Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 10

SPE 165299

Using Chromatographic Fingerprint Technique to Monitor Individual Zone


Production in ASP Flooding
Liu Xincang, Zhang Dong, Ding Jian, Ran Fajiang, Zhao Mingchuan, Li Shiyong, No.4 Oil Production Company
of Daqing Oilfield Co.,Ltd
Copyright 2013, Society of Petroleum Engineers
This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Enhanced Oil Recovery Conference held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 2-4 July 2013.
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 does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its
officers, or members. 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 SPE copyright.

Abstract

Its very important to evaluate layered producing performances at different stages in the course of
oilfield development, but due to limitations of monitoring well conditions and logging expenses, it is
difficult to comprehensively and systematicly monitor all the producers, and this will bring troubles to
adjustments and evaluations during oil field development. To solve this problem, the Chromatographic
Fingerprint technique is introduced to monitor layered producing performances in test area F which has
four target zones in Daqing Oilfied. After response of alkaline-surfactant-polymer (ASP) flooding, screw
pumps are adopted to some producers to minimize scaling in F area where producing profile surveys for
annulus wells arent adaptable to mornitor the layed producing status. Pre-test in lab shows that the
Chromatographic Fingerprint technique is feasible for the four individual test zones for there are distinct
chromatographic fingerprint differences, and ASP injected solution has less influences on fingerprints. A
fuzzy interpretation template has been successfully set up for commingled 4-6 layers production
numerical simulation by using EPB neural network model, and relative errors can be controlled below
10%. The technique has been applied to the producers for 180 times. In-situ test results are stable and
correspond to the static information of lays. It indicates that the Chromatographic Fingerprint technique is
suitable for monitoring individual zone producing performances of ASP flooding. The results from the
fuzzy interpretation template have provided powerful data to re-recognize the connectivity of
heterogeneous reservoir between injectors and producers. It can be applied to producers whose producing
intervals belong to the fuzzy interpretation template. The oil production proportion of per lays can be
easily achieved after the sample from the well fluid is analysed with chromatography and calculated with
the fuzzy interpretation template. The technique has proved to be economical and it is not astricted by
well conditions, so it can play an important role to guide development programs adjustments and
evaluations in oilfields.

SPE 165299

1. Introduction
Chromatographic fingerprint is an important chemical technique applied in the oil field development.
Kaufman et al.first applied peak-height ratio parameters of chromatographic fingerprint to calculate each
layers oil production contribution of commingled two-layer production of North Sea Oilfield in 1987,
and in the 1990s, Lin RenZi et al.[2 ] from China University of Petroleum took the lead in the exploration
of that technique. The main principle of the technique is: In well-connected zones, the hydrocarbon
compositions characteristics are identical, however, in separated zones, though crude oil may come from
the same origin with similarities in the total chromatogram conformation, the chromatographic
fingerprints of some hydrocarbon components (such as isoalkane and cyclic hydrocarbon ,etc. ) in the
individual zone have differences that can be detected. Interpretation templates were set up, matching
crude oil of different proportions in the lab to get separated zones productivity contributions.This
technique is not popularied in the oil field for there exists some difficulities in setting up commingled
templates for oil layers more than three. To solve this problem and confirm oil production from
individual layer by screw pump wells after ASP flooding, we carried out a study on chromatographic
fingerprints of oil in F section of Daqing oilfield which has four target zones with alkaline content of the
injected system up to 1%. The technique proved to be a success in the field test in terms of monitoring
individual layers production of commingled four-layer accurately, economically and quickly under ASP
flooding. Monitoring data accord well with dynamic and static data, so, it can be applied in production
wells which cant be tested by annulus logging.
2.Lab test method and result analysis
According to fine geology study results of the test area , we gathered individual layers crude oil
samples of 4 target test layers and crude oil samples exclusive of ASP contents near the test area to
analyze differences of the chromatogram fingerprints of different layers, and examined changes of
chromatographic fingerprints between water flooded crude oil and ASP flooded oil, then to further
explore feasibility of applying chromatographic fingerprints under ASP flooding.
2.1 The test method:

2.2.1 Individual layers chromatographic fingerprints characteristics test: Take oil samples from
individual layer in the test area to analyze quantitative hydrocarbon fingerprints directly after they are
dehydrated. Then simulate different matchings in the lab and observe whether fingerprint compounds are
partitional.

