ESTIMATION of PRIMARY OIL RESERVES
J . J. ARPS BRITISH-AMERICAN O I L PRODUCING C O .
ABSTRACT
This paper reviews the methods
currently in use for estimating pri-
mary oil reserves and discusses the
principles on which these methods
are based. Particular emphasis is
placed on how these methods change
with the type of information avail-
able during the life cycle o f an oil
property. This paper contains various
novel estimating methods and short-
cuts heretofore unpublished.
INTRODUCTION
Estimating oil reserves is one of
the most important phases of the
work of a petroleum engineer since
the solutions to the problems he
deals with usually depend on a com-
parison of the estimated cost in
terms of dollars, with the anticipated
result in terms of barrels of oil. His
recommendations to management re-
garding the best course of action are
therefore normally based on the most
favorable balance between these
two.
Specific engineering problems
which require such a knowledge of
Original manuveript received in Petroleum
Branch office on Feb. 26, 1956. Revised manu-
script received June 29. 1956. Paper presented
at the Petroleum Conference-Economics and
Valuation, Dallas. Tex., March 29-30. 1956.
Discussion of this and all following techni-
cal papers is invited. Discussion in w r i t ~ n g( 3
copies) may be sent to the offices of the
Journal of Petroleum Technology. Any dis-
cussion offered after Dee. 31. lQ56, ghould hc
in the foim of a new paper.
182
MEMBER AlME DALLAS, TEX.
recoverable oil reserves and a pro- chart is presented (Fig. 1) showing
jection of future rates are: [a.] the the three periods in the life of an
exploitation and development of an imaginary oil property. Time is
oil reservoir; [b.] the construction of shown on the horizontal axis, while
gasoline plants, pipelines and refiner- the cumulative production and esti-
ies; [c.] the division of ownership in mated ultimate recovery are plotted
unitized projects; [d.] the price to be vertically. No particular units are
paid in case of a sale or purchase of used and this schematical chart is
an oil property, and the magnitude not to scale.
of the loan which it will support; During the first period, before any
[e.] the proper depreciation rate for wells are drilled on a property, any
the investment in oil properties; and estimates will of necessity be of a
[f.] evaluation of the results of an very general nature, based on ex-
exploration program. perience from similar pools o r wells
This discussion will be confined to in the same area, and usually ex-
the various methods and tools which pressed in barrels per acre. This will
are currently in use for estimating
oil reserves to be obtained during the
primary phase of an oil-producing
reservoir and for a projection of the
future production rates. Reserves
which may be obtained by secondary
recovery methods or fluid injection
programs and gas and gas conden-
sate reserves will not be discussed
in this paper.
Unfortunately, reliable oil reserve
figures are most urgently needed dur-
ing the early stages when only a
minimum amount of information is
available. Management's interest
in the oil recovery from a prop-
erty-aside from its use for account-
ing purposes-usually declines when
the property approaches its economic
limit, just at the time when the re-
liability of the estimates is at its best.
T o illustrate this general idea n
PETROLEUM TR i h S A L I I0\5, \ IM1
thcrcfore be called the "barrels per
acre" period. The estimates can
range all the way from AB (prop-
erty non-productive) to CD, reprc-
senting the most optimistic view.
The second period follows after
one or more wells are drilled, and,
assuming that the property is pro-
ductive, it is now possible to pin the
estimated ultimate recovery down
within the much closer limits E F and
GH. During this time interval most
estimates are on a volumetric basis
and are based on acre-feet of pay
and a unit recovery expressed in har-
rels per acre-foot. The type of in-
formation available during this per-
iod consists of well logs, core anal-
ysis data, bottom-hole sample infor-
mation and a subsurface map. Inter-
pretation of this data in the light of
early pressure behavior may lead to
conclusions regarding the type of
productive mechanism to be ex-
pected. Production decline curves or
other trends are not yet available
during this second, or "barrels per
acre-foot", period.
The third period follows after
sufficient actual performance data on
the property have become available
to make a check of previous volume-
tric estimates against decline curve
trends possible. Also, the pressure
hehavior may now make material
balance work possible, thereby offer-
ing other valuable clues regarding
the type of production mechanism
and active oil in place. This in-
creased amount of information
causes the lines HJK and FLK,
which delineate the range between
optimistic and pessimistic estimates,
to converge gradually in point K.
which represents the true ultimate
rccovery or cumulative production
at abandonment time. The dashed
curve BK represents the cumulative
recovery from the property.
It follows from the foregoing that
it is desirable for the engineer mak-
ing a reserve estimate to provide his
client o r his management with the
possible sprcad in estimated ultimate
recovery, both high and low, or, if
he provides them with a single fig-
ure, to point out the probable error
in his estimate.
In reviewing the histories of many
reserve estimates over an extended
period of time in many different
fields, it seems to be a common ex-
perience that the really good fields
such as East Texas, Oklahoma City,
Yates or Redwater, etc.. have been
generally under-estimated during the
early barrels per acre-foot period
compared to their later perform-
ance, while the poorer ones such as
West Edmond, Spraberry and the
like are usually over-estimated dur-
ing the early stages.
It should be emphasized that, as
in all estimates, the accuracy of the
results generally cannot be expected
to exceed the limitations imposed on
it by inaccuracies in the available
basic data. In other words, the bet-
ter and more complete the available
data, the more reliable will be the
result. Another factor which is often
overlooked - particularly in cases
where property values are involved
-is that additional investment in
acquiring good basic data during the
early stages oftentimes pays off later.
With good basic data available the
engineer making the estimate nat-
urally feels more sure of his results,
and will be less inclined to the cau-
tious conservatism which sometimes
creeps in when many of the basic
parameters are based on guesswork
only.
VOLUMETRIC ESTIMATES
During the second, o r "barrels per
acre-foot" period, reserve estimates
are based on a knowledge of the oil-
or gas-bearing reservoir volume and
the physical characteristics of the
reservoir rock and the reservoir fluids
contained therein. These data must
be supplemented with an informed
guess as to the reservoir mechanism
which will govern the withdrawals
during the primary production per-
iod.
The petroleum engineering liter-
ature of the last 25 years has dealt
extensively with the determination
of physical characteristics of the
reservoir rock - such as porosity,
permeability, relative permeability to
the different phases, wetting charac-
teristics, capillary pressure, and in-
terstitial water-as well as with the
significant physical characteristics of
the reservoir fluids such as their vis-
cosity, compressibility, gas solubility,
shrinkage, and such other parameters
as surface tension and interfacial
tension.
Prediction of the reservoir mech-
anism under which recovery will be
obtained during the primary phase
of production also has found wide-
spread treatment in the technical
literature since the middle thirties.
particularly since the introduction of
the material balance concept and a
better understanding of the inter-re-
action between the oil reservoir and
its adjacent aquifer, if such an aqui-
fer is present. Tn this discussion it
will therefore be assumed that the
