PETROLEUM SOCIETY PAPER 2002-082

CANADIAN INSTITUTE OF MINING, METALLURGY & PETROLEUM

Hydrocarbon Liquid Phase Definition,

Determination and Allocation in
Two-Phase Hydrocarbon Reservoirs
A.N. Hamoodi
Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC)

S.A.W. Babajan, A.H. Desouki

Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC)

V. Ruffier-Meray, A. Pina
Institut Français du Pétrole (IFP)

This paper is to be presented at the Petroleum Society’s Canadian International Petroleum Conference 2002, Calgary, Alberta,
Canada, June 11 – 13, 2002. Discussion of this paper is invited and may be presented at the meeting if filed in writing with the
technical program chairman prior to the conclusion of the meeting. This paper and any discussion filed will be considered for
publication in Petroleum Society journals. Publication rights are reserved. This is a pre-print and subject to correction.

ABSTRACT sampling and analysis, and compositional modeling

Identification of the produced hydrocarbon liquid
stream, as either oil or condensate, in two-phase
hydrocarbon reservoirs, gains special significance in
cases where the gas cap and its associated condensate
owners are different from the oil rim owners. Thus, the
definition of the produced hydrocarbon liquid stream is
critical in determining the allocation of the produced
liquid phase and accounting for the volumes of oil and
condensate produced to satisfy marketing constraints. In
this paper we will discuss classification procedures of the
produced hydrocarbon liquid stream, laboratory
demonstrated for a saturated oil reservoir with a large
gas cap and a critical fluid reservoir.
INTRODUCTION
The definition of the hydrocarbon liquid stream and
the characteristics of oil or condensate received
significant focus in the petroleum literature. Appropriate
sampling and conventional analysis of oil and condensate
was discussed as early as 1941 by Flaitz et. al.1 and later
in 1954 by Reudelhuber2,3,4 . Eilerts et. al.5 in 1957
reported observed characteristics of a number of
condensate fluids highlighting the wide range in physical

