Study of Enhanced-Oil-Recovery
Mechanism of Alkali/Surfactant/Polymer
Flooding in Porous Media From
Experiments
Pingping Shen, SPE, Jialu Wang, SPE, Research Institute of Petroleum Exploration and Development, PetroChina;
Shiyi Yuan, SPE, Taixian Zhong, SPE, PetroChina; and Xu Jia, Research Institute of Petroleum Exploration and
Development, PetroChina
Summary
The fluid-flow mechanism of enhanced oil recovery (EOR) in
porous media by alkali/surfactant/polymer (ASP) flooding is
investigated by measuring the production performance, pressure,
and saturation distributions through the installed differential-
pressure transducers and saturation-measurement probes in a
physical model of a vertical heterogeneous reservoir. The fluid-
flow variation in the reservoir is one of the main mechanisms of
EOR of ASP flooding, and the nonlinear coupling and interaction
between pressure and saturation fields results in the fluid-flow
variation in the reservoir. In the vertical heterogeneous reservoir,
the ASP agents flow initially in the high-permeability layer. Later,
the flow direction changes toward the low- and middle-permeabil-
ity layers because the resistance in the high-permeability layer
increases on physical and chemical reactions such as adsorption,
retention, and emulsion. ASP flooding displaces not only the re-
sidual oil in the high-permeability layer but also the remaining oil
in the low- and middle-permeability layers by increasing both
swept volume and displacement efficiency.
Introduction
Currently, most oil fields in China are in the later production
period and the water cut increases rapidly, even to more than
80%. Waterflooding no longer meets the demands of oilfield
production. Thus, it is inevitable that a new technology will re-
place waterflooding. The new technique of ASP flooding has been
developed on the basis of alkali-, surfactant-, and polymer-flood-
ing research in the late 1980s. ASP flooding uses the benefits of
the three flooding methods simultaneously, and oil recovery is
greatly enhanced by decreasing interfacial tension (IFT), increas-
ing the capillary number, enhancing microscopic displacing effi-
ciency, improving the mobility ratio, and increasing macroscopic
sweeping efficiency (Shen and Yu 2002; Wang et al. 2000; Wang
et al. 2002; Sui et al. 2000).
Recently, much intensive research has been done on ASP
flooding both in China and worldwide, achieving some important
accomplishments that lay a solid foundation for the extension of
this technique to practical application in oil fields (Baviere et al.
1995; Thomas 2005; Yang et al. 2003; Li et al. 2003). In previous
work, the ASP-flooding mechanism was studied visually by using
a microscopic-scale model and double-pane glass models with
sand (Liu et al. 2003; Zhang 1991). In these experiments, the
water-viscosity finger, the residual-oil distribution after water-
flooding, and the oil bank formed by microscopic emulsion flood-
ing were observed. In Tong et al. (1998) and Guo (1990),
deformation, threading, emulsion (oil/water), and strapping were
observed as the main mechanisms of ASP flooding in a water-
wetting reservoir, while the interface-producing emulsion (oil/wa-
Copyright ã 2009 Society of Petroleum Engineers
This paper (SPE 126128) was revised for publication from paper IPTC 11257, first pre-
sented at the International Petroleum Technology Conference, Dubai, 4–6 December 2007.
Original manuscript received for review 2 June 2007. Revised manuscript received for
review 13 March 2008. Paper peer approved 19 March 2008.
June 2009 SPE Journal
ter), bridging between inner pore and outer pore, is the main
mechanism of ASP flooding in an oil-wetting reservoir. For a
vertical heterogeneous reservoir, ASP flooding increases dis-
placement efficiency by displacing residual oil through decreased
IFT, simultaneously improving sweep efficiency by extending the
swept area in both vertical and horizontal directions. Some physi-
cal and chemical phenomena, such as emulsion, scale deposition,
and chromatographic separation, occur during ASP flooding (Ari-
hara et al. 1999; Guo 1999). Because ASP flooding in porous
media involves many complicated physicochemical properties,
many oil-recovery mechanisms still need to be investigated.
