68
Starting at time zero, Fluid B is injected at a constant rate of O.
TABLE 3.20—COEFFlClENTS FOR RELATIVE PERMEABILITY
CORRELATIONS, EQS. 3.197 THROUGH 3.199
1.000677
b' -0.99625 a -0.55874189 1.2140403
1.281874
-9.42322
6. Determine the incremental oil recovery as a function of
3.9 A thin reservoir zone (8 ft thick) is to be opened in several wells
to production. The oil from this zone is expected to have a viscosity of
2.36 cp at reservoir temperature. Because the oil is essentially dead,
it will be necessary to supplement the reservoir energy to produce oil
at economical rates. A waterflood is under consideration. Relative
permeability data from an adjacent interval have been correlated with
water saturation by use of Eqs. 3.197 and 3.198. Log calculations
indicate that the initial water saturation should be O. 136. A residual
oil saturation of 0.325 was obtained on cores from a geologically
similar interval.
l. Calculate the waterflood recovery (PV) as a function of PV 's, tD,
of fluid injected for 0 stD to a WOR of F =50.The viscosity of water at
reservoir temperature is 0.63 cp. Relative permeability relationships
are given by Eqs. 3.197 and 3.198.
. (3.197)
In sw
and In krw=aw +bw . . (3.198)
where Eq. 3. 16 gives SwD and Table 3.20 gives the coefficients a b a
and bw for the waterflood.
2. Estimate the potential for a low-tension chemical flood if the
residual oil saturation to chemical flocxling is Sorc=0.1 for the interval
from tD until the chemical flood front breaks through. Determine the
incremental oil when the viscosity of the low-tension solution is 10 cp
and the retention factor, Di, is 0.25. Assume that Eqs. 3.198 and 3.199
represent the relative permeability relationships for the low-tension
flood.
where tension flood.. . .
(3.199)
3.10 Estimate the incremental oil in Problem 3.9 when the
Iowtension flood begins at the end of the waterflood when the
residual oil saturation is assumed to be 0.325. Compare your
estimation of oil recovery vs. PV of chemical injected with the results
of Problem 3.9.
3.11 Show that the erf(') solution (Eq. 3.148) given for the
convection-diffusion partial-differential equation does indeed satisfy
the equation.
3.12 Consider Example 3.9. Assume that a time of 50 hours has
elapsed since the inlet brine concentration was changed. At fris spe-
ENHANCED OIL RECOVERY
cific point in time, calculate the concentration of NaCI (in parts per
million) as a function of position x in the core.
3.13. Hall and Geffen 28 reported an 8.5-ft mixing-zone length
for the following conditions in their dispersion experiments: core
length ft, v=2.0 ft/D, unfavorable viscosity ratio, and Torpedo
sandstone core. The mixing-zone length is measured between the
95% and 5% concentration levels. How does this mi_xing-zone
length compare with that which would be predicted by the
solution to the diffusivity equation for a favorable mobility ratio?
3.14. Consider a linear core that originally contains Fluid A.
0413 ft/hr. After a fixed period of constant injection, the injected
fluid is changed to Fluid C and injection is continued at the same
rate. The system is shown in Fig. 3.63.
Fluid A is miscible with Fluid B, and Fluid C is miscible with Fluid
B. Fluids A and C are not miscible. Also, if Fluids A and C are mixed
with Fluid B the system can become immiscible. In particular, if
the concentrations of Fluids A and C each exceed I % when mixed
with Fluid B, then the system becomes immiscible.
It is desired to inject a slug of Fluid B of sufficient size such that
the system will stay miscible throughout the displacement
process from the entrance to the end at x=50 ft—i.e., until the
concentration of Fluid B is 50% at x=50 ft (mean front position).
Fluids A, B, and C have similar physical properties. The
dispersion coefficient is assumed to be a constant value of K=3.1
ft 2 /hr for all three fluids.
With this information, estimate the minimum slug size of Fluid
B so that miscibility will not be lost. Define the size in terns of the
total time of injection of Fluid B or in terms of the distance
between the mean positions of the front and back of the slug.
3.15. Consider flow in a linear sandstone core. An experiment
is run in which Chemical A is displaced by Chemical B, with which
it is miscible. A step change in concentration is made at the inlet
(x=O) at t=0. The velocity of the displacement is 6.6 x 10 ¯5
in./sec.
When the mean position of the front has traveled 96 in. 1
.461 x 10 6 seconds), the width of the mixing zone is 19.5 in. The
width is defined as the distance between the points where the
concentrations of Chemical B are 0.02 and 0.98 (normalized
concenü•ations).
1. Calculate the dispersion coefficient. Assume that the
dispersion process fits the theory perfectly.
2. Assume that a second experiment is run in the same
system but at a velocity three times the original. Calculate the width
of
the mixing zone when the mean position of the front has traveled
96 in. (same position as in the original experiment).
3. If a third experiment were run, but at a velocity of 10 times
the original velocity , would the width of the mixing zone be larger
than determined in Part 2? Again assume that the width is to be
measured when the mean position of the front has traveled 96 in.
Explain the reasons for your answer.
Additional information (applieS to all questions):
 . Assume that the Perkins and Johnston correlation, Eq. 3.164, The flood is to be conducted in a line drive. The injection
applies and that the contribution of the molecular diffusion term and an observation well are 400 ft apart. The flood-front velocity
is completely negligible. is to be 1.5 ft/D. Assume that the reservoir rock is similar to
DISPLACEMENT Berea sandstone. The
IN LINEAR viscosity of Chemical B
is about the same as
SYSTEMS the crude oi_l viscosity
(slightly favorable
2. The mobility ratio).
following
parameter
C 1. If a slug of
Chemical B is injected
values may as a step change in
be used if concentration, how
required: long will it take for
Fldp=O.24 breakthrough at the
in. and observation well?
Assume that a 1 %
Mean Positions of Fluids Shown concentration
constitutes
Fig. 3.63—1njection of a slug, Problem 3.14. breakthrough.
2. What is the
width (in feet) of the
mixed zone at this time? Assume that the width is the distance
o Treer between the points where the Chemical B concentrations are
1.00
Ethar»l Tracer
99% and I %.
Additional data: D (Chemical B in ft 2 /hr,
0.30 1/(FR 4) —0.5, and Fldp =0.15 in. Use the Perkins and Johnston
correlation, Eq. 3.164, to estimate K? for this calculation.