reservoir mechanism can be pre-
dicted and that the necessary data
on the reservoir rock and reservoir
fluids are o r can he made available.
Pools without an active water
drive and which produce solely as
the result of expansion of natural
gas liberated from solution in the
oil are said to produce under a de-
pletion mechanism; also termed an
internal o r solution gas drive. When
a free gas cap is prescnt this mec-
hanism may be supplemented by an
external o r gas cap drive. When the
reservoir permeability is sufficiently
high, the oil viscosity low, and when
the pay zone has sufficient dip or a
high vertical permeability, the deple-
tion mechanism may be followed o r
accompanied by gravity segregation.
When a depletion-type reservoir is
first opened to production its pores
contain :qterstitial water and oil with
gas in solution under pressure. N o
free gas is assumed to be present in
the oil zone. The interstitial water is
usually not produced, and its shrink-
age upon pressure reduction is negli-
gible, compared to some of the other
factors governing the depletion-type
recovery.
When this reservoir reaches the
end of its primary producing life,
and disregarding for the time bcing
the possibility of gas cap drive o r
gravity segregation, it contains the
same interstitial water as before, to-
gether with a certain amount of resi-
dual oil under low pressure. The
void space vacated by the oil pro-
duced and by the shrinkage of the
remaining oil is now filled with gas
liberated from the oil. During the
depletion process this gas space has
increased gradually to a maximum
value at abandonment time. The
amount of gas space thus created is
the key to the estimated ultimate re-
covery under a depletion mechanism.
It is reached when the produced
free gas-oil ratio in the reservoir,
which changes according to the rela-
tive permeability ratio relationship
and the viscosities of oil and gas
involved, causcs exhaustion of the
available supply of gas in solution.
FINALFREEGASSPACE
FROM COREANALYSIS
If a sufficiently large number of
accurate determinations of the oil
and water saturation on freshly-re-
covered core samples is available, an
approximation of the total free gas
space to be expected in a reservoir
can be obtained from them. This
method is based o n the assumption
that the depletion process taking
place within t h e core upon the
rcduction in pressure by bringing it
to the surface is somewhat similar
to the actual depletion process in
the reservoir. Possible loss of liquids
from the core before analysis may
cause this total saturation to be too
low. On the other hand. the smaller
amount of gas in solution in the
residual oil has a tendency to reduce
the final gas phase. Those using this
method hope that these two effccts
somewhat compensate for each other.
In 1945 R. C. Craze and S. E.
Buckley', of the special API study
committee on Well Spacing and
Allocation of Production, collected
a large amount of statistical data
on the performance of some 103
oil reservoirs in the United States
for the purpose of a statistical
analysis of the well spacing prob-
lem. Twenty-seven of these fields
appeared to be producing under a
depletion-typc mechanism. They pro-
duce from formations widely differ-
ing in geologic age and characteris-
tics and have been operated with dif-
ferent spacings and efficiencies. A
study of the final gas saturation of
these fields shows considerable scat-
tering of the data, as is to be ex-
pected. Most points seem to fall.
however, between 30 and 40 per
cent of the pore space, with the av-
erage at 30.4 per cent.
The average crude oil viscosity
under initial reservoir conditions of
these fields was 2.2 cp. whilc the
average solution gas-oil ratio was
378 cu ft/bbl. As shown by Muskat
and Taylor', higher solution gas-oil
ratio or lower oil viscosity in the
same reservoir rock tend to increase
the final gas saturation and vice
versa.
Under initial conditions the res-
ervoir rock contains, in barrels per
acre-foot :
Interstitial water 7758.f.S~-
Reservoir o i l 7758.f.11-Su.1
Stock tank oil 7758.f.11 -Swl
Bi
in which f stands for porosity as a
fraction and S, for interstitial hater
as a fraction of the pore space; B ,
is the single phase formation volume
factor for oil undcr initial condi-
tions.
U n d e r abandonment conditions
-
1Refercnces r i v e n at end of paper.
the reservoir rock contains, in bar- tics of the reservoir rock and its
rels per acre-foot: fluid content, this table has been
Interstitial water 7758.f.S~
found very helpful in estimating the
Free gas 7758.f.5,
Reservoir oil 7758.f.11-Su--Sg) possible range of depletion recovery
Stock tank oil 7758.f.ll-Sw-SI)
6.
factors. It may be noted that in
in which S, stands for the final gas general the most important single
space as a fraction of the total pore factor governing the recovery factor
space and B, is the single phase is the K , / K , relationship of thc res-
formation volume factor for oil at ervoir rock. Unconsolidated inter-
abandonment reservoir pressure. The granular material seems to be the
unit recovery factor, DR, for a de- most favorable, while increased ce-
pletion-type reservoir is therefore: mentation or consolidation tends to
affect recoveries unfavorably. Infor-
mation obtained from various sources
since publication of this paper:' seems
to indicate that the K,/K, curve No.
23 as shown in Fig. 2 for Wasson
Dolomite was very likely in error
and the maximum case for lime-
Another approximatc approach to
the problcm of estimating recoveries stones and dolomites is therefore too
high. It is recommended that the
from depletion-type reservoirs is the
use of the correlations developed for maximum case for sands and sand-
six different types of reservoir rocks,
representing maximum, average and
minimum conditions for sands and
sandstones and for limestones, dolo-
mites and cherts" In this study these
six types of reservoir rocks were as-
sumed to be saturated with 12 syn-
thetic crude oil gas mixtures, repre-
senting gravities from 15" to 50"
API, and gas solubilities from 60 to
2,000 cu ft/bbl, and their production
performancc computed by means of
the wcll-known depletion equation
(see Eq. 2 on this page) in which the
symbols correspond to the letter sym-
bols recently submitted by the Petro-
leum Branch Executive Committee of
the AIME', with the units defined as
in Ref. 3.
The results of this study, express-
ing recovery factors as a percentage
of stock tank oil in place, are repro-
duced here as Table 1. In cases
where no detailed data are available
concerning the physical characteris-
n .%, -
-- - -
B, B., AP - --
B, /I< k,, AP
TABLE I-PRIMARY RECOVERY I N PER CENT O F O I L I N PLACE FOR DEPLETION-TYPE RESERVOIRS
O i l Solution Oil
GOR Grovity Sand or Sandstones Limestone, Dolomite or Chert
ICu f t l b b l l ["APII Maximum Average Minimum Moximum Average Minimum
 stones should be used for both types
of rock.
Next in importance is crude oil
gravity with viscosity as its corollary.
Higher oil gravities and lower vis-
cosities appear to improve the re-
covery. The effect of gas solubility
on recovery factors is less pro-
nounced and shows no consistent
pattern. Apparently the beneficial ef-
fects of lower viscosity and more
effective gas sweep with higher gas-
oil ratios is sometimes offset by the
higher formation volume factors.
I n the previous refercnce3 the re-
sults were expressed in Table 1 as
recovery in barrels per acre-foot per
per cent porosity rather than as re-
covery in per cent of oil in place.
In general, these data seem to indi-
cate a recovery range from the poor-
est combinations of 2 or 3 bbl/acre-
ft for each per cent porosity to the
best combinations of 17 or 18 bbl/
acre-ft/per cent. An over-all average
seems to be around 10 bbl/acre-ft/
per cent. Analysis of the Craze-Buck-
ley data indicates an over-all average
of the order of 13 bbl/acre-ft for
each per cent porosity.
If the actual PVT data on the res-
ervoir fluids are available, as well as
all the necessary characteristics of
the reservoir rock, the best way to