1
properties and deriving “rule of thumb” to classify
condensates based on gas-oil-ratio (GOR) and API
gravity. In 1986 Moses et. al.6 discussed the
characteristics of oil, near critical fluid and condensate,
his work received significant discussion that advanced
the understanding of the defining characteristics of the
hydrocarbon fluid systems. A more detailed classification
was presented by McCain et. al.7,8,9,10,11,12 . McCain’s
classification identified color, API gravity and gas-liquid
ratio (GLR) as defining characteristics of the produced
hydrocarbon stream.
Legal definitions and classifications were also adopted
by various governmental agencies and are applied as
references. Specifically, the Alberta Mines and Minerals
Act 13,14 and the 1988 OPEC classification15.
The significance of establishing an agreed criteria and
procedure to classify and allocate oil and condensate
production is realized in mixed ownership, where the
owners of the oil and condensate are different. For mixed
production situations, that will inevitably evolve during
the development cycle of two-phase hydrocarbon
reservoirs, present a challenge in determining the
accurate allocation ratio of oil and condensate. We will
demonstrate that appropriate periodic sampling and
analysis of mixed producing wells provide the technical
basis of validating compositional modeling techniques
capable of component tracking permitting differentiation
of liquid streams originating from the gas-cap or oil
column. The procedure was applied to a saturated oil
reservoir and a critical fluid reservoir and the results and
specific technical challenges will be discussed.
CLASSIFICATION PROCEDURES OF THE
PRODUCED HYDROCARBON LIQUID
Definition of produced hydrocarbon liquid stream as
“condensate” based on surface determined properties
was presented by Eilerts et. al.5 in 1957, observing that
condensates range from very rich with a condensate-gas
ratio (CGR) of 500 Stb/MMScf to very lean 10
Stb/MMScf with API gravities reported as low as 30°
API to as high as 80° API. Based on the data reviewed,
Eilerts et. al.5 observed that the API gravity of 85% of the
samples reviewed ranges between 45 – 65° API, and
quoted a rule of thumb for a gas condensate system to
2
exist when the GLR exceeds 5000 Scf/Stb and the liquid
is lighter than 50° API.
Definition and classification of the produced
hydrocarbon stream based on surface determined
properties was also presented by McCain12 with general
guidelines shown in Table-1.
McCain9 further proposed a cutoff of 12.5 Mole % in
heptane plus and a GOR of 3200 Scf/Stb to distinguish
volatile oils from condensates.
Barrufet16,17 offered a slightly different set of general
guidelines shown in Table-2 and illustrated in Figure-1.
Energy governing agencies, were required to establish
guidelines of their own to regulate mineral rights. For
example the Alberta Mines and Minerals Act13, provides
the following definitions for “natural gas” and
“petroleum”:
“natural gas” means the production from any well that,
in the opinion of the Minister, initially produces gas
either alone or with oil at a gas-oil ratio of 1800:1
(m3/m3) (10 MScf/Stb) or higher, but does not include
any production that may be recovered from any well that,
in the opinion of the Minister, initially produces gas with
oil at a lower gas-oil ratio;
“petroleum” means the production from any well that,
in the opinion of the Minister, initially produces oil either
alone or with gas at a gas-oil ratio of less than 1800:1
(m3/m3) (10 MScf/Stb), but does not include any
production that may be recovered from any well that, in
the opinion of the Minister, initially produces oil with gas
at a higher gas-oil ratio.
Such definitions and variations thereof incorporated in
agreements were the basis of legal challenges scrutinizing
the definition of oil and condensate as eloquently
documented by Carlson et. al.14. However, as correctly
observed by McCain et. al.7 the definitions may often
contradict “engineering” definitions.
In a landmark agreement in 1988, OPEC agreed on the
technical basis for the definition and auditing gas
condensates15. This was achieved following a period of
reclassification by some OPEC countries of light crude
oil as quota-free condensate.
 The agreement defined condensate as “Naturally
occurring condensates are those hydrocarbons that exist
in reservoirs whose original temperature falls in the range
from the critical temperature to the maximum
temperature at which two phases can co-exist
(cricondentherm). Those hydrocarbons must only be
produced from wells completed in gas condensate
reservoirs and become liquid at standard conditions of
temperature and pressure”.
The definition is based on three surface measurable
parameters, namely API gravity, GLR and produced fluid
stream composition, specifically the C7+ content with
limits outlined in Table-3.
Streams that satisfy all three upper limits are classified
as gas condensate, while streams that pass the lower limit
of API and GLR and have a C7+ content of more than 8
Mole % will be classified as oil. Streams falling in
between the limits will be subjected to a vaporization test
(ASTM D-86) and if 90% of the sample is vaporized
above 650ºF the sample will considered as gas
condensate, otherwise it shall be considered oil. The
procedure is illustrated in Figure-2.
Based on our experience with a large number of
hydrocarbon reservoirs, we have determined that critical
temperature is an important property that should be
included in the general guidelines as shown in Table-4.
The complexity of hydrocarbons, primarily controlled
by the heavy ends in defining the fluid characteristics as
illustrated by McCain12 , noting that volatile oil with
heptane plus content as low as 10 Mole % and retrograde
condensate reservoirs with heptane plus as high as 15
Mole % have been observed. Similarly, oil with a gravity
as high 55º API and condensate with a gravity as low as
38º API have also been confirmed.
Accordingly, the general limits outlined above, that
were based on the investigators specific set of
hydrocarbon samples, while useful in understanding the
complexity of hydrocarbon fluid systems, may not
