Pressure Transient Behavior for Alternating Polymer Flooding in a Three-zone Composite Reservoir

Pressure Transient Behavior for Alternating Polymer Flooding in a

Three-zone Composite Reservoir
Changyu Zhu1, Shiqing Cheng1,†, Youwei He1, Engao Tang2, Xiaodong Kang2, Yao Peng3, and
Haiyang Yu1
1
MOE Key Laboratory of Petroleum Engineering, China University of Petroleum Beijing, Beijing 102249, China
2
CNOOC Research Institute, Beijing 100027, China
3
Department of Petroleum Engineering, University of Texas at Austin, Austin 78712, USA

Summary
Alternating polymer flooding has achieved great attractions recently in oil industry, however, the research of
pressure analysis in alternating polymer flooding reservoir is rare. This work presents a numerical pressure analysis
method of three-zone composite model for formation evaluation. A new numerical pressure analysis model
(three-zone composite model) is established by considering diffusion, convection, shear, and inaccessible pore
volume, which is based on the rheology experiments. Based on this model, the type curves are then developed
and sensitivity analysis is further conducted. The type curves have seven regimes in three-zone composite
model. The characteristic is the obvious upturn of pressure derivative curve in transient regime between low
concentration and high concentration polymer solution. Formation parameters can be interpreted by history
matching and formation evaluation can be conducted based on this model. As an important part of formation
evaluation, formation damage as a result of adsorption of polymers in porous media is evaluated by comparing
the interpreted permeability with the original value before polymer flooding. The field test data proves that this
proposed method can accurately evaluate reservoir characteristics in alternating polymer flooding reservoirs,
which emphasizes the potential application of this method in petroleum industry.

Keywords: Alternating polymer flooding; Three-zone composite model; Pressure analysis; History
matching

1. INTRODUCTION reservoirs have matured, and Bingham fluids, pseudoplastic fluids,

There are many different laboratory-
and oilfield-based EOR methods to
improve oil recovery, including polymer
flooding1, surfactant flooding2, alkali-
surfactant-polymer (ASP) flooding3,
CO2 flooding4,5, and nanoparticles6,7.
Polymer flooding, particularly
hydrolyzed polyacrylamides (HPAM)
flooding, is widely used in oil
development for its relatively low price
and high sweep efficiency8.
Conventional pressure transient tests
use fixed depth pressure gauges
in wells to effectively estimate
formation parameters, including
oilfield permeability and skin factor9-11.
Moreover, pressure analysis models
and techniques in water flooding
† Corresponding author, E-mail: chengsq973@163.com
©
Smithers Information Ltd., 2017
corresponding commercial software
has been developed for reservoir
evaluation. However, the pressure
transient response characteristics of
non-Newtonian fluids require further
research. Ikoku and Ramey12 studied
the transient percolation characteristics
of non-Newtonian power law fluids
and considered wellbore storage
coefficient and skin factor to present
the analytic solution in homogeneous
infinite reservoirs. O. Lund analyzed
the pressure response characteristic in
non-Newtonian-Newtonian composite
reservoirs13. Song14,15 developed a
pressure analysis model of Newtonian-
non-Newtonian composite reservoirs.
Recently, FH Escobar and JA Martínez
researched Non-Newtonian fluid
pressure transient analysis, including
dilatant fluids, and established
corresponding pressure transient
analysis models16-19. However, their
researches simply consider polymer
solutions as a power law fluid.
So, pressure analysis models and
interpretation methods of polymer
flooding can be further improved in
the polymer’s rheological behavior.
HPAM is non-Newtonian fluid and
its viscosity is a significant parameter
used to establish pressure analysis
model for polymer flooding20,21. A
power law fluid is often considered
when polymer solution percolates in
reservoirs, and many researches about
the rheological behavior characteristic
of polymer solution use a constant
power exponent model to represent
the viscosity model22,23. There exists
not only shear effect and viscoelastic
effect but also physical-chemical
interaction when the polymer solution

Polymers & Polymer Composites, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2017 1