SPE 165299

2.1.2 To examine influences of ASP system on crude oil samples fingerprint characteristics: Make-up
mixing solution according to injected ASP formula and put it into a beaker according to oil/liquid volume
ratio of 1/9. After blending, divide the sample into two parts and heat them in a water bath pot at 50 for
24 hours; One in the wide open and another in a sealed flask, and finally analyze quantitive
chromatographic fingerprints after dehydration.
Fig1 chromatographic fingerprint of the
central well F22

2.2 Lab test result analysis


2.2.1 Chromatographic fingerprint of crude oil has a better repeatability

Only PI22 layer of the central well F22 of the test area

22
pr

23

2000
ph

we tested chromatographic fingerprints repeatability. For

repeatability.
2.2.2 Individual layers chromatographic fingerprints have obvious differences

According to annulus logging results, we chose two


wells that are vertically near and mainly produce from Layer
PI22 and PI33 respectively, and learned from the tests that there

4
5
6
7

19
18
17

example fig.1, the result shows that deviation of characteristic


fingerprint peak is generally less less than 5% with better

21
20

developed. After taking its crude oil sample and dehydrating,

16

15 14

13 12

11

8
9
10

fig.2 Ch ro m at o grap h ic fin gerp rin t ch racat erist ics'


differen ces o f t h e fo ur t arget lay ers
2
63
5
62
7
49
9
35
10
33
11
32
12
30
15
29
16
26
17
25
18
23
20
21
P I 2P12
I12 1111

P I 2P2
P1I22 1122

P I 2P2
P2I 2 22

P IP3
3P3I 333

are obvious differences between the two layers chromatographic


fingerprints. So, we chose another two oil wells in the test areas to carry out MFE test, and got crude oil
samples from 4 target layers in the test area, after dehydration, analyzed their chromatographic
fingerprint. The result is shown in fig.1. Relative deviation range of crude oils chromatographic
fingerprints of the four layers is 22-40%, it is suitable for calculating productivity allocation because of
the distinct differences in fingerprint characteristic.
2. 2. 3 ASP system has less influence on hydrocarbon fingerprint characteristics of crude oil

Crude oils flooded by ASP system and water were heated in the wide open., and there were great
loss of light hydrocarbon before its carbon number reached C9. The relative deviation range was 10-40%
compared with that of water flooding. It cant be used to monitor individual layers productivity of
commingled producing wells. When carbon number was after C9, there were no changes to hydrocarbon,
relative deviation generally less than 5% , and it can be used to monitor individual layers productivity of
commingled producing wells; When they were heated under sealed condition, relative deviation generally

SPE 165299

less than 5% between water flooding oil and ASP flooding oil, and hydrocarbon fingerprints basically
had no changes. UnderASP flooding, chromatographic fingerprint technique has requisites for monitoring
individual layers productivity.
3.Setting up fuzzy interpretation templates for chromatographic fingerprints of crude oil
3.1 Setting-up