Most research has been performed on the microscopic dis-
placement mechanism of ASP flooding, while the fluid-flow
mechanism in porous media at the macroscopic scale lacks suffi-
cient study. In this paper, a vertical-heterogeneous-reservoir model
is established, and differential-pressure transducers and saturation-
measuring probes are installed. The fluid-flow mechanism of
increasing both macroscopic sweep efficiency and microscopic
displacement efficiency is studied by measuring the production
performance and the variation of pressure and saturation distribu-
tions in the ASP-flooding experiment. An experimental database
of ASP flooding also is set up and provides an experimental base
for numerical simulation.
Experimental Apparatus and Method
Experimental Apparatus. The experimental apparatus is com-
posed of six subsystems: a driving pump, the physical model, a
saturation-measurement system, a pressure-measurement system,
a liquid-collection system, and a control and data-acquisition sys-
tem. The experimental apparatus is illustrated in Fig. 1.
The driving pump is one set of ISCO 500D syringe pumps. The
control and measurement system is composed of 25 differential-
pressure transducers, 37 saturation-measuring probes, a pressure
transducer, a temperature-measuring probe, an HP75000 data-
acquisition set, and a Pentium II processor. The liquid-collection
system is composed of three oil/water two-phase flowmeters that
can measure the quantity of water and oil automatically with high
precision. The range of the 25 differential-pressure transducers is
DP = 0–70 kPa, and the precision is
2.5%. The range of the 37
saturation-measuring probes is Sw = 0–1.0, and the precision is

3.4%. The whole process of experiment and data acquisition is
controlled automatically by a computer. The automation reduces
errors and improves measurement precision.
The physical model is a heterogeneous sand-packing model
with a vertically positive rhythm. The model-geometry size is
length L = 0.5 m, width W = 0.5 m, and height H = 0.1 m. The
model is divided into three layers with the same width and differ-
ent permeabilities. The permeability K of these three layers is
0.15, 0.55, and 2.1 mm2, respectively. The heterogeneity-variation
factor is 0.72. The three layers are separated by nonpermeable
boards. A vertical injection well injects fluid into the three layers
simultaneously, and the produced liquid is collected at the outlets
of the three layers. The model simulates the unified injection and
separated production in an interbedded heterogeneous reservoir.
237

Fig.1—Schematic of the experimental apparatus.
The thick black lines in the model represent the borders of the
three different layers, as shown in Fig. 2.
Thirty-seven saturation-measuring probes and 25 differential-
pressure transducers are installed in the model. Among them, 10
differential-pressure transducers and 11 saturation-measuring
probes are in the high-permeability layer, five differential-
pressure transducers and 14 saturation-measuring probes are in
the middle-permeability layer, and 10 differential-pressure trans-
ducers and 12 saturation-measuring probes are in the low-perme-
ability layer. In Fig. 2, the points marked by only a number are the
differential-pressure transducers and the points marked with a
number plus “a” are the saturation-measuring probes.
Experimental Procedure. Quartz sands of different sizes were
mixed together and placed into a tube to measure permeability.
The quartz sands of different sizes were used as the experimental
porous media and were mixed with brine in the model. The grain
size with permeability K = 0.15 mm2 was a mixture of 50% grain
of 80–100 mesh and 50% grain of 160–180 mesh. The grain size
with permeability K = 0.55 mm2 was a mixture of 75% grain of
80–100 mesh and 25% grain of 160–180 mesh. The grain size of
permeability K = 2.1 mm2 was a mixture of 80% grain of 80–100
mesh and 20% grain of 160–180 mesh. After the model was
saturated with brine, simulated oil was used to displace the water.
The injection and production wells were exchanged during the oil-
saturating process until there was no displaced water in the pro-
duction well. The irreducible water saturation in the model was
approximately 25%.
During the ASP-flooding experiment, 0.3 pore volumes (PV)
of ASP solution was injected when the water cut reached 95%.
After the ASP slug was injected, 0.2 PV of polymer solution was
injected as a protecting slug. Waterflooding followed the polymer
slug. The experiment was ended when the water cut reached 95%
again. In the experiment, data from the 25 differential-pressure
transducers and the 37 water-saturation-measuring probes were
collected every 5 seconds with inlet pressures and volumes of
produced water and oil.
