SPE 66536
Contaminated Water Production in Old Oil Fields With Downhole Water Separation:
Effects of Capillary Pressures and Relative Permeability Hysteresis
Solomon O. Inikori, Louisiana State University, and Andrew K. Wojtanowicz, Louisiana State University
Copyright 2001, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.
This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE/EPA/DOE Exploration and Production
Environmental Conference held in San Antonio, Texas, 26–28 February 2001.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300
words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O.
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.
Abstract
Industry operators using downhole water separation
technology in bottom water drive reservoirs with water coning
problem have employed two major approaches. One approach
uses downhole hydrocyclone and pumps to separate water
from oil in one co-mingled production stream. This approach
involves elaborate completion design and high cost equipment.
The second approach, termed “gravity segregation” uses dual
completion technology with zonal isolation packer to
separately produce the water and the oil and so counter the
cone development at the wellbore. Both methods, currently, do
not completely eliminate the problem of contaminated water
production but reduces it to, perhaps, some manageable level.
The growing emphasis on environmental-friendly oil
production operation and increasing cost of water handling
requires the production of oil-free disposable water in a simple
completion design.
This paper presents case studies of the pre-installation design
of gravity segregation method for three fields (West Africa,
Gulf Canada and Louisiana) with strong water coning
problems. The study confirms that old oil fields that have
suffered severe water coning exhibit a transitional saturation
profile and dispersed oil-water contact. In addition, the
imbibition/drainage process of water cone development and
reversal induced by gravity segregation creates relative
permeability hysteresis effect. The effects should be included
in the pre-installation modeling.
The results using numerical simulator, indicate that the
combined effects of capillary transition pressures and relative
permeability hysteresis are responsible for the production of
contaminated water experienced with application of the
gravity segregation approach in old oil fields. It also shows
how to add an envelope to the well’s inflow performance
window to accommodate the transition zone. Inside the
envelope production of oil-free water from the bottom
completion is possible with production of minimal water cut
oil at the top. This uncontaminated water could be disposed
while operators maximize the use of their pipeline and water
separation facilities as well as improve oil recovery.
Introduction
Oil production from reservoir underlain by water causes the
stable oil-water interface to deform into a cone shape.
Moreover, continuous production of oil at a rate above the
critical oil rate makes the cone oil-water interface (contact)
unstable and water breaks through into the wellbore.
After breakthrough, the water production increases rapidly.
The water production creates several operation problems as
follows:
• Increased water mobility creates by-pass oil in the
reservoir
• High rate water production reduces the utility of pipeline
facilities and increase cost of water handling
• Disposal of oil contaminated produced water creates
environmental hazard
• Corrosion and reduced life of pipeline and facilities.
Several mechanisms have been identified as culprits of
excessive water production in oil wells from reservoirs
underlain by water. Among these causes are channeling
behind the casing; perforation into or too close to the water
zone; casing leaks around the water zone, depletion of the
reservoir during production, creation of fracture in the water
zone during stimulation operation; and coning of bottom water
into the wellbore.
Several methods have been employed by operators to solve the
problem of water production in oil wells. One of such solution
is to perforate the well high up in the oil zone above the oil-
water contact (OWC). This solution delays the time to water
breakthrough into the oil well. However, as long as production
rate exceeds the critical oil rate, water production is inevitable.
2 SOLOMON O. INIKORI AND ANDREW K. WOJTANOWICZ
After water breakthrough, the first of industry approach is to
evaluate production logs to see the presence of some possible
natural permeability barrier within the zone of perforation. A
cement squeeze operation is then performed to isolate the
production zone closest to the water contact and reduce the
incidence of high watercut.
Another industry solution is injection of polymers, resins or
gels to create artificial permeability barriers that works in the
same way as natural permeability barriers and reduces water
production.
The application of polymers for water coning control can take
one of two mechanisms:
• Reduction of the mobility ratio between the displacing
fluid (water) and the displaced fluid (oil) to a favorable
value of less than or equal to 1.0.
• Creation of a diversion or block at depth in the reservoir
by cross-link process when an injected inorganic metal
cation comes in contact with the polymer molecules.