 Changyu Zhu, Shiqing Cheng, Youwei He, Engao Tang, Xiaodong Kang, Yao Peng, and Haiyang Yu

percolates in reservoirs. Whereas the adsorption by reacting polyacrylamide with sodium and sodium carbonate. Table 1
interaction between the polymer and shows the brine’s composition, containing NaCl, MgCl2, CaCl2, and Na2SO4.
the reservoir rocks, such as diffusion
and convection, is ignored by using As explained previously, the power law model25 or Carreau model26 cannot
the constant power exponent viscosity precisely illustrate rheological behavior of the polymer when percolating in
model. Meanwhile, polymer solution reservoirs. In this study, the Meter equation was used to analyze the polymer
adsorption in the porous medium viscosity distribution27:
results in inaccessible pore volume
(IPV)24, which should also be taken
into account. These studies do not meet
our study’s practical demands, but they (1)
nonetheless lay a solid foundation for
Where μ0p is the viscosity of polymer solution at very low shear rate (nearly zero),
our work. Besides, it is necessary to
mPa×s, which is calculated by modified Flory-Huggins equation28:
consider the polymer flooding process
to establish a pressure analysis model.
(2)
Generally, offshore oilfield reservoir
In Eq. (2), the fitting numbers of A1, A2, and A3 need to be confirmed, so the
conditions have thick layers,
relationship between the viscosity of polymer solution and its concentration
heterogeneity, high-viscosity crude
was measured in our experiments. The polymer solutions were prepared with
oil, and high salinity brine. These
mechanical agitation at 70 °C to simulate the reservoir temperature, because
characteristics often result in high
temperature significantly affects the polymer’s rheological behavior; pressure has
concentration polymer flooding
a negligible effect on polymer viscosity compared to temperature. The polymer
problems, for example, high injection
concentrations for the experiment varied from 200 mg/L to 4000 mg/L, and the
pressure and formation damage where
low and high polymer concentration in oilfields are 800 mg/L and 2800 mg/L
polymer solutions blocks up in porous
respectively. A Haake RS6000 rheometer (Germany) was used to take the
medium when percolating in reservoirs.
polymer rheological measurement. Then, the relationship between the polymer
Accordingly, alternating low (less than
solution’s viscosity and concentration was obtained by rheological measurement
1000 mg/l) and high (more than 2500
at 70 °C. The fitting parameters of A1, A2, and A3 can also be achieved by matching
mg/l) concentration polymer flooding
experimental data, as shown in Table 2 and Figure 1. The measurements were
has been proposed and applied in
performed under a shear rate of 0.01 s-1.
some offshore oilfields to improve
polymer flooding efficiency. In these
processes, high concentration polymer In Eq. (1), Pa and γ1/2 are functions of μ0p; the equations were provided by CNOOC
solutions are injected, followed by based on their former research.
low concentration polymer solutions.
(3)
However, thorough research on this
alternating polymer flooding method
(4)
has not yet been conducted.
Wang29 studied the relationship between effective shear rate and percolation
This paper provides a three-zone velocity, as shown in the following equation:
composite model and discusses the
validation and application of this model
based on low and high concentration (5)
polymer alternating flooding in offshore
reservoirs. Moreover, formation
evaluation is developed according to (6)
the interpretation results.
Table 1. Synthetic brine composition
2. RHEOLOGICAL MODEL Total salinity NaCl MgCl2 CaCl2 Na2SO4

The proprietary HPAM used for 4.3 wt% 3.43 wt% 0.19 wt% 0.65 wt% 0.03 wt%
alternating polymer flooding was Table 2. Polymer solution characteristics
obtained from CNOOC. The HPAM had
μw, (mPa⋅s) A1,(g/L)−1 A2, (g/L)−2 A3, (g/L)−3 𝐷, (cm2/s)
a molecular weight of 4000 and 5.3%
0.5 0.621 0.186 0.915 0.0246
hydrolysis degree, which can reduce

2 Polymers & Polymer Composites, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2017

 Pressure Transient Behavior for Alternating Polymer Flooding in a Three-zone Composite Reservoir

By considering IPV, Equation (5) is Figure 1. Relationship between the polymer viscosity (μ0p) and polymer
changed to: concentration (Cp)

(7)

Polymer concentration is also affected

by convection and diffusion during
transporting in porous medium. The
following equation shows polymer
concentration, considering convection
and diffusion30:

(8)

Many shear-thinning rheological models

have been developed for polymer
solutions. The apparent viscosity of the
proprietary HPAM cannot accurately
match those models. In contrast, the
rheological model researched in this
study can precisely meet the requirement Figure 2. Sketch of low and high concentration polymer solution alternating
flooding
and can be used to establish a numerical
pressure analysis model.

