Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
A
Major Project
Report On
Parametric Study of
Chemical Enhanced Oil
Recovery
Under the guidance
of
Dr. Jyoti Phirani
Submitted by
Ankush Gupta
20313CHE2227
11/24/2014
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
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.
DATE
PLACE
ANKUSH GUPTA
2013CHE2227
M.TECH 2nd YEAR
ABSTRACT
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.
INTRODUCTION
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:
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.
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.
OPERATIONAL STEPS OF THE SINGLE WELL CHEMICAL TRACER (SWCT ) TEST METHOD FOR
MEASURING SOR
C eo Vc Sor
C ew Vc Sw
C S
e eo or
C ew Sw
S
e K e or
1 Sor
Sor
e Ke
where
Ceo Concentration of ester in
oleic phase
Cew Concentration of ester in
Aqueous phase
Vc
Pore Volume
Water Saturation
UTCHEM RESULTS
Figure 4-a:
Figure 4-b:
Figure 4-c:
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.
Figure 5-a:
Figure 5-b:
Figure 5-c:
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.
Figure 6-a:
Figure 6-b:
Figure 6-c:
Figure 6-d:
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
phase.
ft
/ ft
1556.478 day
1435 ppm 0.465873 days 0.0283 gppm
29447.52943 g
=
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
TRACER TRACKING
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.
GRID DIAGRAM
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
SIMULATION
There is a 20 hour simulation run started on 1 Jan 1990.
Initial Conditions:
Pressure
137.802 bar,
Temperature
71 0C
Reservoir porosity
0.3,
Reservoir Permeability
2000 mD
Oil Saturation
0.4,
0.3,
0.3
Boundary Conditions
Bottom Hole Pressure at production well
137.8 bar
10 rcc / hr
RESULTS
The Water injection rate is 0.00024 sm3 / day and its cumulative profile is shown below in figure :
Figure 10:
Figure 11:
The gas started to produce in the reservoir with the flow rate of 0.036 sm3 / day.
Figure 12:
Figure 13:
GRID DIAGRAM
The reservoir is 7 ft x 7 ft x 3 ft in dimensions and its grid diagram is given below:
Figure 14:
Initial Conditions
The well is primarily as Gas Well at the depth of 8335 ft.
Reservoir Temperature
160 0F,
Pressure
8400 psia
Reservoir Porosity
0.3,
In X direction
500 mD
In Y direction
200 mD
In Z direction
50 mD
Oil Saturation
0.775,
Water Saturation
0.225
Reservoir Permeability:
Boundary Conditions
RESULTS
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:
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.
CONCLUSION
FUTURE STEPS
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
accuracy.
And the correction required in UTChem modeling for the betterment of the SWCTT model.
REFERENCES
http://www.slb.com/~/media/Files/resources/oilfield_review/ors10/win10/eor.pdf
http://www.sbc.slb.com/Our_Ideas/Energy_Perspectives/2nd%20Semester13_Content/2nd%2
0Semester%202013_Seizing.aspx
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.
st
st
Ren COSS: Basics of Reservoir engineering (1 edition). Paris: GULF PUBLISHING COMPANY.
1993.
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.