American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER)

2013

American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER) e-ISSN : 2320-0847 p-ISSN : 2320-0936 Volume-02, Issue-12, pp-373-381 www.ajer.org Research Paper Open Access

Analysis of First Contact Miscible WAG Displacement of the Effects of WAG Ratio and Flow Rate
Reza Cheraghi Kootiani, Ariffin Bin Samsuri
1

(Department Of Petroleum Engineering, Faculty of Petroleum and Renewable Energy Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Malaysia) 2 (Department Of Petroleum Engineering, Faculty of Petroleum and Renewable Energy Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Malaysia )

Abstract: - Miscible WAG injection has been implemented successfully in a number of fields around the world
and there are a number of numerical studies investigating the effect of rate, gravity, slug size, heterogeneity on WAG performance. However there are very few laboratory studies of WAG displacement efficiency reported in the literature. In this paper we report the results from a series of well-characterized experiments using glass bead packs. The aim of these experiments is To investigate the impact of first contact miscible WAG injection on oil recovery To clarify the physical processes during displacements. To provide benchmark data-sets to validate reservoir simulations. The use of bead-packs rather than cores enabled us to observe visually, for the first time to our knowledge, the fluid interactions during each WAG experiment. The relative permeability for water oil and water-solvent were carefully measured along with the permeability and porosity of the pack. A series of displacements were conducted and compared: solvent-oil, water-oil and secondary simultaneous WAG injection at WAG ratios of 1:1, 4:1 and 1:4. These were performed at a range of flow rates to investigate the influence of capillary number on recovery efficiency. For each experiment, the pressure drop across the pack, the flow rate, the cumulative recovery of displaced fluid and the fraction of displacing fluids in the effluent were monitored as well as video recording the water-solvent-oil distributions with time. The experimental results are compared with the predictions from conventional finite difference simulation.

Keywords: - WAG injection, WAG displacement, bead- packs, permeability. I. INTRODUCTION

Miscible WAG injection has been implemented successfully in a number of fields around the world [1]. In principal it combines the benefits of miscible gas injection and water flooding by injecting the two fluids either simultaneously or alternately. Miscible gas injection has excellent microscopic sweep efficiency but poor macroscopic sweep efficiency due to viscous fingering and gravity override. Furthermore it is expensive to implement. In contrast water-flooding is relatively cheap and is less subject to gravity segregation and frontal instabilities. However the residual oil saturation after water-flooding is typically of the order of 20%. Injecting water with the miscible gas reduces the instability of the gas-oil displacement process due to relative permeability effects [2-3], thus improving the overall sweep efficiency. It also improves the economics by reducing the volume of gas that needs to be injected into the reservoir. The optimum WAG ratio for simultaneous WAG injection in a homogeneous reservoir can be obtained by matching the advance rates of the water-oil and solvent-oil displacement fronts. Stalkup [3] provides a method for calculating the optimum WAG ratio from the relative permeability via graphical construction. However this method assumes that the water-oil and water solvent relative permeability are the same. It also neglects the influence of capillary pressure on small scale displacement efficiency and the fact that relative permeability may alter as a function of rate [4-7]. Field experience [1] and numerical studies [8] suggest that the optimum WAG ratio may be around 4:1, which is rather larger than the values typically, calculated using Stalkups method.

www.ajer.org

Page 373

American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER)

2013

This difference between theory and practice is normally attributed to the combined influences of reservoir heterogeneity and gravity, but may also be due to using inappropriate relative permeability curves in the calculation of the WAG ratio and the influence of capillary pressure. This is supported by the fact that the majority of WAG displacements have not recovered as much additional oil as was originally predicted [1] by simulation studies. This is despite the fact that simulation models take into account reservoir heterogeneity and gravity. In this paper we investigate the effect of rate on WAG displacement efficiency using a combination of well-characterized bead-pack experiments and detailed numerical simulation. We show that recovery from WAG is a function of rate as well as WAG ratio. We also show that, at least for the fluid pairs investigated, the measured water-oil and water-solvent relative permeability are not the same. This difference is due to increased levels of viscous fingering in the water solvent displacement. It appears that the microscopic relative permeability is in fact the same.

a.