the

production

commingled

matching

four-layer

interpretation

Table 1 The result of 4-layer monitoring template


number

zone
1

template and its error analysis

PI21

large

number

of

tests

and

Back Propagation Algorithm for the multilayer

neural

network,

namely

Algorithm which was put forward by

10.94

0.81

3.84

9.98

10.23

0.25

1.24

69.57

69.24

0.33

0.24

10.24

0.12

0.58

9.84

0.33

1.65

American scholar, Rumenlhart, in 1985,


can be suitable for productivity partition

forward

propagation

and

back

into

the

program

8-group

fingerprint

chemical

69.13

0.37

0.27

9.97

10.77

0.80

3.86
6.32

10.52

9.27

1.25

PI21

68.95

71.26

2.31

1.65

PI22

10.42

9.11

1.31

6.71

PI33

10.12

9.34

0.78

4.01

69.66

71.25

1.59

1.13

PI21

9.92

9.28

0.64

3.33

PI22

10.26

9.22

1.04

5.34

PI33

10.16

10.23

0.07

0.34

20.10

21.68

1.58

3.78

PI21

19.90

20.68

0.78

1.92

PI22

20.20

20.31

0.11

0.27

PI33

39.80

37.31

2.49

3.23

20.10

20.85

0.75

1.83

PI21

20.05

19.29

0.76

1.93

PI22

39.75

40.86

1.11

1.38

PI33

20.00

18.99

1.01

2.59

19.99

19.23

0.76

1.94

PI21

39.93

40.69

0.76

0.94

PI22

20.09

20.31

0.22

0.54

PI33

19.86

19.75

0.11

0.28

40.42

38.83

1.59

2.01

PI21

20.16

19.95

0.21

0.52

PI22

19.81

20.33

0.52

1.30

PI33

19.81

20.88

1.07

2.63

PI21

and 224 absolute concentration values of


chromatographic

69.50

PI33

PI21

matching

concentration values of 4-layer oil samples

PI22

PI21

propagation. And on the basis of this


model a program was produced. We put

10.17

PI21

calculation. The algorithm process consists


of

PI21
4

10.36

PI21

PI21
3

Relative
deviation
%
3.77

10.13

EPB

Absolute
deviation
%
0.75

PI22
PI21

Calculated
concentration
%
9.57

PI21

PI33

confirmed calculations show that Error

Actural
concentration
%
10.32

compounds. After revising and debugging,


the digital matrix template, which is suitable for four-layer productivity partition calculation, was
achieved. The result of calculation indicates that the calculation precision is relatively higher and the
largest relative deviation of backward calculation is less than 6. 71% (Table 1).
To confirm productivity prediction precision of the four-layer matrix template, chromatographic
fingerprint tests were carried out using oil samples from 4 individual zones in the test area compounded
with another 2 proportions of blending oil, and then the matrix template was used in the calculation, the
absolute error of the result less than 2%, the greatest relative deviation less than 7%. It indicates that the

SPE 165299

chosen 7 fingerprint compounds between C7-C17 are better matched and accord basically with previous
study results[3] , It also indicates that the selected model is suitable for monitoring commingled
production.
3. 2 Setting up fuzzy interpretation templates to adapt to complicated connectivity of oil zones

Oil zones in test area F are mainly river deposit with strong heterogeneity. Therefore, under the
condition of well pattern and well spacing, understanding of connectivity between injectors and
producers scarcely accords well with the underground pay zonesconnectivity.The previous
chromatographic fingerprint interpretation templates put more emphasis on geological connection of oil
reservoirs, and this will certainly cause influences of geological understanding on the interpretation
results. Considering stronger heterogeneity of the test area and understanding of the existed well patterns,
the interpretation template has been set up this time consulting no longer the geological study results and
taking chromatographic fingerprint characteristics as the only judging basis, and the interpretation results
provide basis for further understanding of connectivity of oil reservoirs. Among 28 wells in the test area,
there are 31 layers non-developed. We carried out monitoring test four times in a year and the
interpretation results from fuzzy interpretation template show that proportion of oil production
contribution ratio below 7% was 99.2%. It indicates that the fuzzy interpretation template is very reliable
and within the interpretation error range. The interpretation result provides a basis for further
understanding of connectivity of the oil zones.
4 Field chromatographic fingerprint data analysis
4.1 There are minor differences between chromatographic fingerprint interpretation results and MFE test results.

Altogether 94 wells have been tested since November 2003, among which, 13 wells have recent
annulus logging data. By comparing with the 34 intervals of the 13 wells about the relative oil production
ratio from chromatographic and annulus logging tests we know that there are 24 zones whose data
differences are within 10%,accounting for 70.6% of the total zones, and 4 zones differences within 10%15%,accounting for 11.8% of the total zones. Considering the differences within 15%, the accordance of
the two data is up to 82.4%.It indicates that results of the two test techniques are basically the same.

SPE 165299

Table 2 Monitoring result comparisons of F2-31-P2


Monitoring

method

Monitoring

time

productivity%
PI212

PI22

PI33

2003.10

35.38

52.36

12.26

2003.11

26.64

52.87

11.75

Chromatographic

2004.3

25.39

59.84

14.77

fingerprint

2004.6

29.18

54.93

15.89

2004.9

25.92

51.45

20.46

MFE

Table 3 Monitoring result comparisons of F2-31-P1

Individual layers
Monitoring

method

Monitoring

time

Individual layers
productivity%
PI211

PI33

2003.10

2.0

98.0

2003.11

0.39

99.61

Chromatographic

2004.3

2.26

97.74

fingerprint

2004.6

3.25

96.75

2004.9

2.55

97.45

MFE

In addition, we carried out MFE individual zone test in two wells (F2-31-P1 and F2-31-P2 see
table2 and table3) when we took oil samples from the individual layer in October,2003. Comparing the
test results with chromatographic fingerprint data of the same period , it indicates that individual layer
productivity differences between the MFE test result of the two wells and chromatographic fingerprint
results at the same period are within 10%. These two kinds of data are totally the same.
4.2 Chromatographic fingerprint test results have better stability