3. NUMERICAL PRESSURE
ANALYSIS MODELING
By considering the problems caused by
high concentration polymer solution
injections in offshore oilfields, the
alternating flooding of low and high
concentration polymer solution has
been applied in some offshore oilfields.
The zone surrounding the injection well crude oil is considered a Newtonian fluids. Based on the rheological model and
was displaced by low concentration hypotheses discussed above, our study establishes the non-Newtonian- non-
polymer solution as the first zone; the Newtonian- Newtonian three-zone composite model by considering diffusion,
zone beyond the flooding front of the convection, shear, IPV, wellbore storage effect, and skin factor, which can be
first zone spread by high concentration used in alternating polymer flooding.
polymer solutions was the second zone;
the crude oil was distributed in the Percolation equations:
third zone, as shown in Figure 2. Our
hypotheses are as follows: (1) The fluids
The first zone:
of the first zone and the second zone are
polymer solutions, while the fluids in the
third zone are crude oil; (2) reservoir
rocks and fluids are compressible; (3)
(9)
gravity’s effects are negligible; (4)
reservoir temperature is constant; (5) The second zone:
the pressure drop is ignored at interface.

The fluids in the first and second

zones are non-Newtonian fluids, and (10)

Polymers & Polymer Composites, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2017 3

 Changyu Zhu, Shiqing Cheng, Youwei He, Engao Tang, Xiaodong Kang, Yao Peng, and Haiyang Yu

The third zone: 4. RESULTS AND

DISCUSSION
4.1 Type Curves
(11)
The type curves of the pressure
Internal boundary conditions: and pressure derivative in a log-
log scale were achieved based on
Wellbore storage effect the dimensionless BHP and BHP
derivative. Figure 3 shows the type
curves of pressure analysis in the three-
zone composite model by alternating
(12) polymer flooding. The type curves
Skin factor have seven flow regimes: (I) the pure
wellbore storage regime, where the
pressure and pressure derivative curves
overlap, representing the pressure
(13) behavior characteristic in this stage;
(II) the intermediate flow regime,
External boundary condition (infinite boundary): showing the pressure behavior from
the pure wellbore storage section to
(14) the first-radial flow section within the
first zone; (III) the first radial flow
At interface: regime; (IV) the transient regime
from low concentration section to
(15) high concentration section, where
the pressure derivative curve shows
(16) an obvious upturn; (V) the second
radial flow regime, where the pressure
derivative curve presents a pressure
derivative increase due to the high
(17)
polymer solution concentration; (VI)
high concentration polymer solution-
oil transient regime; (VII) the third
(18)
radial flow regime.
Initial condition:
4.2 Sensitivity Analysis
(19) The effects of different factors on the
type curves are investigated, including
Dimensionless parameters are defined to get the bottom-hole pressure (BHP)
the initial concentration, the first zone
tendency:
radius, the second zone radius, the
crude oil viscosity and IPV.

(20)
4.2.1 Initial Concentration of
HPAM
(21) The influence of the initial
concentration on type curves in
three-zone composite model is shown
(22) in Figure 4. When the initial polymer
concentration of high concentration
polymer is constant, the higher initial
(23) concentration of low concentration
polymer solutions cause higher
polymer viscosity and more flow

4 Polymers & Polymer Composites, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2017

 Pressure Transient Behavior for Alternating Polymer Flooding in a Three-zone Composite Reservoir

resistance in the first zone, which Figure 3. Type curves of pressure analysis in the three-zone composite model by
results in greater upturn amplitude alternating polymer flooding
of the pressure derivative curve in
intermediate flow section (II) and the
first radial flow regime (III) as shown
in Figure 4a. Regime I, IV, V, VI, VII
cannot be influenced.

However, the influence of initial

concentration of high concentration
polymer solutions on type curves
is completely different compared
with that of the low concentration
polymer solutions. When the initial
concentration of low concentration
polymer is constant, the higher initial
concentration of high concentration
polymer solutions lead to more flow Figure 4. Effect of initial concentration of polymer solution on type curves. (a) low
resistance in the second zone, which concentration; (b) high concentration
results in the decrease of the pressure
derivative in the intermediate flow
regime (II) and the first radial flow
regime (III). What’s more, it also causes
greater upturn amplitude of pressure
derivative curve in the transient regime
(IV) and the second radial flow regime
(V), but greater fall amplitude in high
concentration polymer solution-oil
transient regime (VI) and the third
radial flow regime (VII), due to higher
polymer viscosity and constant oil
viscosity which decrease the mobility
ratio as shown in Figure 4b.