Azari and Soliman1 give details of the mechanism of this
operation.
These polymers, in some cases also become source of skin
damage and consequently, impede oil production. Another
aspect of these polymers that needs detailed evaluation is the
effect on the wettability properties of the reservoir rocks.
Smith and Pirson2 suggested the injection of the produced oil
into the reservoir below the perforation in a “re-circulation
method” called “the hydraulic doublet” method. Pirson and
Mehta3 found that this process gives optimum water coning
control when the ratio of injected to produce oil is equal to 0.3
and it could be introduced at anytime in the life of the well.
This method did not gain any field application because of its
economics.
Downhole Separation and Dual Completion
The concept of downhole installation for water control has two
approaches.
One approach uses downhole water separation equipment such
as hydrocyclone (oil-water separators), by-pass valves,
injector pumps and accessories to separate the produced water
from the oil downhole. In most cases, the separated water is
re-injected into some formation below the producing zone.
This has been found to give as low as 23 ppm (parts per
million) oil contamination level. Management of these pumps
and increased oil contamination with deterioration is a major
concern. Also, the location of this equipment in the production
string makes it a wellbore phenomenon. It does not address the
reservoir aspect of by-pass oil due to cone development.
Matthews6 showed that a substantial amount of the produced
water is separated with this technology. “Typically, the
water/oil ratio (WOR) of the oil concentrate stream is reduced
to between 1.0 and 2.0”.
SPE 66536
The second approach is the application of the downhole
separation of water and oil from separate perforations using a
dual completion with zonal isolation packer.
Pirson and Mehta3 also investigated the selective production of
water and oil from their respective zones and concluded that
though it reduces the cone growth, it gives the same overall
water-oil ratio at all times.
Widmyer4 patented water coning control technology in 1955
where he proposed a dual completion string to separately
produce the oil and water zones and thus counter the cone
development. He suggested perforating the top and bottom of
the oil zone and producing each perforation with a production
string.
Apparently considering the cost of the dual completion string,
Driscoll5 suggested a variant of the dual perforation
technology. He suggested two perforations with the bottom
section below the original oil-water contact. Production from
both perforations is to be co-mingled in one production string
with the possible use of a packer and adjustable flow choke to
control oil/water rates. The demerit of this approach is the
reduction in oil rate as a result of the increased hydrostatic
head of the co-mingled fluid. The problem of separation of the
produced fluid and disposal of the contaminated water makes
this technology not so different from the conventional
completion.
This is perhaps one of the catalysts to the concept of downhole
water separation in oil wells with water coning problem.
In the dual completion technology with downhole water sink
(DWS), the top completion is placed as high as possible,
within the top 20 percent of the oil zone and the second
perforation placed at some depth below the oil water contact.
As will be seen later, the location of this bottom completion
(the water sink) is a very important determinant of the
environmental and production efficiency of the technology.
Fisher et al.7 used numerical simulation model for water
coning studies to evaluate the performance of separate
production of water and oil in a dual completion (DWS). They
concluded that it could reduce water cut and, in some cases,
completely eliminate water coning.
Wojtanowicz, Xu and Bassiouni8 and Wojtanowicz and
Shirman9, conducted theoretical studies on the hydrodynamics
of water coning control with DWS.
The model used flow potential distribution generated by two
constant-terminal-rate sinks located between the two linear
boundaries of the oil-water contact (OWC) and no-flow top
boundary in the oil zone and constant-pressure outer radial
boundary representing a steady state process. Figure 1.0.
 CONTAMINATED WATER PRODUCTION IN OLD OIL FIELDS WITH DOWNHOLE WATER SEPARATION:
SPE 66536 EFFECTS OF CAPILLARY PRESSURES AND RELATIVE PERMEABILITY HYSTERESIS
The studies indicated an increase in oil production from the
top completion by efficient water production from the bottom
completion. It also shows that the bottom completion can
produce oil-free water.
A critical limitation of these studies is the lack of analytical
representation of the oil/water transition zone (capillary
transition) and related effects of water saturation changes on
oil contamination in the produced water.
Environmental and Productivity Performance of
DWS.
The major environmental merit of the DWS technology is the
ability to produce oil-free water and water-free oil with the
separate completion. This pressure sink concept not only
permits production of environmentally friendly fluids, it
counters the cone height growth around the wellbore and so
overcome the problem of by-pass oil in the reservoir. In