According to test results statistics of 94 wells since this technique was carried out, there are
altogether 115 zones whose individual production accounts for 30% of the whole well, and in the recent
period, 87 zones production contribution rate discrepancy is within 5%, accounting for 75.6% of the
whole zones; 10 zones individual oil production contribution rate discrepancy between 5%--10%,
accounting for 8.7% of the whole zones. As a whole, 84.3% of the major pay zones oil production
contribution rate is within 10%. Test results are stable. It shows that under the condition in the test area,
oil production contribution rate of zones is relatively stable.
Table 4 Chromatographic fingerprint interpretation comparisons of F2-1-29 well

Monitoring time
2003.2.17
2003.2.24
2003.3.03

Individual zones production contribution rate (%)


PI211
PI212
PI22
PI33
6.75
6.89
80.54
5.8
6.8
6.94
80.4
5.8
6.73
6.87
80.68
5.84

From the date of the single well, we can see that chromatographic fingerprint data are
comparatively stable. Such as Table 4, It shows chromatographic fingerprint test results for 3 crude oil
samples successively taken from F2-1-J29 well in February and March of 2003. From analysis results
we can see that PI22 zone is detected in succession for three times to produce 80% oil of the whole well,
and individual zone production contribution is relatively stable. It shows that this well relies mainly on
PI22 to produce oil at this stage.

SPE 165299

4.3 In cut-superposed thick oil reservoirs, using chromatographic fingerprint technique is better than annulus logging .

In oil field development, when oil reservoir deposited, sand bodies of different periods cut and
superposed each other. Reservoirs of some wells developed to be very thick. Because interlayers
thickness was minor (interlayers thickness 0. 4m). When perforating the oil wells, large sandstone
intervals were completely perforated open. It brought great difficulties for annulus test to subdivide free
points and for understanding of individual layers production. On this occasion, using chromatographic
fingerprint technique avoided limitations of annulus logging.
table 5 fluid production of F2-J2-P6well and water intake of around wells
Well
number
F2-1-P5
F2-1-630
F2-2-P5
F2-2-P6

PI212
PI22
PI211
Sand thickness Relative Sand thickness Relative Sand thickness
fluid
/Net thickness
/Net thickness
fluid
/Net thickness
%
m
m
%
m
pinching
4.2/3.4
32.3
pinching
pinching
3.4/2.6
44.8
pinching
4.3/3.8
45.3
2.4/2.4
12.0
2.5/2
5.6/4.4
4.8
2.6/1.1
43.5
pinching

PI33
Relative Sand thickness
fluid
/Net thickness
%
m
3.7/2.7
4.7/3.2
11.9
5.8/5.1
4.2/3.3

Relative
fluid
%
67.7
55.2
30.8
51.7

Such as the central well F2-J2-P6, which has the largest water cut decrease and oil production
increase. Effective thickness of PI211 zone of this well is 4.4m, 2.6m for PI212 , 1.1m for PI22 (this is a
combined zone, and there are interlayers between separated layers), and 3.3m for PI33. From
chromatographic fingerprint interpretation results we can see that PI212 and PI33 contributes more, 40.6%
and 40.7% respectively, contrast to 45.93% and 41.59 of PI211 and PI33 respectively according to annulus
test interpretation results. So, there are differences between these two interpretation results about putting
on production state of these two layers. To confirm which zone on earth better put on production,
Statistics we collected statistics on individual layer fluid intake of around wells after polymer slugs
injected and allocated fluid according to formation coefficient of the four neighbor wells. Injected volume
of PI211, PI212, PI22 and PI33 are 0.195PV,0.43PV,0.240 PV,0.522 PV respectively. Injected volume of
PI212 and PI33 were the highest, so, their production are larger than others. This result accords well with
chromatographic fingerprint dataIn addition, considering individual layers fluid intake of injectors
around PI211we can see that only one in the four directions--PI211 of F2-2-P5 well has the larger
injected volume, and from horizontal connection state we can see this well should supply fluid for F231-P6 which is in the same river channel as F2-2-P5. Chromatographic fingerprint interpretation results
of this layer of the well for two times are between 80.6%-87.1%and they accord well with static data.