arrive at a volumetric estimate is to
actually compute the pressure-satura-
tion relationship according to Eq. 2.
The accuracy of this type of calcula-
tion falls off rapidly if the pressure
increments chosen are too large, par-
ticularly during the final stages when
the gas-oil ratio is increasing rapidly.
In the study of Ref. 3 where compu-
tations were carried out with IBM
equipment, pressure increments of 10
psi proved satisfactory.
BabsonI4 and Tarner'j have ad-
vanced other computation methods
which require a much smaller num-
ber of pressure increments and can
therefore be handled by desk calcu-
lator. These methods are based on
a trial-and-error type of solution of
material balance and gas-oil ratio
equations.
The permeability distribution in
most reservoirs is sufficiently non-
uniform in vertical and horizontal
directions so that the depletion cal-
culations as above on average ma-
terial should be fairly representative.
However, when distinct layers of
high and low permeability are known
to be present the depletion process
may advance much more rapidly in
a high permeability hank than in a
low permeability zone. In such a
case separate calculations should be
made for each permeability bank
which is known to be continuous and
the results converted into rate-time
curves for each. The estimated ulti-
mate should then be based on a su-
perposition of such curves for the
different zones. In that case one may
find that the more permeable banks
are depleted and have yielded their
full unit recovery, while tighter zones
are still partially saturated. The pro-
duction rate from these tighter zones
may, however, be so slow that the
combined rate for all zones has al-
ready reached the economic limit.
Additional recovery can some-
times be realized when a high pres-
sure reservoir is undersaturated so
that it may produce by virtue of the
expansion of its own reservoir oil,
its interstitial water and of the res-
ervoir rock itself, until the bubble
point is reached.
This additional recovery by ex-
pansion above the bubble point is
sometimes quite substantial. In the
case of the D-7 zone in the Ventura
Avenue field, described by E. V.
Wattss, 40 per cent additional re-
covery was indicated from this
source.
When conditions are favorable for
gravity segregation or gravity drive,
such as low oil viscosity, large pores
and high vertical permeability or
steep dips, the ultimate recovery can
be estimated from a knowledge of
the residual oil saturation remaining
after such gravity segregation has
taken place. Very little factual in-
formation on residual saturation after
gravity segregation is available in the
literature. D. L. KatzGreports that in
the Oklahoma City Wilcox reservoir
oil saturations were found in the gas
zone varying between 1.0 and 25.9
per cent, while oil saturations of be-
tween 52.7 and 92.8 per cent were
found below the gas-oil contact.
These figures are in general agree-
ment with actual recoveries com-
puted by comparing the oil withdrawn
with the volume of sand depleted. The
writer found by studying the receding
gas-oil contact, from detailed Okla-
homa City Wilcox fluid level data,
and by comparing the oil produced
with the sand volume from which it
was drained, that recoveries as high
as 70 per cent of the pore space were
not unusual.
WATER DRIVE RESERVOIRS
Natural water influx into oil reser-
voirs is usually from the edge inward
parallel to the bedding planes (edge
water drive) or upward from below
(bottom water drive). Bottom water
drive is only possible when the reser-
voir thickness exceeds the thickness
of the oil column, so that the oil-
water interface underlies the entire oil
reservoir. It is further only possible
when vertical permeabilities are high
and there is little or no horizontal
stratification with impervious shale
laminations.
In either case, water as the displac-
ing medium moves into the oil-bearing
section and replaces part of the oil
originally prescnt. The key to a volu-
metric estimate of the unit recovery
by water drive is in the amount of oil
which is not removed by the displac-
ing medium. This residual oil satura-
tion after water drive plays a role
similar to the final gas saturation in
the depletion-typc reservoir discussed
in the previous section.
In order to determine the unit re-
covery, it is necessary to again com-
pare the amount of interstitial water
and oil with dissolved gas initially
present with the condition at aban-
donment time, when the same intersti-
tial water is still present but only the
residual o r non-floodable oil is left.
The remainder of the original oil has
at that time been removed by water
displacement.
Calculation of the residual oil per-
centage from laboratory data on the
relative permeability relationship for
reservoir oil and water combined with
the necessary viscosity data is possible
by means of the Buckley and Leverett
frontal drive method', which has been
modified and simplified by Pirsonbnd
Welge" The difficulty of obtaining a
reliable relative permeability relation-
ship for the reservoir rock being stud-
ied has, however, somewhat restricted
the practical use of this ingenious
mcthod.
RESIDUAL OIL SATURATION
FROM COREANALYSIS
The method most commonly used
is to consider the oil saturation as
found by ordinary core analysis after
correction for shrinkage as the resid-
ual oil saturation to be expected from
flooding with water. This is based on
the assumption that water from the
drilling mud invades the pay section
just ahead of the core bit in a manner
similar to the water displacement
process in the reservoir itself.
The analysis by R. C. Craze and
S. E. Buckley' referred to in the previ-
ous section is also a valuable source
for statistical data on residual oil sat-
uration after water drive. Some 70 of
the 103 fields analyzed produced
wholly or partially under water drive
conditions. Like the depletion-type
fields, they were widely distributed
geographically and produced from
formations which differed in their
geologic ages, physical properties, and
structural characteristics, contained
oils of different properties and pro-
duced under varying degrees of oper-
ating efficiency. A study of the calcu-
lated residual oil saturations for these
fields shows a wide range; from 17.9
to 60.9 per cent of the pore space.
However, the data seem to relate
themselves distinctly according to the
oil viscosity and the reservoir permea-
bility.
The average correlation indicated
by the authors between oil viscosity
and residual saturation, both under
reservoir conditions, is shown by the
following tabulation:
Reservoir Oil Viscosity Residual O i l Saturation
(in CP) (per cent of pore space1
0.2 30
The deviation of the individual data
from this average showed the follow-
ing trend against average formation
permeability:
Average Rerervoir
Deviation of Residual O i l
Saturation from Viscosity
Permeability Trend
(in md) (per cent of pare space)
50 112
According t o these statistical
trends, the residual oil saturation un-
der reservoir conditions for a forma-
tion containing 1 cp oil and having an
average permeability of 500 md can
be estimated at 34.5 +
2, or 36.5 per
cent of the pore space.
I n another more recent statistical
study of Craze and Buckley's water
drive field recovery data by Guthrie
and Greenberger'kultiple correla-
tion analysis methods were uscd to
determine the best-fitting correlation
between the water drive recovery fac-
tor and the various significant parame-
ters. Their equation reads:
Recovery fraction = .I 1403
2719 logK +
25569 S, -
.I355 10gp<~- 1.5380 f -
.00035 H . . . . . . (3)
in which K represents permeability in
millidarcies, S, the interstitial water
saturation, p, the oil viscosity in centi-
poises, f the porosity fraction and H
the pay thickness in feet.
Since Craze and Buckley's data was
arrived at by comparing indicated re-
coveries per acre-foot with porosity
data from the reservoir rock, the rc-
sidual oil calculated by this method
includes a recovery efficiency factor
which is not present when basing the
estimate on residual oil as found in