offshore environment where environmental regulations are
most stringent, the produced fluid is disposable overboard
saving substantial cost of water handling. In some cases, the
produced water is re-injected into the lower reservoir.
Possibility also exists to inject the produced water into the
lower part of the reservoir for pressure maintenance in
stratified reservoirs with competent zonal isolation.
The most stringent environmental guideline at present
recommends maximum of 20 ppm (parts per million) oil cut
standard for disposable oil field water production.
The first field application of the technology was in the Nebo-
Hemphill field located in LaSalle Parish in Louisiana10. Figure
2.0 is the typical completion diagram of the field test project.
The environmental performance of the technology was
outstanding as shown in tables 2.0 and 3.0. An analysis of
produced water from the sink and water from conventional
completions in the field after one year of production indicated
that the level of contamination of the produced water from the
sink was below detection limit14.
Another merit of the technology, beside environmental
efficiency is accelerated recovery. The productivity
performance was also outstanding. Figure 3.0 shows the
consistent increase in production over conventional
completions in field. This is also confirmed by result of
simulation studies on DWS well recovery performance on a
Louisiana field data in figure 4.0. In figure 4.0, the intercepts
of the various recovery lines on the ordinate represent the
typical performance of a conventional oil well. The upward
sloping trends of the recovery line demonstrates the
superiority of the technology over conventional wells.
The technology was also applied in an old well with prolong
water coning history in Texaco’s Kern county field in
California. The result indicated that a history match was
required to effectively predict the performance of the
3
technology11. For this field, the location of the OWC was not
known and oil water transition zone has developed due to the
long production history. The result of this field test indicated
that, even at a high water sink rate they continued to produce
contaminated oil (i.e. oil with water) from the top completion.
However, uncontaminated water was not produced from the
sink except when the top completion is shut-in. The model did
not incorporate a saturation transition effect for this old field.
Modeling Clean Water Performance of DWS in Old
Fields.
To effectively model the performance of old field with long
production history, the inclusion of capillary transition zone to
account for displacement of the OWC is necessary. Mattax12
recommends that where saturation reversals occur, relative
permeabilities are history-dependent and hysteresis should be
taken into account. The combined application of capillary
transition and relative permeability hysteresis in modeling of
old fields has revealed the presence of an operation zone to
achieve uncontaminated water and minimal watercut oil
production. It also revealed that the performance of these old
wells differs significantly from new wells.
Model description. To overcome the limitation of the
theoretical models, a commercial numerical simulator (Eclipse
100) was adapted for this study. This gives the flexibility to
incorporate the dual concept of history dependent relative
permeability curves and capillary transition zone.
The model is a conceptual radial grid with fluid and rock
properties from fields with severe water coning history (table
1.0.).
A straight-line approximation of capillary pressure transition
was employed:
H ( S w )( ρ w − ρ o )
Pc ( S w ) =
144
This linear approximation, though not very representative of
actual capillary pressure data, has been used by several
researchers, and is suitable for conceptual evaluation studies.
Typical Corey model13 relative permeability correlations were
used to generate imbibition and drainage relative permeability
curves for this study. See figure 5.0.
The Eclipse hysteresis option was used to permit the
specification of different saturation table for both drainage
(decreasing wetting phase saturation) and imbibition
(increasing non-wetting phase saturation). The Killogh’s13
model of scanning curves, should the process be reversed at
some intermediate point before full drainage or imbibition,
was adopted. This is to ensure that the trapped critical
saturation (Sncrt) always lies between the two critical ends of
4 SOLOMON O. INIKORI AND ANDREW K. WOJTANOWICZ
the drainage and imbibition curves. These two end-points were
made to coincide in to have uniform residual oil saturation and
effectively evaluate the recovery performance.
DWS Well evaluation and the Inflow Performance
Window (IPW)
The study developed an innovative technique to evaluate the
performance of the wells called inflow performance window
(IPW), figure 6.0. The inflow performance window is a plot
of production rate at the top completion on the abscissa versus
water production rate from the sink completion on the
ordinate. The points of the plot represents critical rates at one
completion (top or bottom) for constant rate at the second
completion – as shown in figure 6.0. The IPW consist of three
domains; a triangular shaped envelope represents the domain
of segregated fluid production (water- free oil production from