The chemical concentration of the ASP agents used for the
experiment was 0.15 wt% 2600E polyacrylamide, 0.1 wt% sodium
hydroxide (NaOH), and 0.35 wt% of heavy alkyl-benzene
sulfonate surfactant. The viscosity of the ASP solution was m =
43–44 mPas, and the IFT of the ASP flooding was s = 5.510-3
mN/m. The oil used in the experiment was a simulated oil with
viscosity m = 10.0 mPas. The brine used to make the solution and
drive the water consisted of pure water and 2 wt% sodium chloride
(NaCl).
Saturation-Measurement Method. The electric-resistivity dif-
ference between brine and oil is large. For brine, it is quite
low, and, for oil, it almost reaches infinity at approximately
238
Fig. 2—Sketch of experimental model and location of transdu-
cers.
10  1016 Om. The electrical property of a reservoir reflects
the water-saturation variation. When an electrical current I is
supplied between Electrodes A and B, an electric field is estab-
lished in the reservoir. The electrical-potential difference be-
tween the two measuring electrodes M and N is measured, and
the difference reflects electrical-resistivity variation in the res-
ervoir, as shown in Fig. 3.
The electrical current I is a low-frequency rectangle-wave
alternating current and is adjustable. The electrical-potential dif-
ference between M and N, DUMN, is measured, and resistivity R is
calculated with the following equation:
DUMN
R¼b ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (1)
I
where b is the electrode-system coefficient, which is related only
to the dimension and type of electrode system. b is determined in
a uniform medium with known electric conductivity.
After measuring the electrical resistivity of a reservoir, the
saturation is calculated according to Archie’s law:
bRo
Snw ¼ ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (2)
Rt
where Rt is the resistivity of rock saturated with oil (measured
resistivity), Ro is the resistivity of rock saturated with water, Sw is
the water saturation, b is a coefficient, n is the saturation index,
and b and n are determined through a coreflooding experiment. In
an ASP-flooding experiment, b and n should be modified by the
ASP-flooding displacement (Shen et al. 2002).
On the basis of the electrode-measurement theory, the small
saturation probes were made to measure the water-saturation vari-
ation in 3D physical modeling with advanced techniques, such as
double molding, and antioxidization and anticorrosion materials.
The shape and size of the probe is shown in Fig. 4. The probe is
Fig. 3—Schematic of saturation-measuring mechanism.
June 2009 SPE Journal

Fig. 4—Sketch of saturation-measuring probe.
composed of three parts: (1) a coupling section, which connects
electrodes and saturation-measuring system with a cable (Fig. 1);
(2) a sealing section, which seals the probe when it passes through
the physical model; and (3) electrodes, which measure the electri-
cal resistivity of the reservoir. The diameter of the probe is 5 mm,
and the distance between electrodes is 15 mm. The width of each
electrode is 1.8 mm, and the measuring error of a probe is less
than
3.4%. The detailed structure of a probe is shown in Shen
et al. (2002) and the patent by Wang and Shen.
Fig. 5—Production-performance curves of ASP flooding. (a) Production performance of ASP flooding. (b) Oil recovery of three
different permeability layers. (c) Water cut of three different permeability layers. (d) Produced-liquid percentage of three perme-
ability layers.
June 2009 SPE Journal
Experimental Results and Discussion
Many physical modeling experiments have been conducted
recently on EOR by ASP flooding. The experimental results
showed that ASP can enhance oil recovery greatly. In this paper,
an ASP-flooding experiment is taken as an example to study the
fluid-flow mechanism of ASP flooding, such as the enhancement
of both displacement and sweep efficiency, by analyzing produc-
tion performance and the variation of pressure and saturation
distributions.
Production Performance. As illustrated in Fig. 5a, under the
conditions of this experiment, the oil recovery is 54% for water-
flooding and 70.6% at the end of ASP flooding. The EOR is
16.6% after ASP flooding. In the water-cut curve (Fig. 5c), it is
shown that water begins to break through to the production well
when the injected volume reaches 0.25 PV and that water cut
reaches approximately 97% at the end of waterflooding. When
the ASP slug is injected, the water cut declines gradually to its
lowest point of 52%, then rises again sharply until it reaches
100%. As illustrated by the recovery curve (Fig. 5b), oil recovery
rises slowly during ASP flooding and rises quickly in the follow-
239
up waterflooding by 12.6%. The inlet pressure during waterflood-
ing remains stable at approximately 15 kPa and increases greatly
to a peak of 150 kPa during ASP flooding. Even though the
pressure decreases during the follow-up waterflooding, it is still
higher than that during waterflooding alone. The reason is that the
synergistic effect of adsorption, retention, and emulsion of ASP
agents increases residue resistance.