the cores. This recovery factor re-
flects the effect of spacing, if any, and
of by-passing some of the oil in less
permeable strata by more rapid water
influx through permeable zones. Also,
it includes the effect of having to
abandon a property before the water-
flooding action in all zones is com-
plete, because of the water-oil ratio
reaching the economic limit. When
using this data, therefore, one will not
arrive at the unit recovery under 100
per cent efficient water flooding, as
would be obtained from the core an-
alysis data, but rather find an over-all
average recovery per acre-foot.
CALCULATION OF TIIE UNIT
RECOVERY UNDER A WATER
DRIVEMECHANISM
Under initial conditions the reser-
voir rock contains, in barrels per acre-
foot:
Interstitial water 7758.f.S~
Reservoir oil 7758.f.(l-SW)
Stock tank oil 7758.f.(l -Swl
BO
Under abandonment conditions the
reservoir rock contains, in barrels per
acre-foot :
Interrtifial rmter 7758.1.5,
Residual oil
(Stock tonk conditions) 7758.f.So
in which So stands for the residual oil
saturation under surface conditions as
J fraction of the total pore space and
B,, is the single phase formation vol-
ume factor for oil. The unit recovery
factor for a water drive reservoir
W R is, therefore:
Eq. 4 shows the unit recovery fac-
tor for a 100 per cent effective water
drive. In many reservoirs the permea-
bility distribution is sufficiently non-
uniform in both vertical and horizon-
tal directions so that a flood front or
an oil-water contact will advance
more or less in the same manner as if
+ the formation were entirely uniform.
In such a case the unit recovery fac-
tor should be representative except
possibly for a correction to allow for
efficiency of the drainage pattern. In
other reservoirs there may be distinct
layers of higher and lower permeabili-
ties which appear to be more or less
continuous across the reservoir. In
such a case water may advance much
more rapidly through the high perme-
ability streaks than through the tighter
zones. Allowance must then be made
for this permeability distribution. In
case the nature of the continuity of
different permeability streaks is un-
known, the estimate which takes the
permeability distribution into account
should be considered as a conserva-
tive one, while the one based on a uni-
form reservoir throughout should re-
sult in an optimistic figure. W. E.
Stiles l1 in 1949 showed how the re-
covery from a waterflood property
may be computed, while taking into
account the permeability distribution.
A simplified version of his method in
tabular form is shown on Table 2. The
data on this tabulation are adopted
from a Tensleep sand reservoir in
Wyoming where good statistical aver-
ages on more than 3,000 core analy-
ses were available. Part of these cores
were taken with water-base mud,
which yielded the residual oil figures
on Line 6. Another portion was taken
with oil-base mud and yielded the in-
terstitial water figures of Line 8.
The cores were divided into the five
permeability groups shown on Line 1
and appeared to have a fractional dis-
tribution of the samples as shown on
Line 2. Line 3 carries the average per-
meability for each group, while Line 4
shows the capacity of each group in
terms of darcy feet. For this purpose
it was assumed that the calculation
applied to a representative 100-ft total
section.
The relative water permeability K,
behind the flood front is shown on
Line 7, while the relative oil permea-
bility K , ahead of the water in the
clean section is listed on Line 9.
These relative permeabilities were
based on laboratory measurements.
The unit recovery factor for each
group was then computed by means
of Eq. 4. The formation volume fac-
tor B, used was 1.07.
On Line 11 is shown the cumula-
tive +vet capacity in darcy feet under
the assumption that the five groups
are watering-out progrcssively in the
order from high to low permeability.
The figures shown are the cumulatives
of those on Line 4. On Line 12 the
cumulative remaining or clearz oil ca-
pacity is carried, which is equal to the
rota1 capacity of 3.243 darcy ft minus
the wet capacity on Line 11. The
water-oil ratio of the produced stream
from such a linear water flood is
shown on Line 13 based on:
or, with an oil viscosity of 5.5 cp and
a water viscosity of 0.46 cp:
(7) (11)
W O R = 12 X -- X --- . . ( 6 )
(0) (12)
It will be noted that the WOR at
the time all permeabilities down to
100 md are wet has reached 15.5.
When the watering-out process has
advanced down to 50 md the W O R is
36.0. When groups 3 and 4 succes-
sively watcr out the W O R has in-
creased to 76.5 and 307.9, respec-
tively.
On Line 14 is shown the cumula-
tive oil production from each group
at the time group 1 is watered-out
(Min K,., = 100 md; W O R =
15.5).In group 1 the recovery of 61.6
listed is the product of Line 2 and
Line 10 (full unit recovery). For each
of the other groups the full recovery
is reduced in the proportion of its
average permeability to 100 md,
based on Stiles' assumption that the
advance of a linear flood will be ap-
proximately proportional to its aver-
age permeability. The total recovery
for all groups corresponding to WOR
= 15.5 is shown as 175.4 bbl/
acre-ft in the last column. In a similar
-
the produced stream vs cumulative oil
recovery per acre-foot will be found
on Fig. 2. Based on economic limit
considerations, a final oil percentage
of 2 per cent is indicated for this field
and the corresponding recovery at
that time can be found by interpola-
tion as 292 hbl/acre-ft.
As stated before, unless the conti-
nuity of the various permeability
zones across the structure is definitely
established, this recovery figure should
be treated as a conservative one.
In limestone pools producing un-
der a bottom water drive, such as
certain of the vugular D-3 Reef res-
ervoirs in Alberta, one finds an ex-
treme range in the permeabilities,
often running from microdarcies on
up to the darcy range. Under those
conditions t h e modified "Stiles"
method heretofore described yields
results which are decidedly too low.
The reason is that in pools like the
Redwater D-3 there is a substantial
density difference between the rising
saltwater and the oil. While the water
rises and advances through the highly
permeable vugular material, it may at
first bypass the low permeabilitv
matrix material leaving oil trapped
therein. However, the moment such
bypassing occurs, a buoyancy gradi-
ent is set up across this tight material
which tends to drive the oil out ver-
tically into the vugular material and
fractures. In the case of Redwater
D-3, where the density difference be-
tween salt water and oil is 0.26. while
-
~
ery may be obtained due to this so-
called buoyancy effect.
In addition to these buoyancy phe-
nomena there is also the effect of cap-
illarity and preferential wetting of the
reservoir rock by water. Imbibition of
water from fractures and vugular ma-
terial into the low permeability matrix
as the water advances may materially
aid the above buoyancy mechanism,
but are much more difficult to eval-
uate quantitatively. To make a calcu-
lation of the recovery under a buoy-
ancy mechanism it is necessary to first
determine by statistical analysis of a
large number of cores the average
interval between high permeability
zones. A separate computation is then
made for each of the permeability
ranges to determine what pcrcentage
of the matrix oil contained in a theo-
retical tube of such average length
may be driven out during the produc-
ing life of the reservoir under the
effect of this buoyancy phenomenon.
Surprisingly improved recoveries
are generally indicated by this method
over what one would expect from a
"Stiles" type calculation and the re-
sults from recent studies of the rise in
water table seem to confirm the valid-
ity of this concept.
ESTIMATES BASED ON
PERFORMANCE DATA
Estimates of ultimate recovery by
extrapolation of a performance trend
fundamentally all follow the same
pattern. The two quantities one
wishes to determine are usually either
remaining oil reserves or remaining