the top completion and oil-free water production from the
water sink completion). This is the domain of interest for
environmentally sensitive areas. Below the envelope is the
domain of water breakthrough into the oil completion. Above
the envelope is the domain of reverse oil coning with oil
breakthrough into the water sink completion. An addendum
region beyond the apex of the envelope displays a “flip-flop”
line representing a region of instability with some level of
contamination in fluid production on either side.
Figure 7.0 gives an understanding of the cone behavior within
the IPW. The bottom line of the IPW is the water
breakthrough line and the top line represents oil breakthrough.
Between these lines the cone height decreases gradually with
increased water production at the sink. At a certain the rate,
production from the sink balances oil production from the top
completion and the oil water contact remains flat. Increasing
water production beyond this point leads to inverse oil cone
development until oil breakthrough beyond the top line.
The behavior of fluid production within the three regions of
the IPW is best captured in figure 8.0 (without the capillary
transition effects). For a certain rate of oil production the rate
of the sink is varied. The downward sloping curves show the
initial breakthrough of water into the top completion. The
amount of water production decreases gradually with
increasing rate at the sink until cone is stabilized and there is
segregated fluid production from both completions. This
region represents zero oil cut and zero water cut. Beyond this
region, the cone is inverted and oil breakthrough into the water
sink.
DWS Well Performance with Relative Permeability
Hysteresis and Capillary Pressure transition. The result of
the evaluation of the DWS well performance indicated that, a
major merit of the technology, uncontaminated single phase
fluid production from the two completions needs effective
modeling with reasonable field data from the producing wells
from extensive reservoirs. Specifically, production logs should
SPE 66536
be run to ascertain the level of movement of the oil water
contact over time.
For thin reservoirs, there is no appreciable difference as the
segregated fluid domain is almost non-existent.
The domain of segregated fluid production could be
tremendously reduced or even non-existent depending on the
size of the capillary transition. Not incorporating these
concepts in the model development and pre-installation
planning for old wells will result in over-estimation of the
performance of the well. Figure 9.0 shows that the segregated
flow domain gets smaller with increasing size of capillary
transition. In figure 6.0, the shaded section shows the typical
difference between an IPW for old wells with coning history
and a new well with distinct oil-water contact. Operating the
DWS well in this region for the old well means operating
outside the domain of segregated fluid production and the
result is contaminated fluid in one or both completions.
The size of capillary transition determines the critical rates of
the IPW. The critical oil rate is most affected by the capillary
transition size changing from about 146 BOPD for a new well
with sharp contact to about 82 BOPD for an oil zone with 60
percent capillary height. The area of the domain reduces by
about 36 percent. The critical water rate at the sink shows
some slight but unappreciable decrease with increasing size of
capillary transition zone.
Another interesting aspect of the effects of capillary transition
in old wells is the location of the water sink completion.
Within the transition zone both fluids are mobile depending on
the extent of sweep. For environmental purposes, it is very
important that production logging operation be performed and
the exact water saturation profile be determined as part of the
pre-installation modeling. For effective environmental
application, the water sink should be located either below the
original oil water contact or in a completely swept zone with
only residual oil saturation. The location of the sink within a
zone of mobile oil creates an inverse oil cone and
consequently, oil production in the water sink. This production
of oil may persist with increasing rate of the water sink.
While locating the water sink close the OWC contact reduces
the amount of water production at the sink to stabilize the cone
it also creates two unwanted problem of:
• Reducing the size of the segregated fluid production
domain as can be seen in figure 10.0.
• Creating the problem of initial inverse oil cone and
consequent contaminated water production (figure 11.0).
Figures 13.0 and 14.0 shows the cone development profile
in a DWS model. First, there is water cone development
at low rate at the water sink. Then at high rates from the
sink, there is reverse oil cone development as in figure
14.0.
 CONTAMINATED WATER PRODUCTION IN OLD OIL FIELDS WITH DOWNHOLE WATER SEPARATION:
SPE 66536 EFFECTS OF CAPILLARY PRESSURES AND RELATIVE PERMEABILITY HYSTERESIS
The level of oil production at the water sink depends on the
location of the sink. In figure 12.0 location of the water sink in
the zone of water saturation transition leads to permanent
inverse oil cut. The production of oil reduces with movement
of the sink below the initial oil water contact. Location of the