The oil-recovery curves of the three permeability layers are
shown in Fig. 5b. During ASP flooding, the recovery from the high-
permeability layer rises first approximately 15.9% then the recovery
from the middle-permeability layer rises approximately 17%. Last,
the recovery from the low-permeability layer slowly rises approxi-
mately 12.6%. When the ASP solution enters the high-permeability
layer, the enhancement extent of recovery is larger in the high-
permeability layer and smaller in the middle- and low-permeability
layers. In the follow-up waterflooding, the recovery enhancement is
relatively larger in both the middle- and low-permeability layers and
is smaller in the high-permeability layer. This trend will be clearer
from the illustration of pressure and saturation variations.
The water-cut curves of the three permeability layers are
shown in Fig. 5c. The water cut of the high-permeability layer
drops first to its lowest point of 42%. The water cut of the middle-
permeability layer does not drop until the follow-up waterflood-
ing, but the drop to the lowest point of 5% is the greatest. The
Fig. 6—Pressure variation at different locations in the model. (a) Pressure variation in high-permeability layer. (b) Pressure
variation in middle-permeability layer. (c) Pressure variation in low-permeability layer. (d) Pressure difference between inlet and
outlet in three different permeability layers.
240
water cut of the low-permeability layer drops even later than that
of the middle-permeability layer; but, the curve fluctuation of the
low-permeability layer is large and the drop is small.
The liquid-production percentage curves of the three layers are
shown in Fig. 5d. The liquid volume produced from the three
permeability layers shows that the liquid-production-percentage
curves of the three layers remain constant before water breaks
through into the production wells (injected volume < 0.25 PV).
In this period, the produced liquid is the greatest, approximately
42%, in the high-permeability layer while it is the least, approxi-
mately 22%, in the low-permeability layer. After water breaks
through in the high-permeability layer (0.25 PV  injected vol-
ume  0.9 PV), the produced liquid increases rapidly and then
remains at 55%. The liquid in the middle-permeability layer also
decreases and remains at 27%, while the produced liquid in the
low-permeability layer drops to 18%. Because of the ASP agents’
effect, the flow resistance increases and adjusts the flow profile
in the high-permeability layer, which makes the produced liquid
in the high-permeability layer decrease and the liquid in the
middle- and low-permeability layers increase. During the follow-
up waterflooding, the liquid produced in the high-permeability
layer increases rapidly again but decreases in the middle- and
low-permeability layer as the ASP solution is displaced gradually
out of the high-permeability layer.
June 2009 SPE Journal
Pressure Variation. The pressure variation in the model is shown
in Fig. 6. (The locations of the differential-pressure transducers
are shown in Fig. 2.) In the high-permeability layer, during water-
flooding, the pressures of three points in the model are stable
(Fig. 4 a). The value of the P1 transducer near the injection well
is higher than that of the P5 transducer near the production well.
During ASP flooding, displacing pressure increases because of the
high viscosity of the ASP solution. Thus, the pressure of the P1
transducer, which is closest to the injection well, increases ear-
liest. The pressure of the P4 transducer, which is in the middle of
the model, is higher than that of the P5 transducer, which is close
to the production well. Through comparing the pressure variation
of three positions, the gradual movement of the ASP solution from
the injection well to the production well is observed. Because of
physicochemical reactions such as adsorption, retention, and
emulsion of ASP agents in reservoir, the pressure in the high-
permeability layer becomes lower gradually from the injection
well to the production well during the follow-up waterflooding.
But, it is still higher than that of waterflooding alone, which
means a higher residual resistance in the follow-up waterflooding.
The variations of pressure in the middle- and low-permeability
layers are close to that of the high-permeability layer (Figs. 6b
and 6c).
