SPE 149044

Impact of Wettability Alteration on Recovery Factor

Abdulla Karimov Aziz/Azerbaijan State Oil Academy

Copyright 2011, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE/DGS Saudi Arabia Section Technical Symposium and Exhibition held in Al-Khobar, Saudi Arabia, 15–18 May 2011.

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 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 the SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committee of Society of Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction,
distribution, or storage of any part of this paper 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 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

Recovery Factor is one of the key elements in determining commercial viability of hydrocarbon fields. It has been recognized
that the recovery factor, apart from other parameters, depends on wettability of the reservoir rocks which in turn affects
calculations of other parameters used in the volumetric equation. This study is concerned with the impact of wettability
alteration due to production on resistivity saturation exponent used in the Archie equation and its subsequent effect on reserves
calculations.
The idea is to compare capillary pressure derived saturations measured from laboratory tests on water wet samples and those
derived from total porosity resistivity model with cementation and saturation exponents also measured under the same
laboratory conditions. The discrepancy between the two is then used as part of the methodology for identification of potential
wettability alteration. If discrepancy between the two methods isn’t caused by anomalously high permeabilities or wrong Free
Water Level estimations, then by the way of iteration, saturation exponent can be varied until the match between the resistivity
model and height function saturations is achieved. The workflow for integration of all saturation estimation sources is
developed to back propagate the errors in hydrocarbon volume calculations.

Introduction

The physical processes associated with wettability have been extensively studied in the literature. The application of
wettability studies in understanding and improving the recovery factor of hydrocarbon fields on a pore scale come from a great
number of laboratory experiments and hence empirical relationships of wettability with properties characterizing storage and
flow capacities of reservoir rocks (Fig.1). Although, there are several sources and methods of wettability measurements, there
are no mathematical models reflecting the physical relationships of rock properties as a function of wettability at reservoir
conditions as shown in Fig. 1. Saturation modeling, on the contrary is better defined in terms of relationships between rock
physical parameters (porous plate capillary pressure, Nuclear Magnetic Resonance, electrical resistivity, acoustic velocity etc.)
and saturation measurements under laboratory conditions.

a) b)
2 [1059]

c) d)

Figure 1. Schematic of empirical relationships between wettability and other rock properties characterizing storage
and flow capacities.

As saturation is one of the key parameters in calculations of volumetric estimates of hydrocarbon reserves, defining the correct
physical model (whether deterministic or probabilistic) becomes critical at all stages of the field development. It appears that
all physical properties that are related to saturation are affected by the rock’s wettability. For instance, capillary pressure
curves behave differently depending on the degree of wettability as depicted in Fig. 2 for both water- and oil- wet rocks. Same
goes for resistivity based models where the most affected parameter, particularly in the Archie model, is the saturation
exponent often denoted as n. Generally, saturation exponent n increases with increase in the degree of oil wettability as
described by the schematic on Fig.1 (b). During active production stage and also depending on the variations of surface
properties of grains and fluid composition changes across the reservoir, wettability alterations can take place. Often, lack of
extensive wettability tests on representative core samples result in building inappropriate saturation models, which can lead to
over – or under – estimation of reserves. Thus, during production, redistribution of capillary forces might take place and a
normally water–wet sandstone (as in the case study presented later on in this paper) can alter its wettability and ultimately
become mixed or oil-wet.
a) b)

Figure 2. Dependence of capillary pressure measured on a rock sample from degree of wettability
a) water-wet rock b) oil-wet rock (Donaldson, E.C., Thomas, R.D. and Lorenz, P.B. : “Wettability
determination and its effect on recovery efficiency”, SPE, March 1969, 13-20)

This is seen as anomalously high resistivity values against what would be considered a typical for the field reservoir property
values. Plugging in the same Archie parameters initially set for a water-wet reservoir results in unrealistically low irreducible
water saturations unusual for the range of the reservoir rock quality for the particular field.

Methodology

The workflow proposed in this paper as a methodology to solve for the uncertainty in saturation estimations involves
integration of all approaches in saturation modeling (Fig.3). Three independent sources of water saturation estimation, height
function water saturation derived from capillary pressure measurements, resistivity model with laboratory derived pore
[1059] 3