sink below the top 20 percent of the water zone eliminates the
problem of inverse oil coning.
Also, the target of a company could be to produce clean water
at the sink and minimal water cut oil at the top completion.
This will involve operating the belt region before the flip-flop
line . The diagram in figure 15.0 gives a guide on the
operation range. In the sample schedule (figure 15.0), top
completion liquid rate of 180 BLPD is targeted. The sink rate
could be operated anywhere from 0 to 250 BWPD. Beyond
this point, instability sets in and there is initial contamination
in both completion. Producing water at 250 bb/day gives
optimum oil recovery with less than 10 percent water cut in
the top completion and oil-free disposable water in the bottom
completion.
DWS well design and production schedule.
To mitigate the problem of produced water contamination
while maximizing oil recovery with the DWS technology,
effective design and planning is necessary.
• Adequate field data and production logs should be run to
understand the extent of water saturation transition
development over time and the possible current location
of oil-water contact.
• A good understanding of field history from start of
production and location of original oil-water contact is
necessary
• Capillary pressure data from core analysis within the field
or correlation fields could be used to derive suitable
capillary pressure data from the Leverett J-function
correlation for the pre-installation studies.
• In the absence of core data, capillary pressure information
could be obtained from electric resistivity log responses
using typical capillary profile match.15
• In the last option, linear approximations from Young’s
equation could be used to together with information from
the production logs.
• To avoid, initial oil breakthrough (initial inverse oil cone),
the water sink location should be as deep as the limit of
water handling capacity can dictate. The sink should not
be installed just below the oil-water contact or in the
transition zone where mobile oil can easily flow into the
water sink.
• In wells where the transition size is almost the same size
as oil zone thickness water production starts almost
immediately at the oil zone completion. For such
completions, it might be necessary to turn on the water
sink for a period to collapse the cone prior to start up oil
production as was the case in the Texaco operation in
kern county.
5
Conclusion
This paper presents the results of studies conducted to evaluate
the performance of one of industry’s solution to water
production – the Downhole Water Sink technology (DWS), in
old oil wells with persistent water coning history. The study
included the effect of capillary transition in the modeling of
the DWS application in old oil wells where the long history of
persistent water production creates a water saturation
transition above the original oil-water contact. The result
shows that adequate planning and understanding of the
reservoir and well history is necessary to effectively operate
within the segregated flow domain and avoid the problem of
contaminated water production. It shows that the inclusion of
the effect reduces the segregated fluid flow domain and
increases the possibility of contaminated water production.
By adequate modeling and production control it is possible to
produce completely oil-free water and water-free oil.
In summary:
• The application of DWS enables operators to produce
uncontaminated water from oil wells that are disposable
or could be re-injected for pressure maintenance.
• This possibility could be eroded in old oil fields with
severe water coning history without adequate pre-
installation modeling and planning.
• Incorporating the dual concept of capillary pressure
transition and relative permeability hysteresis effects in
modeling of old wells can mitigate the problem of
contaminated fluid production in these wells.
• Where water handling and disposal is not restricted as in
offshore environments, location of the sink closest to the
bottom of the water zone increases the size of the domain
for segregated fluid production and accelerates oil
recovery.
• Locating the water sink at the oil-water contact or slightly
below reduces the amount of water production required to
counter cone development. However, it creates the
environmental problem of inverse oil cone.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This study is part of an LSU research project funded by the
joint industry panel for the application and development of the
Downhole Water sink Technology for water coning control.
Authors would like to express appreciation to the DWSTI JIP
for encouragement to carry out this study and permission to
publish the result.
References
1 Azari, M. and Soliman, M.:1996, “Review of Reservoir
Engineering aspects of Conformance Control technology”, Paper
SPE 35171 SPE Permian Basin Oil and Gas Recovery
Conference, Midland, TX, March 27-29.
2 Smith, C.R., and Pirson, S.J.: “Water Coning Control in Oil
Wells by Fluid Injection,” SPEJ, Vol.3, No. 4, 314 – 326, 1963.
3 Pirson, S.J., and Mehta, M.M., 1967, “A Study of Remedial
Measures for Water-Coning By Means of a Two-Dimensional
Simulator”, Paper SPE 1808, 42nd Annual Fall Meeting of the
6 SOLOMON O. INIKORI AND ANDREW K. WOJTANOWICZ SPE 66536