The differential pressures between the inlet and outlet of the
high-, middle- and low-permeability layers are shown in Fig. 6d.
(DP1 = P1-P5 in the high-permeability layer. DP2 = P13-P15 in
the middle-permeability layer. DP3 = P21-P25 in the low-perme-
ability layer). During waterflooding (injected volume < 0.96 PV),
the differential pressure of the three layers varies moderately
without serious fluctuations. The differential pressure is the high-
est in the high-permeability layer, is intermediate in the middle-
permeability layer, and is lowest in the low-permeability layer.
After the injection of the ASP slug, the differential pressure in
these three layers increases almost simultaneously. This means
that the ASP solution enters the three layers almost simultaneous- Fig. 7—Pressure distribution of ASP flooding. (a) Waterflood-
ly. After that, the differential pressure in these three layers begins ing (0.0 PV). (b) Waterflooding (0.9 PV). (c) ASP flooding
to increase differently. The differential pressure increases rapidly, (1.39 PV). (d) ASP flooding (1.35 PV). (e) Follow-up waterflood-
and the gradient is highest in the high-permeability layer. The ing (1.45 PV). (f) Follow-up waterflooding (1.93 PV).
differential pressure increases most slowly and the gradient is
least in the low-permeability layer. In the follow-up waterflood- leaves Probe a1. When the injected volume reaches 1.18 PV,
ing, the ASP solution flows fast in the high-permeability layer, so Probe a3 detects that water saturation drops from 0.69 to 0.48,
the oil bank in this layer is displaced earliest and the differential which indicates that the oil bank has moved to the middle of the
pressure gradient decreases fastest. The differential-pressure of model near Probe a3. Then, the water saturation of Probe a3 probe
the low-permeability layer decreases slowest. rises again to 0.87 after the oil bank moves away from Probe a3.
The pressure distribution in the high-permeability layer is ob- When the oil bank moves near the production well, Probe a7
viously higher than that in the middle- and low-permeability detects the oil bank by measuring a water-saturation drop from
layers (Fig. 7) because the high-viscosity ASP solution enters the 0.52 to 0.38 when the injected volume is 1.36 PV. The water
high-permeability layer more than it does in the middle- and low- saturation then rises again to 0.84. When the oil bank reaches the
permeability layers (Fig. 5d). In Fig. 7, a dense contour-lines production well as the injected volume is 1.48 PV, the water cut
zone, which is a high-pressure gradient, is formed during ASP of the production well drops rapidly from 97 to 42% and the
flooding. This zone extends gradually from the high-permeability recovery increases by 15.7%. The water saturations in the middle-
layer to the middle- and low-permeability layers and moves faster and low-permeability layers have the same variation, but the oil-
in the high-permeability layer than that it does in the middle- and bank formation time lags and the moving velocity slows down
low-permeability layers (Figs. 7b and 7c). The formation time and (Figs. 8b and 8c).
moving velocity in the high-pressure-gradient zone are almost the Comparing the water-saturation curves of each layer, it is seen
same as those in the oil bank (Figs. 9b and 9c) of the reservoir. that the formation of the oil bank in the high-, middle-, and low-
Accordingly, the movement of the pressure-gradient zone reflects permeability layers occurs at approximately the same time but that
the movement of the oil bank. The pressure gradient between the moving velocities are different. The ratio of the moving velo-
two points in the oil bank increases while the pressure outside cities in the high-, middle-, and low-permeability layers is V1:V2:
the oil bank, such as near an injection well, is high and the V3 = 2.6:1.4:1. (The oil-bank-moving velocity is V = DL/Dt, where
gradient is not. DL is the distance between two saturation-measuring probes and
Dt is the time of oil-bank movement). From the data, the moving
Water-Saturation Variation. Fig. 8a shows the water-saturation velocity of the oil bank in the high-permeability layer is 2.6 times
curves of three points—near the injection well, in the middle of that in the low-permeability layer.