3.18. A laboratory experiment on dispersion is conducted on

an outcrop core. In the experiment, water is displaced by water
| 04 con69
0.20

O 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.201.40

PW'
Volumes Inlected,

Fig. 3.64—Glycerol displacement run in Berea sandstone

core, Problem 3.19.
cm 2 /s.

3.16. Assume that a propane miscible displacement is to be

carried out in a field test. The minimurn propane slug size
required in the test to ensure miscibi_lity throughout the TABLE 3.21 —GLYCEROL DISPLACEMENT RUN,
displacement process needs to be estimated. Pressure and
temperature conditions are such that propane is miscible with
PROBLEM 3.19, BEREA SANDSTONE CORE
the crude oil and with methane, which will be used to displace
the propane slug.
For simplicity, assume that the reservoir is linear and is 500 ft
long (distance between injection and production well). and

Determine the minimum slug size, assuming that the porous

medium is homogeneous. For this purpose, define the minimum
slug size to be that which will just maintain a zone of propane of
at least 95% of original composition between the oil/propane
zone and the trailing propane/methane zone. Give your answer
as a percent of the total reservoir HCPV.
Additional data: "o =3.0 cp, g c3 —0.10 cp, and —-0.015 cp.

3.17. A miscible
displacement is to
be carried out in a
Liquid d - In Liquid
given reservoir
with Chemical B. 5.0 cm Out
Chemical B is
miscible with the
crude oil at all
compositions. L 122.2 cm
Fig. 3.65—Dispersion experiment, Problem 3.20.
 Experimental Conditions
Flow rate, cm 3 /hr 6
Flow velocity, in./D 13.8
Collection rate, test tube/hr
Permeability before run, md 303
Average temperature, O F
Temperature range, O F 70 to 85
Average pressure in core, psig
Core Dimensions

Length, in. 48.07 Diameter, in. 1.981 Area, in. 2

3.081
PV, cm 3 500.53
Porosity 0.2062

Displacement Fluids

Fluid initially in core: brine, 30 g NaCWL, 650 g glyceroi/L

Viscosity at 22.5 seconds -1 and 77 O F, cp 7.4
Density at 77 0 F, g/cm 3
Fluid injected: brine, 20 g NaCl/L, 700 g glycerol/L,
2.5 vol% ethanol
Viscosity at 22.5 seconds -1 and 77 0 F, cp 1 1.3
Density at 77 0 F, g/cm 3 1.1609
• Pressure caused by effluent valve restricting flow.
taining alcohol as a tracer. The frontal velocity for the experiment is
5.0 ft/D. The measured dispersion coefficient, Kt, is ft2/hr.
l . Estimate the dispersion coefficient at a velocity of 1.0 ft/D. 2.
Estimate the dispersion coefficient at a velocity of 250 ft/D. 3. For the
dispersion coefficient of Part 1, calculate the width of the dispersion
zone at 48 hours after the start of injection. Assume that the width of
the dispersion zone is defined to be the distance between points
where the concentrations are 0.01 and 0.99.
Additional data: D (alcohol in water) ft 2 /hr and
FR$=1.2.
3.19. The dispersion data shown in Fig. 3,64 were taken in the
laboratory. Table 3.21 shows the run conditions.
I . Determine the dispersion coefficient for this run.
2. Plot the experimental data against the analytical solution to
show the ' 'goodness" of fit between theory and data. Plot
concentration of the core effluent vs. time.
3. How well do these results compare with those obtained with
the Perkins and Johnston correlation? That is, how does your answer
to Part I compare to the dispersion coefficient value calculated with
an appropriate correlation presented by Perkins and Johnston?

3.20. A dispersion experiment is conducted in the laboratory in a

linear core, as shown in Fig. 3.65. The core properties are =0.19 and V
—455.7 cm 3 . The liquid is i_njected at a constant rate. The linear
(interstitial) velocity is 1.39 X 10 ¯4 in./sec. In the dispersion
experirnent, a dye is suddenly injected with the liquid and the
concentration of the dye, CB, in the exit stream is measured
continuously. Table 3.22 presents the resulting data, also plotted in
Figs. 3.66 and 3.67.