4.2.2 The First Zone Radius

The influence of the first zone radius
on type curves by alternating polymer
flooding is shown in Figure 5. The first
zone radius indicates the duration of
low concentration polymer flooding
and the volume displaced by low
concentration polymer solutions. When
the second radius is constant, the bigger
the first zone radius is, the longer
duration of the first radial flow regime
(III) will be, and the transient regime
between low concentration and high
concentration polymer solution (IV)
appears later. However, the pressure
derivative curves are converging over
time in high concentration polymer
solution-oil transient regime (VI) and
the third radial flow regime (VII),
since mobility is not affected by the
first zone radius.

Polymers & Polymer Composites, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2017 5

 Changyu Zhu, Shiqing Cheng, Youwei He, Engao Tang, Xiaodong Kang, Yao Peng, and Haiyang Yu

Figure 5. Effect of the first zone radius on type curves 4.2.3 The Second Zone Radius
Figure 6 shows the influence of the
second zone radius on type curves
by alternating polymer flooding.
The second zone radius indicates the
duration of high concentration polymer
flooding and the volume swept by a
high concentration polymer solution.
When the first radius is constant,
a larger second zone radius results
in a longer duration of the second
radial flow regime (V), and a high
concentration polymer solution-oil
transient regime (VI) appears later.
However, the pressure derivative
curves converge over time in the first
radial flow regime (III), the transient
regime form low concentration section
to high concentration section (IV), and
Figure 6. Effect of the second zone radius on type curves the third radial flow regime (VII).

4.2.4 Oil Viscosity

Figure 7 shows the effect of crude
oil viscosity in the third zone on
type curves under infinite boundary
conditions. For lower viscosity oil, the
pressure derivative curve amplitude
moves downward at greater rates in a
high concentration polymer solution-
oil transient regime (VI) due to the
lower flow resistance from the second
zone to the third zone; for higher
viscosity oil, the upward pressure
derivative curve amplitude grows
greater during the third radial flow
regime (VII).

4.2.5 IPV
Figure 7. Effect of crude oil viscosity on type curves
Figure 8 represents IPV’s effect on
type curves by alternating polymer
flooding. The pressure and pressure
derivative curves move upward
slightly with the increase of IPV.
Higher IPV means lower effective
porosity and flow difficulty, which
leads to a higher pressure derivative.
However, IPV has a low effect on type
curves. Moreover, the IPV caused by
alternating polymer flooding is usually
less than 0.2, so IPV’s effects can be
negligible during pressure analysis.
Unlike other parameters, IPV’s effects
on typical curves are listed here only
for theoretical analysis.

6 Polymers & Polymer Composites, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2017

 Pressure Transient Behavior for Alternating Polymer Flooding in a Three-zone Composite Reservoir

5. FIELD TESTS Figure 9 shows the history matching of the individual zone permeability
INTERPRETATION of theoretical curves and oilfield test and flooding front are significant
data. Table 4 shows the interpretation for oilfields because they affect oil
Based on basic oilfield properties, the results. The permeability and skin companies’ development plans.
reservoir conditions are appropriate factor obtained by interpretation
for alternating polymer flooding; were consistent with geological data,
moreover, relatively low formation 6. CONCLUSIONs
indicating that our model can accurately
salinity is good for maintaining interpret field test data and evaluate This work established a three-zone
systematic viscoelasticity. Pressure formations. The interpretation results composite model for alternating
analysis was developed based on the
pressure fall off test, and CNOOC
provided the field test BHP data. The Figure 8. Effect of IPV on type curves
injection well conducted polymer
flooding from Apr 1, 2011 to Apr 17,
2012. The polymer solutions were
injected into reservoirs with an initial
concentration of 2800 mg/L in April
1, 2011. In January 5, 2012, low
concentration polymer solutions with
an initial concentration of 800 mg/L
were injected into the formation, then
the well was shut and the BHP was
measured. It took three days to do the
pressure measurement, and polymer
flooding was carried out again on Apr
20, 2012. Table 3 shows the basic
parameters of the well and reservoir.
Figure 9. History matching of field test data and type curves
Bourdet’s method31 was used to smooth
the pressure derivative curve of the field
test data; BHP data was drawn with
respect to time in log-log scale. It is
feasible to interpret the BHP data and
perform history matching of type curves
to calculate the average formation
pressure, first zone permeability,
second zone permeability, third zone
permeability, first zone radius, second
zone radius, skin factor, and wellbore
storage coefficient. Then, the formation
evaluation can be applied based on the
interpretation results. We calculated the
reservoir parameters using polymer
pressure analysis software that we
developed to solve the problem that Table 3. Basic parameters of well and reservoir
more than one solution existed in the Injection rate Q(m3/d) 100
interpretation. First, the homogeneous Porosity Ф 0.3
model was employed to analyze the Crude oil viscosity μo (mPa·s) 53.8
wellbore storage coefficient and skin Total compressibility Ct (1/MPa) 0.0014
factor. Then, the composite model was Volume factor B 1.1
used to estimate the internal radius. Permeability before polymer flooding μm2 1.24
Finally, the new model presented in this Skin factor before polymer flooding - 0.23
paper was used to calculate significant Well radius rw (m) 0.1
parameters. *provided by CNOOC