SPE 165299

So, PI211 layer of F2-J2-P6 well has fewer fluid supply directions, and responds relatively worse.(see table5)
From above we can see that under the condition that the interlayers are smaller, using chromatographic
fingerprint test results can better show oil wells putting on production state and it is a good remedy for
annulus logging.
Fig.3 Mullion map of F2-D2-P6 well group

F2-1-P5
X2-1-P5

F2-1-630
X2-1-630

212
|
22

211
212
22
33

33

F2-D2-P6
X2-D2-P6
211
|
22
33

F2-2-P5
X2-2-P5

F2-2-P6
X2-2-P6

PI211
PI212
2

211
|
212

33

33

4. 4 Using chromatographic fingerprint monitoring results to direct selecting wells and layers which should be
improved

During oilfield development, To improve production state of oil reservoirs, stimulation treatment
was carried out in the middle of responding period, and chromatographic fingerprint data can better
monitor the response results. For example, all the four zones of the better developed central well X2-d1P4 which is in the middle of the test area are all developed zones, Fracturing measures were taken for
several times in June 2003, and incremental daily oil production was 10t before and after muti-fracture
fracturing measures were taken. From the chromatographic fingerprint monitoring results we can see that
before measures were taken, daily oil production of PI212 was 6.5t which accounted for 65% of the whole
daily production of the well. Daily oil production for the other three zones were 0.5-1.5t. Daily oil
production of PI212 was up to 15.9t after fractured. While production of other 3 zones were still 1.0-1.5t,

SPE 165299

so, incremental oil production mainly centered on the PI212 zone. From the fine geology study results we
can see that this zone is fluvial channel sand deposited in two directions with good connectivity. Before
the measures, it responded well with relatively high oil production. After the measures, oil production
increased obviously, so the chromatographic fingerprint monitoring results can be the basis of selecting
stimulation measures of oil wells.
4.5 Application range of chromatographic fingerprint technique and its cost analysis

When chromatographic fingerprint technique was applied in the test area, oil samples used to set up
the interpretation template were taken from two wells in the south west corner of the test area. Using this
template to interpret the farthest well F2- J1-P6 which is about 2.2Km away, and its chromatographic
fingerprint analysis results accord well with the annulus test result . It indicates that under the test areas
condition (fluvial faces deposit and located in the oil zone), control distance could reach 2Km and 4Km
to the north -south and west-east directions. Control area of the individual interpretation template can
reach about 8 square kilometer.Wells are arranged

Monitoring expenses of the fingerprint and annulus test Fig 4

according to the five-spot well pattern whose well

are 110 wells or so. Only 25% of the wells are


monitored. Compare with annulus logging tests, if
each well is monitored twice a year, then
monitoring cost of 4.0104US$ will be saved this

Monitoring expenses (thousand US$)

spacing is 250m .The number of producing wells

300
Legend

250

annulus test one time


fingerprint test twice
fingerprint test four times

200
150
100

year. The interpretation template can be used for 6


to eight years[3] if the zone and the area dont

50
0
0

40

80

Monitor tiimes per year (wells)

change. Monitor expenses spent afterwards is


only 1/10 of expenses of the previous annulus spent. Monitoring expense of 46.9104US$ will be
economized if we calculate according to the above 6 years.
Such as the map on the right side, it shows the contrast of monitoring expenses of the
chromatographic fingerprint technique and annulus test technique under different work load. Expenses of
the chromatographic fingerprint technique is well below that of the annulus test, and even if
chromatographic fingerprint monitoring increases to 4 times a year or the monitored wells double,
monitoring expenses will be economized considerably. It provides technological guarantee to monitor
individual zone productivity at the oil field in a larger scale.

10

SPE 165299

5 Summary
5.1 Individual layers chromatographic fingerprint data of target test zones differ obviously; ASP system has
less influence on crude oils chromatographic fingerprints, so chromatographic fingerprint technique can be
used in ASP flooding.
5.2 Field monitoring results show that chromatographic fingerprint technique can be used to monitor
individual zones oil production contribution with stable monitoring results. Meanwhile, it is better than
annulus logging when testing in cut-superposed large and thick reservoirs and when interlayers are
smaller.
5.3 Setting up an interpretation template for the whole reservoir can reduce understanding influence of the
zones on chromatographic fingerprint interpretation results.
5.4 Chromatographic monitoring technique is simple and economical and it is suitable to be used on thick oil
reservoirs and areas with 4-6 developing zones.
References
[1] Kaufman R L , Ahmed A S , Moldowan J M. A new technique for the analysis of commingled oils and its
application to production allocation calculations[A]. Procedings of the Sixteenth Annual Conection of Indonesian
Petroleum Association. Indonesian Petroleum Association,1987.247-268.
[2] Lin renziOil and Gas Exploration and Oil Reservoir Geochemistry[M]BeijingOil Industry Press1998.
[3] Jin Xiaohui,et al, Partition experiment of GC fingerprint of crude oilPetroleum Experimental Geology2003251
53-57.