geometry parameters, and Dean Stark saturation measurements on preserved wellsite plugs are important input parts of the
workflow. Since majority of capillary pressure measurements are performed on the cleaned-up plugs, the grain surfaces of the
sample do not usually restore back to the in-situ wettability that they had, moreover, the sample is usually inclined to be water-
wet after certain processing performed upon it. On the top of that, if air-brine system is used during capillary pressure
measurements, it is likely that the wetting phase was water. Same goes for Archie parameters – it is likely that after cleaning
up the plugs both cementation and saturation exponents are measured under water wet conditions. In this case, the two
calculations are compared and if the resistivity values observed from the electrical logs against the reservoir are within the
usual range seen in all other wells in the field or fields in the basin given the similar range of rock properties, then the rock is
considered to be water wet provided the two methods yield the saturation values within the acceptable error range. On the
other side, if the resistivity values are anomalously high are resulted, unrealistically low irreducible water saturation values as
opposed to the ones calculated from the height function. The next step is to eliminate the potential errors in permeability
estimation which is part of the height function equation – to achieve very low water saturations the rock quality, and
particularly permeability should be very high so the high capillary forces result in displacement of a bigger portion of water in
the pore system. If unusually high permeabilities are then required to get to the very low saturation values for what is
otherwise an average quality reservoir rock, it is then likely to have characteristics of that of a mixed- or oil- wet rock.
Manipulation of saturation exponent values then might give a good match between the two saturation models and explain high
resistivity values against the reservoir rock with normal for the field range of properties.

Figure 3. Workflow for wettability change identification

Implementation

Importance of core data in establishing the initial and fundamental empirical relationships applicable for particular field is
critical in realizing the workflow presented in Figure 3. One of those relationships is between capillary pressure and saturation,
which is controlled by the pore geometry and connectivity (Figure 4 a). Once the measurements of capillary pressure are made
on the representative number of core plugs the empirical relationship can then be developed between saturation, permeability
and the height above the free water level (Figure 4 b). Continuous logs of water saturation are calculated in each well using
4 [1059]

known petrophysical interpretation workflows. Another empirical relationship is developed using core measurements is the
relationship between water saturation and electrical properties of the rock (Archie Model), and in a similar way a continuous
saturation curve can be produced (Figure 4 c). The comparison between the three sources of saturation estimation might reveal
the discrepancy between the two empirical models, with the Dean Stark water saturation data on preserved core plugs being
considered as the true and representative in situ water saturation of the reservoir rock (Figure 4 d).

Figure 4. Core derived measurements turned into continuous curves using known petrophysical workflows
a) capillary pressure measurements, b) continuous saturation curve derived from height function,
c) continuous saturation curve from Archie model, d) integration of all saturation sources

In the case presented in Figure 4 d, Dean Stark water saturation measurements coincide with capillary pressure derived
saturation, the reason being unusually low irreducible water saturation calculations from Archie model, which in turn is the
result of unusually high resistivity values against the reservoir. The alternative option that should be taken into account and
checked as a potential reason for the discrepancy between the two models is the representativeness of Archie pore geometry
parameters (m,n), which very much depend on the distribution of available core plugs within the field and the robustness of
rock typing methodology. This is then tackled by plugging in the range of permeability values into saturation height function
by the way of iteration until water saturation values derived from height function coincide with saturation values obtained
from electrical Archie model in the case of anomalously high resistivity. Once the equality is achieved between the two
empirical models the feasibility of permeability value obtained by iteration method is then analyzed with respect to geology
[1059] 5

and statistical averages of reservoir properties in the field. In the particular case of anomalously high resistivity (over 200 Ohm
meters as opposed to usual 20-60 Ohm meters) unreasonably high permeability values are conditioned (tens of Darcie’s as
opposed to usual 200 – 800 mD) to achieve
the match of the capillary pressure derived
and electrical model saturations. As just as
fluid contacts and rock typing and rock
properties uncertainties are eliminated as per
description above, the alternative solution of
wettability change can offered.
As sketched in Figure 1 a saturation
exponent generally increases with inclination
of the rock surface towards mixed or oil wet
characteristics. From the other hand and by
similarity to the mathematical operations
performed on capillary pressure derived
water saturation model, iteration of
saturation exponent in the electrical model
can be made to match saturation values from
Dean Stark measurements and height
function.
It appears that saturation exponent value of
up to 5 is reached to match the Archie model
saturations to the ones from the height Figure 5. Impact of saturation error on STOIIP in the case study.
function. The resultant saturation estimation
error is then propagated to volumetric
calculations as shown in Figure 5. This in turn also affects the subsequent sweep efficiency and hence recovery factor
evaluation.

Conclusions and Future Work

Development of such a workflow early at the appraisal stage of the fields’ life cycle helps mitigate erroneous calculations of
hydrocarbon volumetrics and estimations of sweep efficiency. In the case study described in the implementation part of this
paper, utilization of both numerical and conceptual approaches in interpretation of wettability alteration was the key tool in the
workflow. Numerically, permeability values proved to be by in large too deviated from the usually expected average values of
the reservoir across the field, whereas saturation exponent values proved to be higher than laboratory derived ones.
Conceptually, anomalously high resistivity values and the general trend of increase of saturation exponent in mixed and oil wet
rocks lead to the conclusion of the likelihood of wettabiity alteration of the reservoir rock.
One of the recommendations forward is to build empirical relationship between saturation exponent and wettability under
laboratory conditions as well as evaluate the potential of utilizing NMR or possibly ultrasonic waves to quantify and monitor
wettability changes either due to lateral or vertical variations in the surface properties of the reservoir rocks or due to
production during development stage of the field.

