Top Banner
Enhanced Oil Recovery by Water Alternating Gas (WAG) Injection: The Opportunity and the Challenge Centre for Enhanced Oil Recovery & CO 2 Solutions Characterisation of Three Phase Flow and Water Alternating Gas (WAG) Injection Studies JIP Institute of Petroleum Engineering, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh Scotland, UK Contact: Prof. Mehran Sohrabi Telephone: +44 (0)131 451 3568 Email: [email protected] Sohrabi M., Fatemi M., Ireland S. Presented by: Mobeen Fatemi 06 May 2014
32

Enhanced Oil Recovery by Water Alternating Gas (WAG ......Water Alternating Gas (WAG) Injection Studies JIP Institute of Petroleum Engineering, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh Scotland,

Jan 31, 2021

Download

Documents

dariahiddleston
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
  • Enhanced Oil Recovery by

    Water Alternating Gas (WAG)

    Injection: The Opportunity and

    the Challenge

    Centre for Enhanced Oil Recovery & CO2 Solutions

    Characterisation of Three Phase Flow and

    Water Alternating Gas (WAG) Injection

    Studies JIP

    Institute of Petroleum Engineering,

    Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh

    Scotland, UK

    Contact:

    Prof. Mehran Sohrabi

    Telephone: +44 (0)131 451 3568

    Email: [email protected]

    Sohrabi M., Fatemi M., Ireland S.

    Presented by: Mobeen Fatemi

    06 May 2014

    mailto:[email protected]

  • North-Sea WAG Injection Potential

    Distribution of EOR field applications by method in the North Sea (total of 19

    projects). (SPE 99546; 2006)

    2

    WAG48%

    MEOR5%

    FAWAG11%

    SWAG5%

    MGI31%

  • WAG Injection

    O

    W

    3

  • O

    W

    G

    WAG Injection

    4

  • O

    W+ O

    G+O

    G+W+O

    WAG involves major

    complexity and

    hysteresis, caused by

    injection alternation

    that happens during

    process.

    WAG Injection

    5

  • WAG Injection

    WAG involves major complexity and hysteresis, caused by

    alternating injection that happens during process.Therefore,

    numerical simulation of WAG injection becomes extremely

    complex (involves the 2-phase and 3-phase Pc and kr and also

    their hysteresis behavior).

    Our current understanding of the physics (and sometime

    chemistry) involved in three-phase flow is currently limited

    and hence quantifying and predicting the outcome of these

    processes are difficult.

    6

  • 7

    Measuring 3-phase kr is very difficult and time consuming

    hence many correlations have been proposed for calculating

    3-phase kr from the more readily available 2-phase data

    Note: These models are usually based on water-wet systems and high

    IFT gas/oil.

    WAG Injection

  • 8

    Formulation available in the existing reservoir simulators are

    not capable of adequately account for the complex interplay

    of hysteresis, capillary pressure, wettability, IFT, trapped

    phase saturation and their impact on flow under three-phase

    flow regime.

    WAG Injection

  • Water Flood

    Gas injection

    Alternating slugs of gas and water (WAG)?

    Sequence of gas and water injection?

    Simultaneous injection of water and gas (SWAG)?

    Wettability?

    Interfacial Tension (gas type)?

    Rock type?

    Rock Permeability?

    Miscibility?

    Trapped phase saturation and hysteresis?

    Reliability of Reservoir Performance Prediction

    9

  • 06/05/2014 10

    06/05/2014 10

  • JIP at Heriot-Watt University: Research Approach

    To experimentally study parameters and understand mechanisms

    involved in GF, WAG and SWAG injections.

    To generate 2-phase and 3-phase relative permeability curves using

    the results of the coreflood experiments.

    Evaluate existing 3-phase models

    Develop improved methodologies for obtaining 3-phase kr and

    hysteresis for reliable numerical simulation of WAG injection.

    11

  • Experimental Condition

    Different injection scenarios WAG, SWAGContinuous GasContinues Water

    Different IFT valuesHigh IFT (immiscible)Low IFT (intermediate)Very low IFT (near-miscible)

    Different wettability conditionsWater-Wet, Oil-Wet & Mixed-Wet

    Different Core SamplesCarbonates, Sandstones

    12

  • 13

    This research programme was first launched on November

    1997 with main aim of understanding the process of WAG

    injection. The scope of work was later extended to three-

    Phase flow (including WAG).

    Inlet Outlet

    Cover plate

    Two-dimensional etched pore structure

    Micromodel Experiments

  • Core Length

    / cm

    Diameter

    / cm

    Porosity

    / frac.