necessarily be considered as general absolute limits.
Accordingly, especially for hydrocarbon fluids falling in
the border limits, laboratory analysis of the produced
fluid stream is necessary to classify the hydrocarbon
fluid.
3
DESCRIPTION OF THE LABORATORY WORK
The objective of this effort was to establish a reliable
measure of the proportion of oil and condensate in a
mixed production stream that may be adopted in
repetitive field data acquisition. As a pre-requisite, cost
effectiveness was a criteria outlined from the onset, to
permit integration of the analysis as part of the routine
reservoir monitoring program. The data will serve to
validate predictions of compositional models, tracking oil
and condensate production. The investigative laboratory
research effort used initial-state confirmed oil and
condensate separator liquid samples.
Laboratory measurements included Carburane ®
(chromatographic data processing program for detailed
hydrocarbon characterization) analysis, density, viscosity
and molecular weight of the pure oil and condensate
separator liquid samples and five predetermined
mixtures. The results were then analyzed, and
correlations of the measured physical property as a
function of oil content in the mixture were established as
shown in Figures 3-6. This provided the basis for
verification of the technique, through blind tests for
mixtures prepared by operators not involved in the initial
laboratory measurement and analysis.
The identification of the components up to C20 was
carried out by Carburane® software and presented as
follows:
• For the light fractions contained in the cut C1-C11, Cn
gathers all the components having n-carbon atoms,
for each chemical family (N-paraffins, iso-paraffins,
naphthenes and aromatics).
• In the C12-C15 carbon atoms range, paraffins Cn is the
sum of normal and iso-paraffins having n carbon
atoms, naphthenes Cn is made of the cycloparaffins
(naphthenes) with the same carbon number and
aromatics Cn contains all the aromatic molecules
with n carbon atoms.
• The compositional data given by gas
chromatography with the Carburane® procedure for
the C16-C 20 cut are expressed as only made of two
families: saturates Cn contains all the normal, iso-
and cyclo-paraffins having n carbon atoms while
 aromatics Cn corresponds to all the aromatic
molecules with the same carbon number.
• All the molecular weights are either pure component
data for light hydrocarbons from C1 up to C11, or data
estimated by the Carburane® procedure for all
fractions between C12 and C20.
• Molecular weight of the C20+ was measured by
tonometry. The error involved in the final
quantification of the C20- cut is estimated equal to 3
weight%.
• Due to the high volatility of the mixtures, special
attention was necessary in the preparation of the
samples.
The weight percentages of C20+ cut obtained from TBP
distillation, Carburane® method and Simulated distillation
indicate similar results shown in Table-5.
The Carburane® analysis of the oil and gas condensate
samples, mixtures 1, 2, 3, 4, and the blind test mixture are
shown in Table-6. Mixture 5 (10% oil and 90%
condensate) could not be treated with Carburane®
method due to the low content of C20+ cut.
Blind test
The sample was arbitrarily prepared with 70.0% of oil
and 30.0% of condensate. The physical measurements
and the resulting prediction of the oil and condensate split
is presented in Table-7.
From the results, it is demonstrated that repartitioning
of condensate and oil from a mixed sample based on
established correlations of density, viscosity, molecular
weight of liquid and composition to the weight
percentage is possible with reasonable accuracy. The
density correlation is considered the simplest approach to
be applied as a repetitive measurement, as part of routine
reservoir monitoring. The correlations are based on the
characteristics of the original oil and condensate samples
and therefore are not general and should be re-established
as either the condensate or stock tank oil changes.
The laboratory determined oil and condensate
production proportions for mixed producing wells, will
serve to validate and history match compositional models
set-up to track oil and condensate production.
4
DETERMINATION OF THE PRODUCED LIQUID
STREAM IN RESERVOIR MODELS
Tracking of hydrocarbon fluids is essentially a material
balance problem. For example, movement of retrograde
condensate of the gas-cap gas, evolution of solution gas
from the oil-zone, mixing of different fluids in the
reservoir and surface facilities, and revaporization of
retrograde condensate and vaporization of reservoir oil
caused by lean gas injection. Each hydrocarbon fluid is
tracked on the basis of the individual hydrocarbon
components defined in the simulation model18 . The
hydrocarbon fluid may exist in either the oil or gas phase,
or both at any time or location in the reservoir, and moves
with the phase in which it is present.
To track reservoir fluids, the hydrocarbons in a
reservoir should be defined according to the original
agreed ownership boundaries. Typically for an oil and
condensate allocation case, the hydrocarbon is split to
above and below the gas-oil contact (GOC). As the
reservoir is produced, fluid will flow through the field to
the production wells. Generally, each component will
move along a different path.
At a given producer, each component will have a
fraction from above the GOC and a fraction from below
it. We can thus define two streams, one for components
originating from below the GOC and the other for
components originating from above. If these are run
separately through the separator system we can obtain
stock tank hydrocarbon liquid and stock tank
hydrocarbon gas volumes attributable to each of these
streams.
In the tracking model these production volume rates
originating from hydrocarbons above and below the GOC
are reported separately. Thus for a given well, oil surface
volume production rates from above and below the GOC
is accumulated as well as the total rate. Field and group
totals for hydrocarbons from above and below the GOC
are then generated. Similarly, fluid in place at surface