manner the cumulative oil production the vertical permeabilities for matrix
for Min K,,.,., 50 md; WOR = productive life. Cumulative produc-
material are only a fraction of the tion and time are therefore normally
36.0, or 260.4 bbl/acre-ft. is com-
horizontal permeabilities, a simple selected as independent variables, and
puted on Line 15, and for Min K,c,.,
- 25, 10 and 0 md, respectively, calculation based on Darcy's law ap- plotted as abscissae. A varying char-
344.5, 418.3 and 55!),6 bb]/acre-ft, plied to a vertical tube with a cross- acteristic of the well performance
on Lines 16, 17 and 18. A graphical section of 1 Sq cm shows that during which can be easily measured and re-
presentation of the results of this com- the anticipated lifetime of the field corded is then selected as dependent
putation in terms of 011 percentage in very substantial additional oil recov- variable to produce a trend curve. For
extrapolation purposes this variable
has to meet two qualifications: (1)
TABLE 2-COMPUTATION OF THE WATER DRIVE RECOVERY FACTOR FOR A TENSLEEP SAND its value must be a continuous func-
RESERVOIR I N WYOMVNG B Y T H E "PERMEABILITY-BLOCK" OR MODIFIED STILES METHOD
tion of the independent variable and
GROUP I 2 3 4 5 Total
~ - - - change in a uniform manner; and (2)
1.
2.
Permeability Range ( m d )
Fraction of S a m p l e r
it must have a known end point.
3. Average Permeability (mdl By making a graph of the values
4. Capacity i n dorcy feet
5. Avg Porosity Fraction (I] of this continuously changing depend-
6. Avg Resid. Oil Fraction IS,,)
8. Avg 1nte:stitial Woter Froc. ISl,-) ent variable as ordinates against the
7. Relative Woter Perm. (KT,.) value of the independent variable
9. R e l a t i v e Oil Permeability ( K O )
10. E r t . U n i t Recovery Factor (bbl/acre-fl) (cumulative production or time) as
I I. C u m . "Wet" Cap. Z (41
12. C u m . "Clean Oil" Cap.=-3.243-111) abscissae and graphically extrapolat-
13. Water-Oil Ratio ing the apparent trend until the known
14. Cum. Rec. WOR - 15.5
Min Ka.,,r 100 end point is reached, an estimate of
-
:-
15. C u m . Rec. WOR 36.0
Min K w c t
-

