementation
of the methods due to lack of data and technologies and less literature is available. If we find
the newer technologies and up gradation of the processes this can be the key to energy sectors.
Tracer tracking method of data input is especially suited to tracking fluid which initially exists within
a particular region of the reservoir. In the case of gas condensate reservoirs, it is thus possible to
track the oil which initially exists in the vapor phase in separate regions of the reservoir and to
determine its subsequent movement through the reservoir grid. The Tracer option could also be
used to predict the concentration of chemical impurity species (such as the sulphur content of the
oil) in the hydrocarbon production streams.
In Residual oil saturation model we have reached up to the residual oil saturation value of the oil in
the reservoir where we are injecting the gas for oil production it is the Gas flooding technique.
As the residual oil saturation value reached, now we will perform the Single well chemical tracer
test to calculate the Sor value in Slb Eclipse Simulator.


There is still a long way to go, and I want to go in small steps; my near future plans are:

The implementation of Single Well Chemical Tracer Test on Slb Eclipse, to verify its

And the correction required in UTChem modeling for the betterment of the SWCTT model.


Tomich, J.F.,Dalton, R.L., Deans, H.A. , and Shallenberger, L. K.: Single-Well Tracer Method
to Measure Residual Oil Saturation, JPT (February 1973) 211_218.

Joseph S. Tang, Brad Harker: Mass Balance Method to Determine Residual Oil Saturation
From Single Well Tracer Test Data, JCPT (February 2008) 115 124.


James J. Sheng: Modern Chemical Enhanced Oil Recovery (1

edition). NewYork: GULF



Ren COSS: Basics of Reservoir engineering (1 edition). Paris: GULF PUBLISHING COMPANY.

Deans, H.A., and Carlisle, C.T.: Single-Well Tracer Tests in Complex Pore Systems, paper
SPE/DOE 14886 presented at the Fifth Symposium on EOR Tulsa, April 20_23, 1986.

Sheely, C.Q. and Baldwin, D.E.: Single-Well Tracer Test for Evaluating Chemical Enhanced
Oil Recovery Processes, JPT (Aug. 1982)1887_1896.