conditions is reported for the entire reservoir or by fluid
in place region, split for fluid above and below the GOC.
The hydrocarbon components are tracked using tracer
variables.
 Generally one tracer per component might be
sufficient. However, the problem is with injection
hydrocarbon, which cannot be identified with either the
'above' or 'below' original components.
For the most accurate solution all components should
be tracked, as each will generally form a different
distribution in the reservoir. However, this may be
expensive, as twice the number of components (2Nc)
tracers will be required. An alternative is to track a
smaller number and interpolate or extrapolate to find the
concentrations of the missing tracers. At least one light
component (generally C1) and one heavier component
(for example C7+) should be tracked.
When the fluid in place or the production from a well
is obtained, the tracers are used to define a stream from
above the GOC and a stream from below the contact.
These are then flashed separately so that the volumes
from above and below can be reported separately. The
sum of these two volumes will not generally be exactly
equal to the total volume produced by the well, for three
reasons:
• Injection gas, which is not from original reservoir
components.
• The separator flash is not linear, so the volume of oil
and gas resulting from a mixture is not exactly the
same as the sum of the volumes of two sub-mixtures.
• The tracer solution will disperse like any numerical
solution, so that the sum of the tracers concentrations
will not generally equal exactly one.
A normalization option may be used to request that the
production volumes be normalized to equal the total rate
of the well.
ALLOCATION OF OIL AND CONDENSATE IN A
SATURATED OIL RESERVOIR
The reservoir is characterized by a well defined GOC,
established through original pressure measurements in the
gas cap and oil column open hole logs of wells
penetrating the GOC as the separation of neutron porosity
log from the bulk density log constricts indicating a
change in the hydrocarbon fluid from gas to oil (Figure-
7).
5
The development plan considered concurrent depletion
of the oil column and gas cap through producers in both
the oil column and gas cap as shown in Figure-8.
Applying the tracking option, considering the GOC as the
limit defining the boundary of the hydrocarbon fluids,
hydrocarbon liquid originating from the gas cap
(condensate) and hydrocarbon liquid originating from the
oil column (oil) could be tracked in producing wells in
both regions. The performance of selected oil column and
gas cap wells, with the split/allocation of produced
hydrocarbon determined are also shown in Figure-8.
The compositional model determined split, applying
the tracking option will be verified (history matched)
through appropriate sampling and laboratory analysis as
discussed above.
ALLOCATION OF OIL AND CONDENSATE IN A
CRITICAL FLUID RESERVOIR
The reservoir is characterized by a compositional
gradient with depth that exhibits dew-point behavior
(gas) at the crest, and bubble-point (oil) down-dip, with
no clearly identifiable contact of the gas and oil (Figure-
9). The original reservoir pressure is higher than the
saturation pressures (dew-point and bubble-point). A
reference GOC, between the deepest depth known dew-
point type fluid, and the shallowest bubble-point type
fluid, was agreed. This formed the foundation of a
mutually acceptable allocation procedure of the produced
hydrocarbon liquid as either oil or condensate. The
reservoir is developed through pressure maintenance with
producers located downdip below the agreed GOC and
three crestal lean gas injectors as shown in Figure-10.
Gas breakthrough through conning and expansion of
the gas cap resulted in increasing volumes of gas
condensate commingly produced through the oil
producers. Considering the different ownership of the oil
and gas-condensate, the definition and allocation
procedure of the produced hydrocarbon liquid stream
required extensive technical evaluation and debate among
the concerned parties and the following procedure was
adopted:
• Periodical compositional analysis of the produced
fluids separator samples tracing the change of C12+.
 A decrease in C12+ is indicative of an increase in light and validation (history-matching) based on
hydrocarbon condensate production. Periodical laboratory measurements.
sampling and analysis is in progress.
• The process permits equitable, fair and technically
• Compositional simulation model tracking oil and sound, and verifiable basis for the allocation of the
condensate production was adopted to calculate and produced hydrocarbon liquid, and facilitates the
allocate the condensate and oil volumes as shown in technical basis for mixed ownership development
Figure-11. The model results will be cross-verified planning considerations.
through the estimated proportions determined based
on the variation in C12+. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors wish to extend their appreciation to the
CONCLUSIONS Abu Dhabi National Oil Company for permission to
• Identification of the produced liquid stream as either publish the study.
oil or condensate is critical due to ownership or
marketing constraints. NOMENCLATURE
• Guidelines proposed by various authors in ASTM American Society for Testing Materials.
classifying hydrocarbon liquid as either oil or Carburane® IFP Registered chromatographic data
condensate provide a useful reference, however are processing program for detailed hydrocarbon
specific to the authors reviewed fluids and cannot be characterization.
generalized as the differences in classification limits GOR gas-oil ratio.
demonstrate. GLR gas-liquid ratio.
CGR condensate-gas ratio.
• The OPEC classification procedure is considered
GOC gas-oil contact.
elaborate and provides a technically valid basis for
Tc critical temperature.
classifying hydrocarbon fluids as either oil or
C7+ heptane and heavier components.
condensate subject to confirmation in vaporization
C12+ dodecane and heavier components.
tests (ASTM-D86) for fluids with properties not
Nc number of components.
conforming to the specified limits.