Society of Petroleum Engineers of AIME, Houston, TX, October

1-4.
4 Widmyer, R.H.: “Producing Petroleum from Underground
Formations,” U.S. Patent No. 2,855,047, Oct. 3, 1955.
5 Driscoll, V.J.: “Multiple Producing Intervals to Suppress
Coning,” US Patent No. 3,638,731, Feb. 1, 1972.
6 Matthews, C.. Chachula, R., Peachey, B.R., and Solanki, S.C.,
1996, “Application of Downhole Oil/Water Separation Systems
in the Alliance Field,’ Paper SPE 35817, Third International
Conference on Health, safety & environment in Oil and Gas
Exploration, New Orleans, LA, June 9-12.
7 Fisher, W.G, Letkeman, J.P., and Tetreau, E.M., 1970, “The
Application of Numerical Coning Model to Optimize
Completion and Production Methods To Increase Oil
Productivity in Bellshill Lake Blairmore Pool” Journal of
Canadian Petroleum Technology, Oct. – Dec., 33-39.
8 Wojtanowicz, A.K., Hui Xu, and Bassiouni, Z., 1991, “Oilwell
Coning Control Using Dual Completion With Tailpipe Water
Sink”, Paper SPE 21654, SPE Production Operation
Symposium, Oklahoma City, OK, April 7-9.
9 Wojtanowicz, A.K., and Shirman, E.I., 1994, “An In-situ
Method for Downhole Drainage – injection of Formation Brine
in a Single Oil-Producing Well,” Proc. Int. Symposium on
Scientific and Engineering Aspects of Deep Injection Disposal
of Hazardous and Industrial Wastes, Lawrence Berkeley
Laboratory, Berkeley, CA, May 10 –13.
10 Swisher, M.D., and Wojtanowicz, A.K., 1995, “New Dual
Completion Eliminates Bottom Water Coning”, Paper SPE
30697, SPE Annual Technical Conference & Exhibition, Dallas,
TX, October 22-25.
11 Bowlin, K.R., Chea, C.K., Wheeler, S.S., and Waldo, L.A.,
1997, “Field Application of In-situ Gravity Segregation to
Remediate Prior Water Coning”, Paper SPE 38296, SPE
Western regional Meeting, Long Beach, CA, June 25-27.
12 Mattax, C.C and Dalton, R. (ed.), 1989, “Reservoir Simulation”,
Monograph Vol. 13, SPE Textbook Series, Richardson, TX,
pp. 135.
13 Archer, J.S. and Wall, C.G., 1988, “Petroleum Engineering –
principles and practice” , Graham and Trotman, London, , pp.
92-119
14 Swisher, M.D., and Wojtanowicz, A.K., 1995, “In-situ
Segregated Production of Oil and water – A Production Method
With Environmental Merit: Field Application”, Paper SPE
29693, SPE/EPA Exploration and Production Environmental
Conference, Houston, TX, March 27-29.
15 Ibrahim, A., Desbrandes, R., and Bassiouni, Z., “Derive
Capillary Pressure From Well Logs”, Petroleum Engineer, July
1994, pp 38 – 41.
 CONTAMINATED WATER PRODUCTION IN OLD OIL FIELDS WITH DOWNHOLE WATER SEPARATION:
SPE 66536 EFFECTS OF CAPILLARY PRESSURES AND RELATIVE PERMEABILITY HYSTERESIS 7