the model, and near the production well—and the water-cut curve The movement of the front edge of the oil bank according to
of the production well in the high-permeability layer. The average the saturation of each point is shown in Fig. 8d. The horizontal
irreducible water saturation measured by Probes a1, a3, and a7 is axis is the ratio of the coordinate of the front edge l of the oil bank
0.35. After waterflooding, water saturations measured by Probes and the distance between the injection and production well L (i.e.,
a1, a3, and a7 are 0.64, 0.69, and 0.52, respectively. During the l/L). The vertical axis is the injected volume (after ASP solution is
ASP flooding, Probe a1 detects the oil bank first, and water satu- injected). When the injected volume of ASP solution reaches 0.44
ration drops rapidly from 0.64 to 0.46 when the injected volume is PV, the oil bank in the high-permeability layer moves to the
1.02 PV. The water saturation rises to 0.85 after the oil bank production well of the model. At the same time, the front edges

June 2009 SPE Journal 241

Fig. 8—Water-saturation variation of ASP flooding. (a) Water-saturation variation in high-permeability layer. (b) Water-saturation
variation in middle-permeability layer. (c) Water-saturation variation in low-permeability layer. (d) Front-edge movement of oil bank
of ASP flooding.
in the middle- and low-permeability layers reach 0.6 L and 0.4 L,
respectively. The oil bank in the middle-permeability layer
reaches the production well when the injected volume is 0.57 PV
and the front edge of the oil bank in the low-permeability layer is
at 0.6 L. Last, the oil bank in the low-permeability layer reaches
the production well when the injected volume is 0.91 PV.
Fig. 9 is a contour map of water-saturation distribution during
ASP flooding. The formation and the moving velocity of the oil
bank can be observed through water-saturation variation. The
formation of time of the oil bank in the reservoir is nearly the
same in these three permeability layers, but the movement of oil
bank in the high-permeability layer is faster than it is in the
middle- and low-permeability layers. The water saturation in-
creases rapidly after the oil bank flows over. Therefore, only when
the oil bank moves to the production well can ASP flooding
enhance oil recovery greatly.
Comparison and Analysis. Comparing the production perfor-
mance (Fig. 5), the pressure variation (Figs. 6 and 7), and water
saturation variation (Figs. 8 and 9) of the ASP flooding in the
vertical-heterogeneous-layer model, we find that the fluid-flow
distribution in the reservoir is the main mechanism of production
performance variation. For example, when the oil bank in the
high-permeability layer is close to the production well (Fig. 8a,
the injected volume is approximately 1.48 PV), the pressure at all
points in the reservoir reaches the highest values (Fig. 6a), the
242
water cut of the production well starts to drop (Fig. 5c), and the oil
recovery begins to rise (Fig. 5b).
During ASP flooding, the ASP solution initially moves faster
in the high-permeability layer than it does in the middle- and
low-permeability layers because complex physicochemical reac-
tions, such as adsorption, retention, and emulsion of the ASP
solution, cause the flow resistance and the pressure to increase.
Therefore, the pressure difference in the high-permeability layer
becomes higher than those in the middle- and low-permeability
layers, as shown in Fig. 6d, which results in the fluid changing
flow direction from the high-permeability layer toward the mid-
dle- and low-permeability layers. The flow rate and the produced
liquid decrease in the high-permeability layer, but they increase in
the middle- and low-permeability layers (Fig. 5d).
In the follow-up waterflooding, when the ASP solution flows
out of the model, the flow resistance and pressure in the high-
permeability layer decrease (Fig. 6d) and the fluid flow turns
toward the high-permeability layer. Then, the flow rate and the
produced liquid increase again in the high-permeability layer and
decrease in the middle- and low-permeability layers (Fig. 5d).
Therefore, the variation of flow paths in the reservoir is the
important factor to enhance oil recovery greatly by ASP flooding.
Experimental Database. A series of chemical-flooding experi-
ments have been conducted, such as 1D, 2D, and 3D experiments,
polymer flooding, and ASP flooding. All the experimental data
June 2009 SPE Journal

Fig. 9—Water-saturation distribution of ASP flooding. (a)
Waterflooding (0.3 PV). (b) Waterflooding (0.92 PV). (c) ASP
flooding (1.21 PV). (d) ASP flooding (1.35 PV). (e) Follow-up
waterflooding (1.45 PV). (f) Follow-up waterflooding (1.93 PV).
are collected in databases, such as physical-model parameters
(e.g., permeability, porosity, relative permeability, irreducible wa-
ter saturation, residual-oil saturation, heterogeneity-variation
factor, physical-model size, and heterogeneous-reservoir type),
fluid properties (e.g., density; viscosity; chemical concentration
including polymer, alkaline, and surfactant; and IFT), chemical-
injecting schemes, production performance (e.g., oil recovery,
water cut, and inlet-pressure variation), pressure distribution, and
saturation distribution in the reservoir. The experimental data can
provide the experimental base for numerical simulation.