• Laboratory procedures for the determination of the SI METRIC CONVERSION FACTORS

proportion of oil and condensate produced in mixed ºAPI 141.5/(131.5+ºAPI) = g/cm3
production cases were evaluated.
ft x 3.048* E-01 =m
• The density correlation of the proportion of oil and
condensate is reasonably accurate and considered the ft3 x 2.831 685 E-02 = m3
simplest approach to be applied as a repetitive bbl x 1.589 873 E-01 = m3
measurement, as part of routine reservoir monitoring.
ºF (ºF-32)/1.8 = ºC
• The correlations are based on the characteristics of
psi x 6.894 757 = kPa
the original oil and condensate samples and therefore
are not general and should be re-established as either lb/ft3 x 1.601 846 = kg/m3
the condensate or stock tank oil changes.
lbm x 4.535 924 E-01 = kg
• Component tracking is successful in establishing the
*Conversion factor is exact.
proportion of the produced liquid stream as
demonstrated for a saturated gas capped reservoir
and a critical fluid reservoir, subject to verification

6
REFERENCES
1. Flaitz, J.M., Parks, A.S., ‘Sampling Gas-Condensate
Wells’, Transactions AIME, 1941, 146, 13-27.
2. Reudelhuber, F. O. ‘Separator Sampling of Gas-
Condensate Reservoir’, Oil & Gas Journal (June, 21,
1954) 138-140.
3. Reudelhuber, F. O. ‘Better Separator Sampling of
Crude Oil Reservoirs’ , Oil & Gas Journal
(November, 8, 1954) 181-183.
4. Reudelhuber, F. O. ‘Sampling Procedures for Oil
Reservoir Fluids’ , Journal of Petroleum Technology
(Dec. 1957) 15-18.
5. Eilerts, C.K., et. al., “Phase Relations of Gas-
Condensate Fluids, Tests Results, Apparatus, and
Techniques”, American Gas Association, New York
City (1957). SPE Petroleum Engineers Handbook.
6. Moses, P. L. ‘Engineering Applications of Phase
Behavior of Crude Oil and Condensate Systems’,
Journal of Petroleum Technology (Jul. 1986), 715-
723, SPE 15835, and discussions and responses to the
paper SPE 16177, 16440, 19893.
7. McCain, W.D. Jr., “Chemical Composition
Determines Behavior of Reservoir Fluids”, Petroleum
Engineer International, October 1993.
8. McCain, W.D. Jr., “Black Oils and Volatile Oils –
What’s the Difference?”, Petroleum Engineer
International (November 1993) 24.
7
9. McCain, W.D. Jr., B. Bridges, “Volatile Oils and
Retrograde Gases – What’s the Difference?”,
Petroleum Engineer International (January 1994) 35.
10. McCain, W.D. Jr., Piper, L.D “Reservoir Gases
Exhibit Subtle Differences”, Petroleum Engineer
International (March 1994) 45.
11. McCain, W.D. Jr., “Revised Gas-Oil Ratio Criteria
– Key Indicator of Reservoir Fluid Type”, Petroleum
Engineer International (April 1994) 57.
12. McCain, W.D. Jr., “Heavy Components Control
Reservoir Fluid Behavior”, SPE Journal of Petroleum
Technology September 1994, SPE 28214.
13. Alberta Mines and Minerals Act RSA 2000 M17.
14. Carlson, M.R., Friesen, J.G, “Ownership of Solution
and Evolved Gas: Technical and Legal Perspectives”.
Journal of Canadian Petroleum Technology, Special
Edition 1999, Volume 38 No. 13.
15. “Definition and Auditing Procedure of OPEC Gas
Condensate” OPEC 28th of November 1988.
16. Barrufet, M., “Reservoir Classification Based on
Fluid Type”, PETE 323 Texas A&M.
17. Barrufet, M., “Phase Behavior Fundamentals and
Review of Thermodynamics” PETE 605 Texas A&M.
18. Geoquest Eclipse 300 Technical Reference Manual
2001a.
Table-1 McCain’s12 Classification of the hydrocarbon stream