    Permeability

    / mD

    Core 1 67.0 4.98 0.17 1000

    Core 2 60.5 5.08 0.19 64

    Core Flood Experiments

    Pressure

    /psia

    Temperatur

    e

    /oC

    Ρg/kgm-3

    ρL/kgm-3

    µg/mPa.s

    µL/mPa.s

    IFT

    /mNm-1

    1200 37.8 86.6 466 0.0141 0.0793 2.7

    1790 37.8 184.8 345 0.0206 0.0474 0.15

    1840 37.8 211.4 317 0.0249 0.0405 0.04

    Core properties

    Fluid properties

    Injection Production

    14

  • Effect of IFTo/g: (1000 mD, Gas Injection, Mixed-wet)

    15

    0.0

    0.2

    0.4

    0.6

    0.8

    1.0

    0 2 4 6 8 10

    Oil

    Re

    cove

    ry (

    Co

    re P

    V)

    Injected Gas (Core PV)

    1000mD, GF, MW, 1825 psi

    1000mD, GF, MW, 1200 psi

    σ = 2.70

    σ = 0.04

  • Effect of IFTo/g: (65 mD, Gas Injection, Mixed-wet)

    16

    σ = 2.70

    σ = 0.04

  • 65mD, Mixed-Wet 1000mD, Mixed-Wet

    0

    0.2

    0.4

    0.6

    0.8

    1

    0 2 4 6 8 10

    Oil R

    ecovery

    (fr

    ac.

    IOIP

    )

    Injected Fluids (Core PV)

    WAG, MW, 65mD

    Water Injection, MW, 65mD

    SWAG (Qg/Qw=0.25), MW, 65mD

    Gas Injection, MW, 65mD

    0

    0.2

    0.4

    0.6

    0.8

    1

    0 2 4 6 8O

    il R

    ecovery

    (C

    ore

    PV

    )

    Injected Fluids (Core PV)

    WAG Injection, MW, 1000mD

    Water Injection, MW, 1000mD

    SWAG (Qg/Qw = 0.25), MW, 1000mD

    Gas Injection, MW, 1000mD

    Mixed-Wet Rock (65mD vs. 1000 mD; σg/o = 0.04 mN.m-1)

    Performance of Different

    Injection Scenarios

    WAG WAG

    GF

    GF

    17

  • 65mD, Mixed-Wet 1000mD, Mixed-Wet

    0

    20

    40

    60

    80

    100

    0 2 4 6 8 10

    Pre

    ssure

    Dro

    p (

    psi

    )

    Injected Fluids (Core PV)

    SWAG (Qg/Qw=1), MW, 65mD

    WAG, 65mD, MW, IDIDID

    Water Injection, MW, 65mD

    Gas Injection, MW, 65mD

    0

    5

    10

    15

    20

    25

    0 2 4 6 8Pre

    ssure

    Dro

    p (

    psi

    )

    Injected Fluids (Core PV)

    SWAG, MW, 1000mD

    WAG, MW, 1000mD

    Water Injection, MW, 1000mD

    Gas Injection, MW, 1000mD

    Mixed-Wet Rock (65mD Vs. 1000 mD; σg/o = 0.04 mN.m-1)

    Effect of Injection Scenario on

    Injectivity

    18

  • 19

    G OW G WG WSw,im=18% , Soi=82%

    W G

    65 mD

    WAG-IDIDIDID

    Mixed-wet

    0

    0.1

    0.2

    0.3

    0.4

    0.5

    0.6

    0.7

    0.8

    0.9

    0 2.5 5 7.5 10 12.5

    Prod

    uced

    Oil

    (fra

    c. S

    orw

    )

    Injected WAG (Core PV)

    WAG-IDIDIDID, 65mD, MW, 1840 psia

    WAG-IDIDIDID, 65mD, MW, 1790 psia

    WAG-IDIDIDID, 65mD, MW, 1215 psia

    σ = 2.70

    σ = 0.04

    σ = 0.15

    Effect of Gas/Oil IFT on WAG

  • 20

    W1

    W2

    W3

    W1

    W3

    W2

    σ = 2.70σ = 0.04

    0.1

    1

    10

    100

    0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

    Inje

    ctiv

    ity

    (cc/

    psi

    )

    Injected Brine (Core PV)

    W1

    W2

    W3

    W1

    W2

    W3

    σ = 0.15

    Effect of IFTOil/Gas on Injectivity

  • 21

    One of the major achievements of this research is a

    growing set of core flood data covering a wide range

    of pertinent parameters (IFT, Wettability, Hysteresis,

    K, Rock Type, etc) investigating various injection

    strategies.

    As far as we know, no such comprehensive data is

    available in published literature.

    A unique set experimental data

  • 22

    Measuring 3-phase kr is very difficult and time

    consuming hence many correlations have been

    proposed for calculating 3-phase kr from the more

    readily available 2-phase data.