EXPERIMENTAL DESINGED AND CONDITIONS

Grade 11 (200-250m) Ballotini glass beads were chosen as the porous medium because they enabled a relatively homogenous sample to be constructed and simple flow visualization techniques to be used. The beads were sealed in a Perspex box, dimensions 23cm10cm0.6cm. The packs thickness was determined by the requirement that the flow be essentially two-dimensional so that direct comparison with 2D numerical simulations could be made [9-10]. "Fig.1" shows a plane view of the Perspex model.The model was packed following the method described in Caruana [11-12]. The homogeneity of the pack was checked by performing an M=1 miscible displacement (dyed water displacing undyed water) through it and observing the linearity of the displacement front. Six inlet ports were used to ensure the injected fluid(s) entered the pack over its entire cross section. During WAG experiments the water and paraffin (solvent) were injected simultaneously into alternate ports across the inlet face in an attempt to ensure uniform injection of both fluids across the inlet face. Three types of displacement experiments were performed: miscible, immiscible and WAG. The miscible and immiscible displacements were performed in order to fully characterize the flow properties of the pack and to enable us to assess the efficiency of the WAG recovery process. We used ISOPAR V to represent the oil phase and paraffin to represent the miscible solvent. Both water paraffin and water-ISOPAR V displacements were performed in order to measure the relative permeability for both fluid pairs. The fluid pairs used for each displacement and their properties are summarized in "Tables 1 and 2." Before starting each experiment the model was flooded with carbon dioxide to displace the air and then flooded with distilled water until it was completely saturated. The pack was then flooded with oil (actually ISOPAR V or paraffin) and driven to irreducible water saturation. Seven WAG displacements were conducted in all. Three displacements were performed at a rate of 5ml/min to investigate the effect of WAG ratio on recovery, using WAG ratios of 1:4, 1:1 and 4:1. A further four displacement experiments were performed at a WAG ratio of 1:1 using constant rates of 1, 2, 4, and 6ml/min to investigate the effect of rate on recovery. In addition three water-paraffin immiscible displacements were performed at rates of 1, 3 and 5 ml/min to determine the effect of rate on relative permeability. Two water-ISOPAR V displacements and two miscible (paraffin displacing ISOPAR V) displacements were performed at rates of 1 and 5 ml/min respectively, for comparison purposes. Relative permeability was not obtained from the 1 ml/min water-ISOPAR V displacement because it would have taken too long to establish residual oil saturation. All displacements were recorded using a camera and video recorder. The displacing water phase was colored with Lissamine red dye whilst the displacing solvent phase was colored with Waxoline blue dye. The recovery and effluent profiles were also recorded for all displacements. The solvent and oil effluents were distinguished using the refractive index method. This enabled outlet concentrations to be determined with an accuracy of 2%. JBN analysis [13] was used to determine the relative permeability from the water flooding experiments. The porosity of the pack was found to be 38% and the permeability 29D. These values are typical for glass bead packs [9-12], 14. The longitudinal dispersion characteristics used in the simulations were taken from Muggeridge et al [14]. They obtained a longitudinal dispersion coefficient of 0.036cm2/sec for a pack of similar sized beads using the method of Brigham et al [15]. This is also comparable with the value quoted in Christie et al [10]. The transverse dispersion coefficient was chosen to be 0.0012 cm (giving L/T=30), again by analogy with the experiments of Muggeridge et al [14] and Christie et al [10]. The relative permeability obtained from the water-paraffin displacements as a function of rate are given in Figure 2. It can be seen that there is a significant variation with rate. The relative permeability obtained from the water-paraffin and the water-ISOPAR V displacements at a flow rate of 5ml/min are given in "Fig.3". There is a significant difference in the overall displacement behavior of the two fluid systems, despite the fact that paraffin and ISOPAR V are first contact miscible. It is normal

www.ajer.org

Page 374

American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER)

2013

engineering practice to assume that water-oil and water-gas relative permeability are the same when the oil and gas are first contact miscible. We attribute the difference observed in our experiments to the high level of viscous fingering observed in the water- ISOPAR V displacement (see "Fig.6"). This is not accounted for in the JBN analysis used to calculate the relative permeability.

II.

FIGURES AND TABLES

Interfacial Tension (mN/m) 0 0 35.8 26.6 -

Table1. Fluid pairs used in the displacements. Displaced Phase Displacing Phase Miscible, M=1 Miscible, M=7 Miscible, M=1.5 Miscible, M=10.6 Miscible WAG Clear water (oil) Isopar V (viscous oil) Paraffin (light oil or solvent) Oil ISOPAR V (viscous oil) Oil ISOPAR V (viscous oil) Blue water (solvent) Blue Paraffin (solvent) Red water (water) Red water(water) Red water & Blue Paraffin

Table2. Properties of fluids used in the displacements. Viscosity (cp) 1.01 Water 1.52 Paraffin (solvent) 10.56 Isopar V (heavy oil)

Figure1. Plan view of experimental setup

Figure2. Water-paraffin relative permeability curves obtained from 1ml/min, 3ml/min and 5ml/min displacements.

www.ajer.org

Page 375

American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER)

2013

Figure3. Relative permeability data obtained from experiments for both a) water-heavy oil b) water-light oil (solvent).

Figure4. Comparison of experimental and simulated solvent-oil distributions at different pore volumes of solvent injected for M=7 miscible displacement. The initial irreducible water saturation is 8%.