Polymers & Polymer Composites, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2017 7

 Changyu Zhu, Shiqing Cheng, Youwei He, Engao Tang, Xiaodong Kang, Yao Peng, and Haiyang Yu
Table 4. Interpretation results of field test data
Average reservoir pressure
The first zone permeability
The second zone permeability
The third zone permeability
The first radius
The second radius
Skin factor
Wellbore storage coefficient
polymer flooding reservoirs. Type
curves of pressure transient analysis
were achieved, and history-matching
was conducted. Also, field test data were
further fitted. The main conclusions are
as follows:
1. Rheological behavior of the
proprietary HPAM polymer
obtained from CNOOC was studied
and the three-zone composite
model was developed based on this
rheological model by considering
shear rate, diffusion, convection,
IPV, wellbore storage effect, and
skin factor.
2. The remarkable feature in the
type curves was the obvious
upturn in the transient regime
between low concentration and
high concentration polymer
solution (IV). Sensitivity analysis
was carried out to investigate
the influence of different factors
on type curves, including initial
concentration, the first zone radius,
the second zone radius, crude
oil viscosity and IPV. The initial
concentration of high concentration
polymer solutions had great
influence on the type curves, but the
effect of IPV could be negligible.
3. The field test data were history-
matched and interpreted with the
presented three-zone composite
model, which suggests that the
model can accurately interpret
field test data and describe
the dynamic characteristics of
reservoirs. Formation evaluation
can be conducted by comparing
the interpreted permeability with
8 Polymers & Polymer Composites, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2017
MPa 17.8
μm2 1.03
μm 2
0.96
μm2 1.21
m 54.5
m 135.6
- 1.45
m3/MPa 2.71
the initial value before alternating
polymer flooding. If interpreted
permeability is not much lower
than initial permeability, there
is no need to employ additional
techniques to reduce formation
damage . Moreover, the first zone
radius and second zone radius,
which indicates the flooding front
and alternating polymer flooding
efficiency, should be taken into
account when adjustment plans are
made.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors thank the CNOOC for
providing geology information, flow
rates and BHP data. We also gratefully
appreciate financial support from
National Natural Science Foundation
of China (No. 51304223), National
Science and Technology Major
Projects (No. 2016ZX05009-004, No.
2016ZX05013002-005).
REFERENCES
1. Zhang Weihua, Hou Xiaohuai.
Plasma‐Initiated Aqueous
Solution Polymerization of
Acrylamide. Polymers for Advanced
Technologies, 10, (1999), 465-467.
2. Bera A., Mandal A, Guha B.B.
Synergistic Effect of Surfactant and
Salt Mixture on Interfacial Tension
Reduction between Crude Oil and
Water in Enhanced Oil Recovery.
Journal of Chemical & Engineering
Data, 59, (2013), 89-96.
3. Manrique E.J., De Carvajal G.G.,
Anselmi L., et al. Alkali/Surfactant/
Polymer Use at VLA6/9/21 Field in
Maracaibo Lake . Journal of Petroleum
Technology, 53, (2001), 51-52.
4. Yu H., Kotsmar C., Yoon K.Y., et al.
Transport and Retention of Aqueous
Dispersions of Paramagnetic
Nanoparticles in Reservoir Rocks.
The 17th SPE Improved Oil
Recovery Symposium (IOR ’10),
SPE paperno.129887, Tulsa, Okla,
USA, (2010).
5. Zhang T., Murphy M.J., Yu H., et
al. Investigation of Nanoparticle
Adsorption During Transport in
Porous Media. The SPE Annual