Conclusion
• Because physicochemical reactions such as adsorption, reten-
tion, and emulsion of ASP solution cause flow resistance and
pressure to increase, the fluid flow changes direction from the
high-permeability layer to the middle- and low-permeability
layers. The flow rate and the produced liquid decrease in the
high-permeability layer and increase in the middle- and low-
permeability layers. Consequently, the macroscopic sweep effi-
ciency increases.
• A high-pressure gradient zone is formed in the model during
ASP flooding. The formation time and moving velocity of the
high-pressure gradient zone are almost the same as those of the
oil bank. Accordingly, variations in the pressure-gradient zone
reflect the movement of the oil bank.
• Because ASP agents reduce IFT, the residual oil of each layer is
displaced to form an oil bank. The formation time in each layer
is nearly the same, and the movement velocity in the high-
permeability layer is faster, so the oil bank reaches the produc-
tion well earlier than in the middle- and low-permeability
June 2009 SPE Journal
layers. So, the oil recovery of the high-permeability layer in-
creases and the water cut decreases earlier than those in the
middle- and low-permeability layers.
• In a vertical heterogeneous reservoir, the mechanism of ASP
flooding to enhance oil recovery is that the recovery enhance-
ment in the high-permeability layer is by means of displacing
residual oil (i.e., by means of increasing displacement efficien-
cy). The variation of flow paths causes ASP agents to sweep
into the middle- and low-permeability layers and displace the
remaining oil there. Therefore, the oil recovery of the middle-
and low-permeability layers is enhanced by improving efficien-
cy of both sweeping and displacing.
Nomenclature
b = coefficient
H = height
I = electrical current
K = permeability
l = coordinate
L = length
n = saturation index
P = pressure
Rt = resistivity of rock saturated with oil
Ro = resistivity of rock saturated with water
Sw = water saturation
t = time
V = velovity
W = width
b = electrode-system coefficient
m = viscosity
s = interfacial tension
Acknowledgments
This research was conducted with the financial support of
National Key Fundamental Research Program of China under
grants 2005CB221300 and G1999022511. The support is grate-
fully acknowledged.
References
Arihara, N., Yoneyama, T., Akita, Y., and XiangGuo, L. 1999. Oil Recov-
ery Mechanisms of Alkali-Surfactant-Polymer Flooding. Paper SPE
54330 presented at the SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference and
Exhibition, Jakarta, 20–22 April. doi: 10.2118/54330-MS.
Baviere, M., Glenat, P., Plazanet, V., and Labrid, J. 1995. Improved EOR
by Use of Chemicals in Combination. SPE Res Eng 10 (3): 187–193.
SPE-27821-PA. doi: 10.2118/27821-PA.
Guo, S. 1990. Physical Chemical Fluid Flow in Porous Media: Micro-
scopic Mechanism. Beijing: Science Press.
Guo, W. 1999. Status and development direction of tertiary oil recovery
technique in Daqing Oilfield. Petroleum Geology and Production of
Daqing Oilfield 18 (3): 24–26.
Li, H., Liao, G., Han, H., et al. 2003. Alkaline/Surfactant/Polymer(ASP)
Commercial Flooding Test in Central Xing 2 Area of Daqing Oilfield.
Paper SPE 84896 presented at the SPE International Improved Oil
Recovery Conference in Asia Pacific, Kuala Lumpur, 20–21 October.
doi: 10.2118/84896-MS.
Liu, W., Li, L., Tong, Z., et al. 2003. Microscopic Permeability Mecha-
nism of ASP Flooding of Daqing Oilfield. Transactions of Chongqing
University (Natural Science) 23 (1): 119–121.