    +

    0.0

    0.0

    0.2

    0.4

    0.6

    0.8

    1.0

    0.0

    0.2

    0.4

    0.6

    0.8

    1.0

    k r

    1.00.80.60.40.2

    k rog

    k rg

    0.0

    0.0

    0.2

    0.4

    0.6

    0.8

    1.0

    0.0

    0.2

    0.4

    0.6

    0.8

    1.0

    1.00.80.60.40.2

    k row

    k rw

    2Ph Oil & Gas 2Ph Oil & Water 3Ph Oil k r

    So

    Sg=1

    Sw

    k ro0.01

    0.80

    Use 2Ph k rg in 3Ph

    and 2Ph k rw in 3Ph

    SwSg SwSg

    Three-phase kr Determination

    22

  • 23

    Fluid injection

    Unsteady state 2-phase test

    2-phase kr

    Simulation of WAG

    test using 3-phase krmodels

    Swir =18%, k=65 mD

    WAG experiment

    Fluid injection Swir =18%, k=65 mD

    Comparing experiment and simulation results e.g.

    recovery and pressure representing the accuracy

    of that particular 3-phase kr model.

    Evaluation of 3-phase kr Modells

    23

  • 0

    0.02

    0.04

    0.06

    0.08

    0.1

    0.12

    0.14

    0.16

    0.18

    0.2

    0 2 4 6 8

    PVinj

    Oil

    Reco

    very

    , P

    V

    EXPERIMENT

    0

    0.02

    0.04

    0.06

    0.08

    0.1

    0.12

    0.14

    0.16

    0.18

    0.2

    0 2 4 6 8

    PVinj

    Oil

    Reco

    very

    , P

    V

    EXPERIMENT

    BAKER2

    0

    0.02

    0.04

    0.06

    0.08

    0.1

    0.12

    0.14

    0.16

    0.18

    0.2

    0 2 4 6 8

    PVinj

    Oil

    Reco

    very

    , P

    V

    EXPERIMENT

    SWI

    BAKER2

    0

    0.02

    0.04

    0.06

    0.08

    0.1

    0.12

    0.14

    0.16

    0.18

    0.2

    0 2 4 6 8

    PVinj

    Oil

    Reco

    very

    , P

    V

    EXPERIMENT

    STONE2

    SWI

    BAKER2

    0

    0.02

    0.04

    0.06

    0.08

    0.1

    0.12

    0.14

    0.16

    0.18

    0.2

    0 2 4 6 8

    PVinj

    Oil

    Reco

    very

    , P

    V

    EXPERIMENT

    STONE2

    SWI

    BAKER1

    BAKER2

    0

    0.02

    0.04

    0.06

    0.08

    0.1

    0.12

    0.14

    0.16

    0.18

    0.2

    0 2 4 6 8

    PVinj

    Oil

    Reco

    very

    , P

    V

    EXPERIMENT

    STONE1

    STONE2

    SWI

    BAKER1

    BAKER2

    0

    0.02

    0.04

    0.06

    0.08

    0.1

    0.12

    0.14

    0.16

    0.18

    0.2

    0 2 4 6 8

    PVinj

    Oil

    Reco

    very

    , P

    V

    EXPERIMENT

    STONE1

    STONE2

    SWI

    BAKER1

    BAKER2

    LARSEN

    0

    0.02

    0.04

    0.06

    0.08

    0.1

    0.12

    0.14

    0.16

    0.18

    0.2

    0 2 4 6 8

    PVinj

    Oil

    Reco

    very

    , P

    V

    EXPERIMENT

    STONE1

    STONE2

    SWI

    BAKER1

    BAKER2

    LARSEN

    STONE-EXPONENT

    Numerical Simulation of WAG (Mixed-Wet)

    24

  • 25

    Existing three-phase kr models lead to large errors

    in prediction of WAG performance.

    What is the actual 3-phase kr during WAG

    ?

    25

  • 26

    Another major achievement of the project is development

    of a software for obtaining three-phase kr and Pc.