50 the remaining reserves or remaining

16.

17.
C u m . Rec. WOR - 76.5
Min K n . , , t
C u m . Rec. WOR
25 -
--
307.9
life can be obtained. The basic as-
sumption in this procedure is that
Min K,,.,.t : 10 whatever causes governed the trend
18. Cum. Rec. WOR =. '/i
Min -I= 0 of a curve in the past will continue to
govern its trend in the future in a uni-
form manner.
This extrapolation procedure is
therefore strictly of an empirical na-
ture, and a mathematical expression
of the curve based on physical con-
siderations of the reservoir can only
he set up for a few simple cases. The
dependent variables most commonly
selected, and their extrapolation, are
as follows.
Rate of production is by far the
most popular dependent variable used
when production is not restricted. In
that case one commonly refers t o pro-
duction decline curves. The two main
types are rate-time and rate-cumula-
tive curves for each of the two inde-
pendent variables. Rate of production
has the advantage of always being
readily available and accurately re-
corded. When no major changes in
operating procedure are made, and no
stimulation treatments are applied,
the curves normally show a fairly
smooth declining trcnd over extended
periods. This trend usually lends itself
well to extrapolation. T h e second re-
quirement is also easily met, since
known o r estimated operating costs
make it possible to determine the eco-
nomic limit rate, o r the end point of
the curve. This economic limit rate is
the production rate which will just
meet the direct operating expenses of
a well. In determining this economic
limit it is often advisable not t o use
the operating expenditures charged t o
a well but to analyze these costs
closely and determine how much
would actually be saved if the well
were abandoned. This saving yields a
more reliablc yardstick of the true
economic limit of production, since
certain expenses may have to be con-
tinued if other wells on the lease are
kept in operation. T h e following is a
sample calculation of the economic
limit for a well:
Crude Price per bbl $2.80
Gar Revenue per bbl $0.20
Total $3.00
Royalty (12.5 per cent) $0.375
Local Taxer (per h ' bbl) $0.125
Leaves N e t Income per Gross Barrel $2.50
Ertimatsd direct operating cost
ot Economic Limit $250 per month
Estimated Economic
Limit Rote 100 gross bbl/month
T h e mathematical background of
these rate-time and rate-cumulative
curves in connection with the so-
called loss ratio method of extrapola-
tion has been discussed in detail in a
previous publication".
Three types of decline curves are
commonly recognized: constant per-
centage decline, hyperbolic decline
and harmonic decline.
With constant percentage decline
the drop in production per unit of
timc is a constant fraction of the pro-
duction rate.
With hyperbolic decline the drop
in production per unit of time as a
fraction of the production rate is pro-
portional to a fractional power of the
production rate, this power being be-
tween 0 and 1.
With harmonic decline the drop in
production per unit of time as a frac-
tion of the production rate is directly
proportional to the production rate.
Integration of the basic differential
equations leads to rate-time rclation-
ships, as shown o n the classification
of production decline curves of Fig. 3.
After integrating these rate-time
equations a second time the rate-
cumulative relationships shown in
this same table are obtained. On the
chart of Fig. 4 arc shown the trends
of these three types of rate-time and
rate-cumulative curves on regular co-
ordinate paper, semi-log paper, and
log-log paper.
Inspection of this chart shows that
in the case of constant percentage de-
cline thc rate-time curve becomes a
straight line on semi-log paper, while
the rate-cumulative curve straightens
out on regular coordinate paper. I n
either case the tangent of the angle of
slope is equal t o the decline fraction.
I n the case of hyperbolic-type dc-
cline curves the rate-time relation-
ship as well as the rate-cumulative re-
lationship can be straightened out
after shifting to become straight lines
on log-log paper. T h e shifted rate-
cumulative curve in this case assumes
a reverse slope. Besides the extra
work involved in shifting, this type of
paper also has the disadvantage that
the horizontal scale on which the un-
known variable is plotted usually
becomes rather crowded at the point
where the answer is desired. F o r this
reason, special graph paper for hyper-
bolic decline was designed", making
it possible t o plot either time or cumu-
lative on a linear scale and still obtain
the advantage of straight line extra-
polation.
In the case of harmonic decline it
may be noted that the rate-time rela-
tionship can also be straightened out
o n log-log paper after shifting, and
assumcs a slope of 45". It may be of
interest that in this specific case a plot
of the inverse of the production rate
versus time on a linear scale should
also yield a straight line. T h e rate-
cumulative relationship for harmonic
decline becomes a straight line on
semi-log paper. T h e decline fraction
in this case is equal to the rate times
the tangent of the slope angle.
It should be stressed that in this
mathematical treatment of different
types of decline curves the decline
fraction is instantaneous and theoret-
ically applies only to a very short time
interval.
An analysis of a large number of
actual production decline curves as-
sembled by W. W. Cutler, Jr.'3 indi-
cates that most decline curves nor-
mally encountered are of the hyper-
bolic type, with values for the ex-
ponent n between 0 and .7, while the
majority fall between 0 and .4. The
occurrence of harmonic decline ( n =
1) is apparently rare.
As a matter of convenience the
semi-log paper is most often used for
rate-time extrapolations, while regu-
lar coordinate paper is favored for
ratecumulative extrapolations. Since
straight line extrapolation in these
cases assumes a constant percentage
decline, it will be obvious that such
extrapolations therefore generally
provide results which are too conserv-
ative. Experienced engineers usually
allow for this by graphically flattening
the declinc slope in the later stages.
Another popular variable which is
oftentimes substituted for the pro-
duction rate in water drive fields is the
oil percentage of the total fluid pro-
duced. Since projections of this oil
percentage vs time are not often
required, one usually finds this oil
percentage variable o n l y plotted
against cumulative. An example of
this o n semi-log paper is shown for a
T a r Springs reservoir in the Calvin
field of Illinois in Fig. 5. The end
point in this case is the lowest oil
percentage which, combined with the
fluid-producing capacity of the lease,
will just cover operating expenses.
CUMULATIVE GAS VERSUS
CUMULATIVE OIL
It is a characteristic of most oil
reservoirs that only a fraction of the
oil in place is recoverable by primary
production methods. Gas, on the
other hand, moves much more freely
through the reservoir and it can gen-
erally be assumed that at abandon-
ment time only the solution gas in the
remaining oil at the then-prevailing
pressure plus the free gas at that same
pressure are left in the reservoir. In
other words, even though it is not
known exactly how much oil may be
recovered, a much firmcr idea is gen-
erally available of the amount of gas
that will be produced during the pri-
mary production period. This pro-
vides us with the possibility of an end
point to ;I performance curve. The
cumulative gas-cumulative oil method
is illustrated with the chart on Fig. 6.
 II HYPERBOLIC m. HARMONIC
DECLINE DECLINE DECLINE
I -