Nomenclature

Sw - water saturation, %
Rw - resistivity of water, Ohmm
Rt - total resistivity, Ohmm
ɸ - porosity, %
k - permeability, mD
n - saturation exponent
Pc - capillary pressure, psia
H - free water level, m
m - cementation exponent
A - surface area, m2
h - net thickness, m
Iu - Amott wettability
a,b,c,d - empirical constants
6 [1059]

Acknowledgments

My sincere and cordial thanks go to the Information Resource Complex, which provided me with all necessary facilities and
support needed to deliver this work. Encouragement and technical support from SPE student chapter faculty advisor Dr. Arif
Suleymanov of Azerbaijan State Oil Academy is especially appreciated.

References

1) Abbasov, M.T., Aliyarov, R.Y., Musayev, R.A. : “The wettability of reservoir rocks in the process of oil deposits
development”, Azerbaijan National Academy of Science, Geology Institute, Issue #32, 2005
2) Musayev R.A., Karimova F.G., Qashimov A.F.: “Impact of wettability alteration on relative permeability”, Earth Science,
Azerbaijan, 1998, N2, p.62-67
3) Abbasov M.T., Aliyarov R.Y.: “Evaluation of wettability alteration using the well test analysis data”, Earth Science,
Azerbaijan, 1998, N2, p. 131-133
4) Donaldson, E.C., Waqi Alam: “Wettability”, Gulf Publishing Company, Houston, Texas, 2008
5) Hans-Jurgen Butt, Karkheinz Fraf, Michael Kappl: “Physics and Chemistry of Interfaces”, Wiley-VCH Verlag
GmbH&Co. KGaA, Weinheim, 2006
6) Hans-Jurgen Butt, Michael Kappl: “Surface and Interfacial Forces”, Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH&Co. KGaA, Weinheim,
2010
7) Birdi, K.S. :”Introduction to Electrical Interfacial Phenomena”, Taylor and Francis Group, LLC, 2010
8) Donaldson, E.C., Thomas, R.D. and Lorenz, P.B. : “Wettability determination and its effect on recovery efficiency”,
SPE, March 1969, 13-20
9) Arps, J.J. : “A statistical study of recovery efficiency”, Bull. D 14, API, October 1967
10) Coley, F.N., Marsden, S.D., Calhoum, J.C., Jr. : “A study on the effect of wettability on the behavior of fluids in synthetic
porous media”, Prod. Monthly, (Aug, 1956) 29
11) Rust, C.F. : “A laboratory study of wettability effects of basic core parameters”, paper SPE 986-G, November 1957, 6-9
12) Anderson, W.G. : “Wettability Literature Survey – Part 1: Rock/oil/Brine Interactions and the effects of core handling on
wettability”, JPT (October 1986), 1125-1144
13) Anderson, W.G. : “Wettability Literature Survey – Part 2: Wettability measurement”, JPT (November1986), 1246-62
14) Anderson, W.G. : “Wettability Literature Survey – Part 3: The effects of wettability on the electrical properties of porous
media”, JPT (December1986), 1371-76
15) Anderson, W.G. : “Wettability Literature Survey – Part 4: The effects of wettability on capillary pressure”, SPE 15271,
Richardson TX
16) Morgan, W.B. and Pirson, S.J. : “The effect of fractional wettability on the Archie saturation exponent”, Trans., SPWLA,
Fifth Annual Logging Symposium, Midland, TX (May 13-15, 1964) Sec. B
17) Cuiec, L.E.: “Evaluation of Reservoir Wettability and its effects on oil recovery”, Interfacial Phenomena in Oil Recovery,
N.R. Morrow (ed), Marcell Dekker, New York City (1990) 319-75
18) Chatzis I., Morrow N.R., and Lim H.T. : “Magnitude and Detailed Structure of Residual Oil Saturation”, SPE J. (April
1983) 311-26
19) Bobek J.E., Mattax, C.C., and Denekas, M.O. : “Reservoir Rock Wettability – Its Significance and Evaluation”, J.Pet.
Tech (July 1958), 155-60, Trans., AIME, 213
20) Grist, D.M., Langley, G.O., and Neustadter, E.L. : “The Dependance of Water Permeability on Core Cleaning Methods in
the Case of Some Sandstone Samples”, J.Cdn. Pet. Tech (April – June 1975) 14, 48-52
21) Moore, T.F. and Slobod, R.L : “On the Displacement of Oil by Water”, Prod. Monthly, (August 1956) 21, 20-30
22) Gaudin, A.M, Witt, A.F. and Decker, T.G.: “Contact Angle Hysteresis – Principles and Application of Measurement
Methods”, Trans., SME (March 1963), 107-12