Black Oil Volatile Oil Gas Wet Gas Dry Gas

Condensate
GOR < 1.750 1.75-3.2 > 3.2 > 15 > 100
(MScf/Stb)
API Gravity < 45 > 40 > 40 Up to 70 No liquid
Color Dark Colored Lightly Colored Water White No Liquid

Table-2 Barrufet’s16,17 Classification of the hydrocarbon stream

Black Oil Volatile Oil Gas Wet Gas Dry Gas

Condensate
GOR <1 1-8 70 - 100 > 100 > 100
(MScf/Stb)
API Gravity < 45 45-60 > 60
Temp Deg F < 250
FVF <2 >2
Color Dark Green- Light Brown - Light in Color Clear with Clear with no
Black Green liquid produced liquid produced
at surface at surface
Mole % C7+ > 30 > 12.5 < 12.5

Table-3 OPEC’s15 Classification limits of the hydrocarbon liquid stream

Upper Limit Lower Limit

API Gravity =>50 45
Gas Liquid Ratio (Scf/Stb) =>5000 5000
C7+ Mole Percent =<3.5 =<8

Table-4 Critical temperature in the classification of the hydrocarbon stream

Black Oil Volatile Oil Gas Wet Gas Dry Gas

Condensate
Initial Temp. < Tc < Tc > Tc > Tc >Cricondentherm

Table-5 C20+ weight(%) determination through TBP distillation, Carburane® method

and Simulated distillation.
®
Weight percentage TBP distillation Carburane method Simulated distillation
C 20+ cut 46.4 47.4 46

8
Table-6 Carburane® analysis of the oil and gas condensate samples,
mixtures 1, 2, 3, 4, and the blind test mixture.

Table-7 Blind test mixture (70.0% oil and 30.0% condensate) predicted split.

Physical Property Laboratory Measurement Predicted

Oil/Condensate Split
3
Density 20°C 0.820 g/cm 69.8%
2
Kinematic viscosity 20°C 2.669 (mm /s) 66.6%
2
Kinematic viscosity 40°C 4.089 (mm /s) 68.0%
C11- cut 34.5% 67.8 %
N-Paraffin weight % 10.2% 67.5 %.
Molecular weight 178g/mol 55.1 %

9
 7000
TR Critical Points

6000
Volatile I

5000

Condensate Volatile II
Pressure (psia)

4000

3000

2000 Wet Gas

Black Oil
1000

Dry Gas
0
-200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
o
Temperature F

16,17
Figure-1: Phase Envelopes of Hydrocarbon Fluids (Barrufet )

AUDITING PROCEDURE FOR OPEC GAS CONDENSATE AGREEMENT

YES Obtain Surface

Production
Metered? Production
Methods
Data

NO
C7+ GLR? API?
> 8% < 5000 < 45 ≥ 50

≥ 5000 ≥ 45
≤ 8%
Temp. C7+ GLR? GLR?
Oil > 8% < 5000 < 5000

ASTM ASTM ≥ 5000 ≥ 5000

≤ 8%

> 650°F > 650°F

90% 90% C7+ C7+
> 8% > 3.5%
≥ 650°F ≤ 650°F
Temp.
Appeal ≤ 8%
Cond.
≤ 3.5%
Complete PVT Submit
ASTM
Analysis Data
D.86
Tech. Comm. Tech. Comm.

NO ≤ 650°F
Oil Accepted Accepted 90% Condensate
NO > 650°F

YES
YES

Figure-2: OPEC Hydrocarbon Liquid Classification Procedure.