BASIC
CHARACTERISTIC
I DECLINE I S CONSTANT
a-o
D E C L I N E I S PROPORTIONAL
TO A F R A C T I O N A L POWER (R 1
OF T H E P R O D U C T I O N R A T E
D E C L I N E IS PROPORTIONAL.
TO PRODUCTION R A T E
a = 8
I I o < n

D:,.qOz - dkr
1 FOR INITILL CONOITIONS ( FOR WITIK CONOITIONS:

S u b s t ~ t u t e From Rote-itme Equotron Subslrtuie From Rote - ttme Equolkon:

I Substttute From Rote - tune Equotbon:
I
To Find

I 1 a, = L- I
RELATIONSHIP D I
1
I D - D e c l ~ n e as o f r o c t l o n o f productLon r o t e ql = Productron rote o t tbme t

( D, = I n t t ~ o l decline 0, = Cumulotcve o t l productron ol t i m e I

, q , = l n l t l o l praduction role K = Constont

1 t = Time n = Exponent

FIG.3-CLASSIFICATION
OF PRODUCTION
DECLINE
CURVES.
- ---
R A T E - TIME CURVES
COORDINATE

TIME I l l LOG TIME (11

R A T E - CUMULATIVE CURVES
COORMNkTE SEMI-LOG

100
I '
.,
100.000 o 04000 100 tpoo IOWO 100.000
CUMULLTIVE 101 CUYULLTIVE (01 LOG CUMULATNE 101

I- CONSTANT PERCENTAGE DECLINE n = 0 D= 03

--- HYPERBOLIC DECLINE n = % 0,:lO
110 ---HYPERBOLIC DECLINE (SHIFTED ON LOG - LOG I

ID -------- HARMONIC DECLINE n = I D,:30

ma - - - - - - - H A R M O N I C DECLINE (SHIFTED ON LOG - LOG)