Shen, P., and Yu, J., 2002. Fundamental research on enhanced oil recov-
ery in large scale. Beijing: Petroleum Industry Publication Company.
Shen, P., Wang, J., et al. 2002. Research of physical modeling and simi-
larity theory of complex displacing system. Summary report of nation-
al fundamental key research project.
Sui, J., Yang, C.-Z., Yang, Z.-Y., et al. 2000. Surfactant-Alkaline-Polymer
Flooding Pilot Project in Non-Acidic Paraffin Oil Field in Daqing.
Paper SPE 64509 presented at the SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas
Conference and Exhibition, Brisbane, Australia, 16–18 October. doi:
10.2118/64509-MS.
243
Thomas, S. 2005. Chemical EOR: The Past—Does It Have a Future?
Paper SPE 108828 presented as an SPE Distinguished Lecture,
2005–06.
Tong, Z., Yang, C., Wu, G., Yuan, H., Yu, L., and Tian, G. 1998. A Study
of Microscopic Flooding Mechanism of Surfacant/Alkali/Polymer. Pa-
per SPE 39662 presented at the SPE/DOE Improved Oil Recovery
Symposium, Tulsa, 19–22 April. doi: 10.2118/39662-MS.
Wang, D., Cheng. J., Li, Q., Jiang, Y., Sun, Y., and He, Y., 2000. Experi-
ence of IOR Practices from Large-Scale Implementation in Layered
Sandstones. Paper SPE 64287 presented at the SPE Asia Pacific Oil
and Gas Conference and Exhibition, Brisbane, Australia, 16–18 Octo-
ber. doi: 10.2118/64287-MS.
Wang, D., Sun, Y., Wang, Y., and Tang, X. 2002. Producing More Than
75% of Daqing Oil Field’s Production by IOR, What Experiences
Have Been Learnt? Paper SPE 77871 presented at the SPE Asia Pacif-
ic Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition, Melbourne, Australia, 8–10
October. doi: 10.2118/77871-MS.
Wang, J., and Shen, P. Saturation measuring method and measuring probe.
China Patent No. ZL 01123944.1.
Yang, X.M., Liao, G., Han, P., Yang, Z., and Yao, Y. 2003. An Extended
Field Test Study on Alkaline-Surfactant-Polymer Flooding in Beiyi-
duanxi of Daqing Oilfield. Paper SPE 80532 presented at the SPE Asia
Pacific Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition, Jakarta, 9–11 Septem-
ber. doi: 10.2118/80532-MS.
Zhang Jingcun. 1991. Study of enhanced oil recovery. Beijing: Petroleum
Industry Publication Company.
244
Pingping Shen is a professor at the Research Institute of Petro-
leum Exploration and Development (RIPED). An SPE distin-
guished member, he holds a BS degree in fluid mechanics from
Fudan University in Shanghai. He has worked with PetroChina for
more than 40 years. He has been vice president of PetroChina
Company Limited and president of RIPED. His interests include
fluid mechanics in porous media, petrophysics, EOR, resource
usage, and underground storage of CO2 in EOR. He has pub-
lished six books and more than 60 papers. Jialu Wang is a profes-
sor at RIPED. He holds a PhD degree in fluid mechanics from
Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics. He is the dep-
uty director of production engineering at RIPED. His interests
include fluid mechanics in porous media, low-permeability
reservoirs, horizontal well production, and EOR. He has published
two books and more than 40 papers. Shiyi Yuan is a member of
the Chinese Academy of Engineering and a professor at RIPED.
He is the president of the Science & Technology Management
Department of PetroChina. He holds a PhD degree in reservoir
engineering from the French Institute of Petroleum. His research
interests include reservoir engineering, numerical simulation,
and EOR. He has published three books and more than 40
papers. Taixian Zhong is a senior engineer at RIPED. He works in
the Science & Technology Management Department of Petro-
China. He holds a PhD degree in reservoir engineering from the
China University of Geosciences. His interests include phase be-
havior, reservoir description, and EOR. He has published more
than 20 papers. Xu Jia is a senior engineer at RIPED. He holds an
MS degree in reservoir engineering from RIPED. His interests in-
clude EOR and physical modeling.
June 2009 SPE Journal