10
 0.86 220

210

200
0.84

Molecular weight (g/mol)

190

180
density (g/cm3)

0.82 170

160

150
0.8
y = 0.0006x + 0.7791 140
2
R = 0.9994
130
0.78 120

110

100
0.76
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Weight % of Oil in the mixture
Weight % of Oil in the mixture

Figure-3: Density as a function of weight % of oil in the mixture. Figure-5: Molecular weight as a function of weight % of oil in th
mixture.
60
N-paraffins of the C1-C11 cut
10.0
C1-C11 cut
50
9.0 T = 20°C, experiment
Weight % of C1-C11 cut

T = 40°C, experiment
40 8.0 T = 20°C, modelling

Kinematic viscosity (mm2/s)

7.0 T = 40°C, modelling

30
6.0

5.0
20
4.0

10 3.0

2.0
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 1.0
Weight % of Oil in the mixture
0.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Figure-4: C1-11 cut and N-paraffins of C1-11 cut as a function of weight % Weight % of Oil in the mixture

of oil in the mixture. Figure-6: Kinematic viscosity as a function of weight % of oil in the
mixture.

2 00 LIS:RHOB DF;1
42 0 RENAME:NPHI;1 -

Figure-7: Typical open-hole neutron porosity and density log of a well

crossing GOC.

11
 Well O3 Hydrocarbon Liquid Production Well G13 Hydrocarbon Liquid Production

2500 2500
Hydrocarbon Liquid

Hydrocarbon Liquid
2000 2000
(Stb/day)

(Stb/day)
1500 1500

1000 1000

500 500

0 0
0 10 20 30 40 0 10 20 30 40
Years Years

Total Condensate Oil Total Condensate Oil

Well O3 Hydrocarbon Gas Production Well G 13 Hydrocarbon Gas Production

7 25
Gas Production (MMScf/day)

Gas Production (MMScf/day)

50
6

87
20
5 O1
15

0
4

867
3 10
G1
87

2
50

O2 5
1
0 0
0 10 20 30 40 G2 G3 G4 0 10 20 30 40
Years Years

Total Gas Cap Oil Rim Total Gas Cap Oil Rim
O3
G5 G6 G7
8670

Well G8 Hydrocarbon Liquid Production Well O8 Hydrocarbon Liquid Production

4000
O4 2500
3500
Hydrocarbon Liquid

Hydrocarbon Liquid
3000 G8 G9 G10 2000
(Stb/day)

(Stb/day)
2500 1500
2000 O5
8750

1500 1000
G11 G13
8750

1000 G12 86
70
500
500
0 O6 O8 0
0 10 20 30 40 0 10 20 30 40
O7
Years Years

Total Condensate Oil Total Condensate Oil

Well G8 Hydrocarbon Gas Production

Well O8 Hydrocarbon Gas Production
25
Gas Production (MMScf/day)

6
Gas Production (MMScf/day)

20 5

15 4

3
10
2
5
1
0
0
0 10 20 30 40
0 10 20 30 40
Years
Years
Total Gas Cap Oil Rim
Total Gas Cap Oil Rim

Figure-8: Saturated oil reservoir fluid contacts, development scheme and oil/condensate predicted split for selected oil rim and gas
cap producers.

12
 Critical Fluid Reservoir
Compositional Variation with Depth

60.00

50.00

40.00
Mole %

30.00

20.00

10.00

0.00
10850 10900 10950 11000 11050 11100 11150 11200 11250 11300
Mid Perforation Depth (ft. ss.)

c1 c7+

Critical Fluid Reservoir

Initial and Saturation Pressure Variation with Depth

6000

5500
Pressure (psi)

5000 Dew-Point Bubble-Point

4500

4000

3500
10850 10900 10950 11000 11050 11100 11150 11200 11250 11300
Mid Perforation Depth (ft. ss.)

Saturation Pressure Reservoir Pressure Linear (Saturation Pressure )

Figure-9: Critical fluid reservoir initial pressure, saturation pressure and C1 C7+ variation with depth.

2
11199

8 ST
1
10 4
7

5
11000

11100

9 11200
3

11300

11400

Figure-10: Development Scheme of the critical fluid reservoir.

Hydrocarbon Liquid Production

Hydrocarbon Liquid
(Stb/day)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Years

Condensate Oil Total

Figure-11: Critical fluid reservoir predicted production profile and oil/condensate split.

13