Table 1.0 Input data For DWS Studies

INPUT DATA Unit Gulf Canada Louisiana West Africa
Reservoir pressure psi 1987 1788 4150
Thickness of oil/gas column ft 6.5 50 20
Thickness of water column ft 6.5 50 20
Depth of OWC/GWC (static) ft 6161 4770 9786
Position and length of production perforations ft 6154 – 6157.5 4720 – 4725 9766 – 9776
Position and length of water zone perforations ft 6165 – 6168 4780 – 4790 9796 – 9806
Horizontal permeability in oil/gas column mD 888.64 1000 3060
Vertical permeability in oil/gas column mD 74.82 500 75
Horizontal permeability in water column mD 2252.15 1000 3060
Vertical permeability in water column mD 112.28 500 75
Water density at temperature Ib/ft2 74 62.47 61.47
Water viscosity at temperature cP 0.45 0.46 0.39
O
Reservoir temperature F 152 150 165
Porosity in oil column Fraction 0.1142 0.30 0.27
Porosity in water column Fraction 0.0748 0.30 0.27
Oil/gas formation volume factor Rb/stb 1.47 1.26 1.26
Oil gravity / gas gravity API 34 32.4 35
Oil/gas viscosity at temperature (@BHP cP 0.405 1.25 2.5
Completion diameter/hole size inches 7 7 7

Table 2.0 – Hydrocarbon contamination of Drainage/System waters14

Parameter Unit Detection Limit Drainage Water1 System Water2
(DL)
Total Dissolved mg/l 1.0 63,300 69,100
Solids
Oil and Grease mg/l 2.0 < DL 484
Benzene mg/l 1.0 < DL < DL
Ethylbenzene mg/l 1.0 < DL < DL
Toluene mg/l 1.0 < DL < DL
Xylene mg/l 1.0 < DL1.0 < DL
1
Average of two measurements; 2 Endpoint system water

Table 3.0 – PAH Contamination of Drainage/System Waters

Component Unit Drainage water System Water
1
Mid-pont End-point2
Naphtalene ppb 11.32 536.61 450.38
Phenanthrene ppb ND 34.74 26.35
Fluorene ppb ND 6.66 6.11
Dibenzothiophene ppb ND 12.70 9.54
Anthracene ppb ND 0.17 ND
Pyrene ppb ND 0.25 0.23
Other PAH ppb ND 1.48 0.33
Total PAH ppb ND 592.61 492.94
8 SOLOMON O. INIKORI AND ANDREW K. WOJTANOWICZ SPE 66536

O il

W a te r

Fig. 1.0 DWS Water Control Principle

W a te r

O il
P CP

3’
18 ’
O il
O WC
W a te r 7’

5’
64 ’

Fig. 2.0 Typical completion diagram of DWS well.

P r o d u c tio n r a te , B O P

60
W C = 0 .1 %
50

40

30
*
20

10
W C =97%
0
0 W a te r B T 6 12 18 24
T im e , m o n t h s
Fig. 3.0 Production Histories for conventional and DWS wellsNebo-Hemphill field
 CONTAMINATED WATER PRODUCTION IN OLD OIL FIELDS WITH DOWNHOLE WATER SEPARATION:
SPE 66536 EFFECTS OF CAPILLARY PRESSURES AND RELATIVE PERMEABILITY HYSTERESIS 9

5 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0

4 ,5 0 0 ,0 0 0

4 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0

3 ,5 0 0 ,0 0 0

3 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0

2 ,5 0 0 ,0 0 0

2 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0

1 ,5 0 0 ,0 0 0

1 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0

5 0 0 ,0 0 0

-
0 100 200 300 400 500 600

S in k D r a in a g e R a t e , b b l/d a y

200B O P D 150B O P D 100B O P D 300B O P D 400B O P D 600B O P D

Fig. 4.0 DWS Well Recovery Analysis for different oil rates.
R e la tiv e p e r m e a b ility