Technology Conference and
Exibition, SPE paperno.166346,
New Orleans, La, USA, (2013).
6. Wang D., Hou Q., Luo Y., et al.
Stability Comparison between
Particle-Stabilized Foams and
Polymer-Stabilized Foams . Journal
of Dispersion Science & Technology,
36, (2013), 453-461.
7. Ren G., Sanders A.W., Nguyen Q.P.
New Method for the Determination
of Surfactant Solubility and
Partitioning Between CO2 and Brine
. Journal of Supercritical Fluids, 91,
(2014), 77–83.
8. Wyatt N.B., Gunther C.M.,
Liberatore M W. Increasing Viscosity
in Entangled Polyelectrolyte
Solutions by the Addition of Salt .
Polymer, 52, (2011), 2437–2444.
9. Escobar,F.H., Martinez J.A. and
Montealegre-M.M. “Pressure
and Pressure Derivative Analysis
for Injection Tests with Variable
Temperature without Type-Curve
Matching”. CT&F – Ciencia,
Tecnología y Futuro, 4, (2008), 83-
91.
10. Escobar F.H., Martinez J.A., and
Bonilla L.F. “Pressure and Pressure
Derivative Analysis Different of
Type-Curve Matching For Thermal
Recovery Processes”. CT&F, 4,
(2011), 23-35.
11. Escobar F.H., Martinez J.A. and
Bonilla L.F. “Pressure and Pressure
Derivative Analysis for a Three-
Region Composite Reservoir”.
Journal of Engineering and Applied
Sciences, 7, (2012), Nro. 10.
12. C.U. Ikoku, H.J. Ramey Jr. Transient
Flow of Non-Newtonian Power-
Law Fluids in Porous Media. SPE
Journal, 19, (1979), 164-174.
13. Lund O., Ikoku C.U. Pressure
Transient Behavior of Non-
Newtonian/Newtonian Fluid
 Pressure Transient Behavior for Alternating Polymer Flooding in a Three-zone Composite Reservoir
Composite Reservoirs . Society of
Petroleum Engineers Journal, 21,
(1981), 271-280.
14. Song Kaoping, Wang Lei, and Ji
Bingyu. Well Test Analysis of a
Compound Reservoir with Non-
Newtonian and Newtonian Fluid
Flow. Acta Petrolei Sinica, 17,
(1996), 82-86.
15. Song Kaoping. Well Test Analysis
for a Compound Reservoir with Non
Newtonian Power Law Fluids Flow.
Acta Petrolei Sinica, 18, (1997), 78-83.
16. Escobar F.H., Martínez J.A., and
Montealegre-M.M. “Pressure
and Pressure Derivative Analysis
for a Well in a Radial Composite
Reservoir with a Non-Newtonian/
Newtonian Interface”. CT&F, 4,
(2010), 33-42.
17. Martinez J.A., Escobar F.H., and
Montealegre-M.M. “Vertical Well
Pressure and Pressure Derivative
Analysis for Bingham Fluids in a
Homogeneous Reservoirs”. Dyna,
78, (2011), 21-28.
18. Escobar F.H., Zambrano A.P, Giraldo
D.V. and Cantillo J.H. “Pressure and
Pressure Derivative Analysis for
Non-Newtonian Pseudoplastic Fluids
in Double-Porosity Formations”.
CT&F, 5, (2011), 47-59.
19. Martinez J.A., Escobar F.H. and
Cantillo J.H. “Application f the
TDS Technique to Dilatant Non-
Newtonian/Newtonian Fluid
Composite Reservoirs”. Ingeniería e
Investigación, 31, (2011), 130-134.
[20. Yu H., Guo H., He Y., et
al. Numerical Well Testing
Interpretation Model and
Applications in Crossflow Double-
Layer Reservoirs by Polymer
Flooding . The Scientific World
Journal, (2014), 890874-890874.
21. Yu H., H. Guo S. Cheng et
al. Numerical Well Testing
Interpretation Method of Composite
Model and Applications in Offshore
Reservoirs by Polymer Flooding.
Asian Journal of Chemistry, 26,
(2014), 5783-5788.
22. Veerabhadrappa SK, Trivedi JJ,
Kuru E. Visual Confirmation
of the Elasticity Dependence of
Unstable Secondary Polymer
Floods . Industrial and Engineering
Chemistry Research, 52, (2013),
6234-6241.
Polymers & Polymer Composites, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2017
23. Zhang H., Challa R.S., Bai B., et
al. Using Screening Test Results to
Predict the Effective Viscosity of