Figure5. Comparison of a) recovery b) solvent cut curves obtained from experiment and simulation for M=7 miscible displacement.

www.ajer.org

Page 376

American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER)

2013

Figure6. Comparison of a) oil recovery obtained from experiment and simulation b) experimental water cut for M=10.6 and M=1.5 immiscible displacements.

Figure7. Comparison of experimental and simulated water-oil distributions at different pore volumes of water injected for M=10.6 immiscible displacement. The initial irreducible water saturation is 8%.

Figure8. Comparison of recovery (a) and water cut (b) obtained from experiment for M=1.5 immiscible displacement at different injection rates.

www.ajer.org

Page 377

American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER)

2013

Figure9. Oil recovery obtained from experiments as a function of WAG ratio compared with recoveries from miscible injection and water-flooding.

Figure10. Calculation of optimum WAG ratio from fractional flow curves using Stalkups analysis. Water solvent fractional flow curve was calculated using the experimental water- ISOPAR V relative permeabilities.

Figure11. Experimental water (blue) and solvent (red) fronts at different pore volumes of water and solvent injected for simultaneous secondary first contact miscible WAG injection at a WAG ratio of a) 1:1 and b) 4:1. The initial irreducible water saturation is 8%.

www.ajer.org

Page 378

American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER)

2013

Figure12. Comparison of oil recovery obtained from experiment and simulation for WAG injection at an injection ratio of 1:1 and a flow rate of 5ml/min. Water-oil relative permeabilities obtained at this rate were used as an input to the simulator.

Figure13. Oil recovery obtained from experiments at a WAG ratio of 1:1, miscible flooding and water flooding as a function of injection rates.

III.

RESULTS

We attempted to simulate all the experiments predictively in order to test our understanding of the physics of these displacements and thus validate our numerical model of WAG recovery processes. All the input data required by the simulator was obtained from careful characterization of the bead pack properties. There was no history matching involved in this process. "Fig.4 to 8" compare the experimental results from the miscible (M=7) and immiscible (M=1.5 and M=10.6) displacements with predictions from the simulator. It can be seen that the agreement between simulation and experiment is excellent. This confirms that we have characterized the bead pack and fluid properties correctly for both these displacement types. "Fig.7" indicates that the immiscible water-ISOPAR V displacement is unstable. Figure 9 shows the recovery profiles obtained from displacements with WAG ratios of 4:1, 1:1 and 1:4. The flow rate was 5ml/min. The recoveries obtained from miscible injection and water flooding at the same rate are shown for

www.ajer.org

Page 379

American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER)

2013

comparison. It can be seen that the optimum WAG ratio is around 1:1. This is the same as predicted using Stalkups [3] analysis ("Fig.10") on the water-oil relative permeability obtained for this flow-rate. "Fig.11" compares the fluid distributions observed in the 1:1 and 4:1 WAG ratio displacements. It can be seen that in the 1:1 WAG ratio displacement the water (red) and solvent (blue) fronts are travelling at approximately the same speed as would be expected fro m Stalkups3 analysis. However there is still significant fingering of the solvent. This is not expected as at the optimum WAG ratio, the water should suppress the development of viscous fingers. Nevertheless the recovery predicted by the simulator closely matches the experimental curve ("Fig.12"). The simulation used the water paraffin (solvent) relative permeability obtained at 5ml/min and assumed that the water-oil and water-solvent relative permeability were identical. This confirms our hypothesis that the only reason that the experimental measurements of watersolvent and water-oil relative permeability are different is due to the fact that the JBN analysis does not account for the viscous fingering in the water-ISOPAR V displacement. "Fig.13" compares the recovery obtained at 1 PVI as a function of rate for a WAG ratio of 1:1. Results from miscible injection and water flooding are shown for comparison. All data were obtained experimentally. It can be seen that recovery from WAG changes as a function of flow-rate and in fact there appears to be an optimum flow-rate at around 3ml/min. The change in recovery with flow-rate from WAG at 1PVI appears to follow that obtained from water flooding as there is no appreciable rate dependence in the miscible displacement efficiency. The capillary number for the water-ISOPAR displacement at 5ml/min is 0.07, whilst for the waterparaffin displacement it is 1. The capillary number is defined as =

Where is the interfacial tension (N1 ), k is the permeability (2 ), is the porosity (fraction), L is the length of the system (m), is the total velocity (m 1 ) and is the viscosity (N s 1 ). Thus the rate dependent behavior is probably due to capillary pressure effects. This suggests that the rate dependence observed in the water-paraffin relative permeability is probably due to capillary pressure, which has not been taken into account in the JBN analysis. Further simulation work is required to confirm this.

IV.