FIG.&-THREE TYPESOF PRODUCTION

DECLINE
CURVESON COORDINATE,
SEMI-LOGAND LOG-LOG
GRAPHPAPER.
Cun~~llallvc oil production is plottcd
on the horizontal scalc while the cu-
n~ulativc gas production is plotted
on the vertical scale. As is normal in
depletion-type fields, the trend of the
curve appears to steepen with in-
creasing gas-oil ratios.
From a volumetric calculation an
estimate is made of the total gas to be
released from this reservoir down to
an assumed abandonment pressure.
This figurc, which in this case was
1.42 billion cu ft, is marked on the
chart as a horizontal line and repre-
sents the ceiling of the cumulative gas-
cumulativc oil curve.
B~ extrapolating the current trend
until it intersects the estimate for the
total gas available, an estimate can
be obtained for the total oil rccovery
during the primary period.
OIL-WATERCONTACT OR
ABANDOXMENT CON.I'OUR
vs SANDTOP
Another method which is somc-
times practiced in the larger water
drive fields, such as East Texas, is to
choose the depth of the oil-water con-
tact or abandonment contour as the
dependent variable to be plotted
against the cumulative oil recovery as
the independent variable. The end
point of this type of performance
curve is the average depth of the top
of the sand for a given lease. The
method of extrapolation in this case
is based on the simple assumption
that whenever the abandonment con-
CUMULATIVE PRODUCTION
FIG. 5-OIL PERCENTAGE-CUMULATIVE
RELATIONSHIP
PAPER-TAR SPRINGSSANDPRODUCTION,
tour progresses to the top of the sand
the lease is ready for abandonment.
An example of this is shown on the
chart of Fig. 7.
By plotting this type of chart for
many leases in the East Texas field it
has been noted that the rise in the
water table appears to be more o r less
proportional to the cumulative pro-
duction.
KELATIONSHIP
BLTWEEN
R'SERvES AND
From the rate-cumulativc equation
for constant Percentage decline shown
on Fig. 3 it may he noted that the
rem"ning reserves are equal to the
difference between the present pro-
duction rate and the production rate
at the economic limit, divided by the
decline as a fraction. The same time
units should be used for dctermining
both decline and production rates.
This leads to thc following short-
cut: When the decline is 1 per cent
per month the remaining reserves are
100 times the difference in monthly
production rates; for 2 per cent de-
cline per month this ratio equals 50;
for 3 per cent it is 33 1/3; for 4 per
cent it is 25, etc.
When production rates are on a
daily or annual basis the same for-
mula holds, provided the decline is
calculated on the same time basis.
CONCLUSION
A very important use of rcscrvc
I N THOUSANDS OF BARRELS
ON SEMI-LOG
CALVINFIELD.ILL.
estimates has often been overlooked.
Reference is made to the comparison
between the recovery analysis based
on vol~lmetricdata with the one ob-
tained from a projection of individual
well performance.
Oftentimes it is rlifiicult to fit the
projected performance to the volu-
metric estimate. If both types of esti-
mates are based on good, reliable
information but cannot be reconcilcd,
some important conclusions may be
drawn from this discrepancy. If the
performance indicates a substantially
lower ultimate recovery than the vol-
umetric calculation would indicate, it
might mean that there is something
fundamentally wrong in the produc-
tion practices used. Possi'ily morc
drainage points are nccded or the
wells need stimulation treatments o r
cleanout jobs.
On the other hand, if the well per-
formance projection indicates an ulti-
mate recovery well in excess of the
volumetric estimate, it could mean
that the subsurface interpretation used
may be in error and that there may be
a larger oil reservoir on hand than
current subsurface interpretation in-
dicates. In that case it might be highly
desirable to look for a possible exten-
sion to such an oil reservoir.
REFERENCES
I. Craze, R. C., and Buckley, S. E.:
"A Factual Analysis of the Ef-
fect of Well Spacing on Oil Re-
covery," Drill.and Prod. Prac.
API (1945) 144.
2. Muskat, M., and Taylor, M. 0.:
"Effect of Reservoir Fluid and
Rock Characteristics on Produc-
tion Histories of Gas-Drive Res-
ervoirs," Tmns. AIME (1946)
165. 78.
PETROLEUM TRANSACTIONS. A I M E
 C W L A T I V E OIL PROWCTION PER WELL IN THOUSANDS Of BARRELS
FIG.7-ABANDONMENTLINE (SUBSEA)VS CUMULATIVE
OIL RECOVERY-
WOODBINESANGEAST TEXASFIELD.

3. Arps, J. J., and Roberts, T. C;.:
"The Effect of the Relative Per-
meability Ratio, the Oil Gravity,
and the Solution Gas-Oil Ratio
on the Primary Recovery from a
Depletion Type Reservoir,"
Trans. AlME (1955) 204, 120.
4. "Letter Symbols for Reservoir
Engineering," Jour. of Pet. Tech.
(Jan., 1955) 38.
5. Watts, E. V. : "Some Aspects of
High Pressures in the D-7 Zone
of the Ventura Avenue Field,"
Trans. AIME ( 1948) 174, 19 1.
6. Katz, D. L.: "Possibilities of
Secondary Recovery for the
Oklahoma City Wilcox Sand,"
Trans. AIME (1942) 146,28.
7. Buckley, S. E., and Leverett, M.
C.: "Mechanism of Fluid Dis-
placement in Sands," T r a n s .
AIME (1942) 146, 107.
8. Pirson, S. J.: Elements of Oil
Reservoir Engineering, McGraw-
Hi11 (1950) 285.
9. Welge, H. J.: "A Simplified
Method for Computing Oil Re-
covery by Gas or Water Drive,"
Trans. AIME (1952) 195, 91.
10. Guthrie, R. K., and Greenberg-
er, M. H.: " I h e Use of Multiple
Correlation Analyses for Inter-
preting Petroleum Engineering
Data," API Paper 901-31-G,
New Orleans, La. ( M a r c h ,
1955).
11. Stiles, W. E.: "Use of Permea-
bility Distribution in Water
Flood Calculations," Trans.
AIME ( 1949) 186, 9.
12. Arps, J. J.: "Analysis of Decline
Curves," Trans. AIME (1945)
160, 228.
13. Cutlcr, W. W., Jr.: "Estimation
of Underground Oil Reserves by
Well Production Curves," USBM
Bull. 228 (1924).
14. Babson, E. C.: "Prediction of
Reservoir Behavior from Lab-
oratory Data," Trans. AIME
( 1944) 155, 120.
15. Tarner, 5 . : "How Different Size
Gas Caps and Pressurc Mainte-
nance Programs Affect Amount
of Recoverable Oil," Oil Weekly
(June 12, 1944) 32.
***