Swollen Superabsorbent Polymer
Particles Extrusion through an Open
Fracture. Industrial and Engineering
Chemistry Research, 49, (2010),
12284–12293.
24. Liu J.X., Guo Y.J., Hu J., et
al. Displacement Characters
of Combination Flooding
Systems consisting of Gemini-
Nonionic Mixed Surfactant and
Hydrophobically Associating
Polyacrylamide for Bohai Offshore
Oilfield . Energy & Fuels, 26,
(2012), 2858-2864.
25. P.L. Bondor, G.J. Hirasaki and M.J.
Tham. Mathematical Simulation
of Polymer Flooding in Complex
Reservoirs. Society of Petroleum
Engineers Journal, 12, (1972),
369–382.
26. Carreau P.J. Rheological Equations
from Molecular Network Theories .
Journal of Rheology, 16, (1972), 99-
127.
27. Meter D.M., Bird R.B. Tube
Flow of Non-Newtonian Polymer
Solutions: PART I. Laminar Flow
and Rheological Models . AIChE
Journal, 10, (1964), 878–881.
28. P.G. Flory, Principles of Polymer
Chemistry, Cornell University Press,
New York, NY, USA, (1953).
29. Wang X.. Determination of the
Main Parameters in the Numerical
Simulation of Polymer Flooding.
Petroleum Exploration &
Development, 3, (1990), 69–76.
30. J. Wang. Physic-Chemical Fluid
Mechanics and Application in
Chemical EOR, Petroleum Industry
Press, Beijing, China, (2008).
31. Bourdet D., Ayoub J.A., Pirard Y.M.
Use of Pressure Derivative in Well
Test Interpretation . SPE Formation
Evaluation, 4, (1989), 293-302.
NOMENCLATURE
μp = apparent viscosity for polymer
solution, mPa×s
μ = polymer solution viscosity at
the condition of infinite shear rate,
mPa×s, which equals water viscosity
and satisfies the demand in this study
γ1/2 = the corresponding shear rate when
apparent viscosity of polymer solution
is the average of μ and μ0 p, s-1
γ = effective shear rate, s-1
Pa = fitting parameter (1.0 < Pa < 1.8)
μ0p = viscosity of polymer solution
at very low shear rate (almost zero),
mPa×s
A1 = fitting parameters achieved from
experimental data, (g/l)-1
A2 = fitting parameters achieved from
experimental data, (g/l)-2
A3 = fitting parameters achieved from
experimental data, (g/l)-3
Cp = polymer concentration, mg/l
Cp1 = initial polymer concentration of
low concentration polymer solution,
mg/l
Cp2 = initial polymer concentration of
high concentration polymer solution,
mg/l
CSP SEP = effect of salinity and
hardness on polymer viscosity
n = power law index ranging from 0 to 1
C’ = tortuosity coefficient;
r = radial distance, m
Ф = porosity
K = permeability, m2
Q = flow rate, m3/s
h = reservoir thickness, m
V = Darcy velocity, m/s
Фp = effective porosity, Фp = Ф (1 −
IPV)
Cp0 = initial polymer concentration,
mg/l
D = diffusion coefficient
pi = initial pressure, MPa
pwf = bottom hole pressure, MPa
Ct = total compressibility, MPa-1
C = wellbore storage coefficient, m3/
MPa
B = volume factor
9
 Changyu Zhu, Shiqing Cheng, Youwei He, Engao Tang, Xiaodong Kang, Yao Peng, and Haiyang Yu

S = skin factor concentration is high, mPa·s SUBSCRIPTS

K1 = the first zone permeability, um 2
μo = crude oil viscosity, mPa·s P = polymer solutions
K2 = the second zone permeability, um 2
PwD = dimensionless BHP D = dimensionless
K3 = the third zone permeability, um 2
tD = dimensionless time i = initial
Rm1 = radius of the first zone, m CD = dimensionless wellbore storage w = wellbore
coefficient
Rm2 = radius of the second zone, m o = crude oil
rD = dimensionless distance
μp1 = viscosity when the polymer initial t = total
concentration is low, mPa·s rw = wellbore radius, m
μp2 = viscosity when the polymer initial

10 Polymers & Polymer Composites, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2017