CONCLUSION

We have used a combination of well-characterized experiments and simulations to investigate secondary recovery from simultaneous, first contact miscible WAG injection. The use of bead-packs has enabled the visualization of the WAG displacement process as a function of time. This is the first time this has been achieved to our knowledge. We observe that: The optimum WAG ratio calculated by Stalkups analysis does produce the most oil, however the viscous fingering is not suppressed as much as we expected. For these experiments there is an optimum rate of injection which results in the best recovery from WAG. This appears to be due to capillary pressure effects. It is possible that water-solvent and water-ISOPAR V relative permeability are not the same. However our simulations suggest that this is due to the level of viscous fingering present in the water-ISOPAR V displacement which is not factored out in the JBN analysis.

V.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to appreciate Universiti Teknologi Malaysia for their continual support during the course of this paper. Special thanks go to my supervisor Prof. Dr. Ariffin Bin Samsuri for his support in the publication of this paper.

REFERENCES
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [Christensen, J.R., Stenby, E.H. and Skauge, A.: Review of WAG Field Experience, paper SPE 39883 presented at the 1998 International Petroleum Conference and Exhibition, Mexico, 3-5 March. Caudle, B.H. and Dyes, A.B.: Improving Miscible Displacement by Gas -Water Injection, Transactions of the American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineering, 213 (1958), 281-284. Stalkup, F.I.: Miscible Flooding Fundamentals, Society of Petroleum Engineers Monograph Series, 1983. Heaviside, J. and Black, C.J.J.: Fundamentals of Relative Permeability: Ex perimental and Theoretical Considerations, SPE 12173 presented at the 58 ATCE, San Francisco, CA, 1983 Heaviside, J., Brown, C.E. and Gamble I.J.A.: Relative Permeability for Intermediate Wettability Reservoirs, paper SPE 16968, 62 ATCE, Dallas, TX, 1987

www.ajer.org

Page 380

American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER)

[6] [7] [8] [9]

2013

[10]

[11] [12] [13] [14]

[15] [16] [17] [18]

[19]

Avraam, D.G. and Payatakes, A.C.: Flow Regimes And Relative Permeabilities During Steady -State 2Phase Flow In Porous-Media, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 293, (1995) 207 -236 Hughes, R.G. and Blunt, M.F.: Pore scale modeling of rate effects in imbibition, Transport in Porous Media 40(3), (2000) 295-322 Christie, M.A., Muggeridge, A.H. and Barley, J.J.: "3D Simulation of Viscous Fingering and WAG Schemes", SPE Reservoir Engineering 8, (1993), 19-26. Christie, M.A. and Jones, A.D.W.: Comparison between Laboratory Experiments and Detailed Simulation of Miscible Viscous Fingering, presented at the 4 European Symposium on Enhanced Oil Recovery, Hamburg (1987) Christie, M.A., Jones, A.D.W. and Muggeridge, A.H.: "Comparison between Laboratory Experiments and Detailed Simulations of Unstable Miscible Displacement Influenced by Gravity", in North Sea Oil and Gas Reservoirs - II, (Graham & Trotman) 1994, 245-250 (Proc. of the North Sea Oil and Gas Reservoirs Conference, 1989). Caruana, A.: Immiscible Flow Behaviour within Heterogeneous Porous Media. Ph.D. Thesis. Imperial College, London (1997). Caruana, A. and Dawe, R.A.: Experimental studies of the effects of heterogeneities on miscible and immiscible flow processes in porous media, Trends in Chemical Engineering, 3 (1996) 185-203. Johnson, E.F., Bossler, D.P. and Naumann, V.O.: Calculations of Relative Permeability from Displacement Experiments, Trans AIME 216 (1959), 370 -372. Muggeridge, A.H., Jackson, M.D., Al-Mahrooqi, S.H., Al-Marjabi, M. and Grattoni, C.A.: Quantifying Bypassed Oil in the Vicinity of Discontinuous Shales , paper SPE 77487 presented at the 2002 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Texas, 29 September - 2 October. Brigham, W.E., Reed, P.W. and Dew, J.N.: Experiments on mixing during miscible displacement in porous media, SPE Journal 1 (March 1961), 1 -8. Christie, M.A.: High Resolution Simulation of Unstable Flows in Porous Media: SPE Reservoir Engineering 4, (August 1989) 297-304. Fayers, F.J. and Muggeridge, A.H., Extension to Dietz Theory and Behaviour of Gravity Tongues in Slightly Tilted Reservoirs, SPE Reservoir Engineering 5, (1990), 487 -494. Davies, G.W., Muggeridge, A.H. and Jones, A.D.W.: Miscible Displacements in a Heterogeneous Rock: Detailed Measurements and Accurate Predictive Simulation, paper SPE 22615 presented at the 1991 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, TX, October 6-9. Christie, M.A. and Bond, D.J.: Detailed Simulation of Unstable Flows in Porous Media, SPE Reservoir Engineering 2 (1987) 514-522.

www.ajer.org

Page 381