    3-phase kr can be obtained directly instead of indirectly from

    2-phase.

    kro =kro (Sw, Sg)

    krw =krw (So, Sg)

    krg =krg (Sw, So)

    Gas

    Oil

    Water

    OilWater Gas

    Direct 3-phase kr - 3RPSim

  • 27

    injection core

    using our in-house simulator

    (3RPSim) to estimate 3-phase

    kr values by history matching

    experimental results e.g.

    recovery and pressure

    Determination of 3-phase kr by

    history matching experimental

    results:

  • 0

    0.02

    0.04

    0.06

    0.08

    0.1

    0.12

    0.14

    0.16

    0.18

    0.2

    0 2 4 6 8

    PVinj

    Oil

    Reco

    very

    , P

    V

    EXPERIMENT

    0

    0.02

    0.04

    0.06

    0.08

    0.1

    0.12

    0.14

    0.16

    0.18

    0.2

    0 2 4 6 8

    PVinj

    Oil

    Reco

    very

    , P

    V

    EXPERIMENT

    BAKER2

    0

    0.02

    0.04

    0.06

    0.08

    0.1

    0.12

    0.14

    0.16

    0.18

    0.2

    0 2 4 6 8

    PVinj

    Oil

    Reco

    very

    , P

    V

    EXPERIMENT

    SWI

    BAKER2

    0

    0.02

    0.04

    0.06

    0.08

    0.1

    0.12

    0.14

    0.16

    0.18

    0.2

    0 2 4 6 8

    PVinj

    Oil

    Reco

    very

    , P

    V

    EXPERIMENT

    STONE2

    SWI

    BAKER2

    0

    0.02

    0.04

    0.06

    0.08

    0.1

    0.12

    0.14

    0.16

    0.18

    0.2

    0 2 4 6 8

    PVinj

    Oil

    Reco

    very

    , P

    V

    EXPERIMENT

    STONE2

    SWI

    BAKER1

    BAKER2

    0

    0.02

    0.04

    0.06

    0.08

    0.1

    0.12

    0.14

    0.16

    0.18

    0.2

    0 2 4 6 8

    PVinj

    Oil

    Reco

    very

    , P

    V

    EXPERIMENT

    STONE1

    STONE2

    SWI

    BAKER1

    BAKER2

    0

    0.02

    0.04

    0.06

    0.08

    0.1

    0.12

    0.14

    0.16

    0.18

    0.2

    0 2 4 6 8

    PVinj

    Oil

    Reco

    very

    , P

    V

    EXPERIMENT

    STONE1

    STONE2

    SWI

    BAKER1

    BAKER2

    LARSEN

    0

    0.02

    0.04

    0.06

    0.08

    0.1

    0.12

    0.14

    0.16

    0.18

    0.2

    0 2 4 6 8

    PVinj

    Oil

    Reco

    very

    , P

    V

    EXPERIMENT

    STONE1

    STONE2

    SWI

    BAKER1

    BAKER2

    LARSEN

    STONE-EXPONENT

    0

    0.02

    0.04

    0.06

    0.08

    0.1

    0.12

    0.14

    0.16

    0.18

    0.2

    0 2 4 6 8

    PVinj

    Oil

    Reco

    very

    , P

    V

    EXPERIMENT

    STONE1

    STONE2

    SWI

    BAKER1

    BAKER2

    LARSEN

    STONE-EXPONENT

    Heriot-WattSimulator

    Numerical Simulation of WAG (Mixed-Wet)

    28

  • New Hysteresis model

    Required two-phase data for running this model1. Oil/water : krow2. Oil/gas : krog3. Gas/water : krgw, krwg

    three-phase pore occupancy

    Saturation function

    accounting cyclic

    Hyst

    Two-phase kr

    3Phri rij rjk rik rkjk f k k k k (1 )(1 )

    i

    j k

    Sf

    S S

    SPE #152218. Three-Phase Relative Permeabilityand Hysteresis Model for Simulation of WaterAlternating Gas (WAG) Injection. MehranSohrabi 29

  • Three-Phase Flow JIP at Heriot-Watt University

    Micromodel Experiment Core-flood Experiment

    Mechanisms of Flow Mechanisms of FlowExamining different

    injection Scenario

    Generating kr and Pcdata

    Analyse experimental

    data

    Evaluate capability of existing simulators and models

    Three-Phase kr Three-Phase Pc Hysteresis IFT scalingTrapped

    saturationViscous

    fingering

    Modelling

    New improved mathematical

    model for calculating flow

    parameters (kr , Pc , trap

    phase, hysteresis..)

    High quality measured data

    for different rock and fluid

    conditions (kr & Pc)

    methodologies to correct the SCAL

    data due to experimental artefact

    (viscous fingering, end-Effects)

    In-house Software

    (3RPSim)

    Deliverable

    30

  • Project’s Sponsors

    31

    http://www2.petrobras.com.br/ingles/index.asphttp://www2.petrobras.com.br/ingles/index.asphttp://www.dongenergy.com/EN/index.htmhttp://www.dongenergy.com/EN/index.htmhttp://www.bhpbilliton.com/http://www.bhpbilliton.com/http://www.bp.com/home.do?categoryId=1&contentId=2006973http://www.bp.com/home.do?categoryId=1&contentId=2006973

  • 32