1
0 .9
0 .8
0 .7
0 .6
0 .5
0 .4
0 .3
0 .2 Im b ib it io n c u r v e s
D ra in a g e
0 .1
0

0 .0 0 0 .2 0 0 .4 0 0 .6 0 0 .8 0 1 .0 0
W a te r S a tu r a tio n (S w - f r a c tio n )
Fig. 5.0 Relative Permeability Hysteresis Curve (Corey Exponent = 4.0)

400
W a te r R a te (b b l/d a y )

300

200

100

0 50 100 150 200 250

O il R a te (b b l/d a y )
H Y S 3 0 ' C A P :W a te r B t H Y S 3 0 ' C A P : O il B t
ZERO CA P, NO HYS ZERO CA P, NO HYS
Fig. 6.0 Relative Permeability Hysteresis Effect on IPW with Capillary transition (envelope of water cut oil Prod.)
10 SOLOMON O. INIKORI AND ANDREW K. WOJTANOWICZ SPE 66536

40
35
N e g a tiv e V a lu e s in d ic a te in v e rs e o il c o n e d e v e lo p m e n t
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
-5 0 100 200 300 400 500 600
-1 0
-1 5
S in k P r o d u c tio n R a te ( B L P D )
Fig. 7.0 Typical Cone Profile Within IPW
Water Cut (top Completion) (fraction)

0.3000 0.0600

0.2500 0.0500

0.2000 0.0400

0.1500 0.0300

0.1000 0.0200

0.0500 0.0100

0.0000 0.0000
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400

Sink Production Rate (BLPD)

WC@100 BLPD top WC@200 BLPD Top Oc @100 BLPD Top OC@200 BLPD top
Oil cut ( btm Completion) (fraction)

Fig. 8.0 Oil cut/Water cut Analysis in DWS well

400
300
(bbl fluid/day)
Water Rate

200
100
0
0 50 100 150 200 250
Oil Rate (bbl fluid/day)

60%' CAP:Oil Bt 60%' CAP:Water Bt 20%' CAP:Oil Bt

20%' CAP:Water Bt NO CAP: Water Bt" NO CAP:Oil Bt
Fig. 9.0 Effect of Capillary Pressure Transition zone on DWS well performance (IPW)
 CONTAMINATED WATER PRODUCTION IN OLD OIL FIELDS WITH DOWNHOLE WATER SEPARATION:
SPE 66536 EFFECTS OF CAPILLARY PRESSURES AND RELATIVE PERMEABILITY HYSTERESIS 11

1500
1300
Liquid rate at completion (BLPD)

1100
900
700
500
300
100
- 100
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Liquid Rate at top Completion (BLPD)

Nsp =0 Nsp =0 Nsp - 0.75 Nsp =0.75 Nsp =0.5 Nsp =0.5
Fig. 10.0 IPW variation with Sink Position Number (refernce depth of sink in water zone)

1.6
1.4
1.2
BO PD

1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 1 2 3 4 5
T im e (years)
Fig. 11.0 Initial inverse Oil Cone in DWS wells

20
Location of Sink above or Below OWC

15
10
5
0
-20000 -5 0 20000 40000 60000 80000
-10
-15
-20
Total oil production ( stb )
Fig. 12.0 Water Sink Oil Production with Depth (Transition zone to below OWC)
12 SOLOMON O. INIKORI AND ANDREW K. WOJTANOWICZ SPE 66536

Fig. 13.0 Simulation representation of water cone profile

Fig. 14.0 Inverse Oil Cone Development in DWS wells

0.2500 0.0450
Oil Cut In btmCompletion

0.0400
0.2000 0.0350
Water cut in top Completion

0.0300
0.1500
0.0250
0.0200
0.1000
0.0150
0.0500 0.0100
0.0050
0.0000 0.0000
0 200 400 600 800
Fluid Production at Sink (BLPD)

WC OC
Fig. 15.0 OilCut and Watercut Profile outside Segregated Flow domain