SPE 143570

Smart EOR Screening, Breaching the Gap between Analytical and

Numerical Evaluations
Moreno, Jaime; Gurpinar, Omer; Liu, Yunlong Schlumberger
Copyright 2011, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition held in Jakarta, Indonesia, 2022 September 2011.

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
Hydrocarbons exploration is reaching global frontiers pressuring for near and long term solutions to increase oil
production from the existing assets. Field development drivers are shifting towards maintaining a high production
plateau while effectively sweeping the reservoir hydrocarbon to maximize recovery. Enhanced oil recovery offers
a substantial alternative to improve recovery of green and mature fields by means of enhancing pore level
sweeping in the reservoir.

While the principles of EOR schemes are not new; field implementation has been scarce and, as a consequence
the physics governing the displacement process have not been completely understood. Highly heterogeneous
reservoirs in particular pose a challenge for EOR. Geological features influence the EOR agent advancement and
their influence needs to be considered on the early stages of EOR screening. A successful EOR selection
requires a detailed understanding of the reservoir governing forces together with the reservoir architecture to
maximize reservoir conformance.

This paper focuses on these issues by proposing a new methodology to aid the EOR selection, addressing the
influence of vertical and lateral heterogeneity at the early stages of the screening and providing guidance to
maximize contacted oil in the reservoir by reconciling the reservoir driving forces and geological architecture. A
comprehensive analysis of the present and past reservoir conditions is used to determine the EOR best suited for
the reservoir; data mining, optimized numerical and analytical simulations are used to further substantiate the
decision and help mitigate uncertainties by incorporating present and past EOR experience during the selection
process.

Introduction
Understanding rock architecture and fluid flow governing forces is the fundamental key to uncovering the
enhanced oil recovery potential of any given reservoir (including measurement scales); with growing hydrocarbon
demand, maturing fields and advances in technology fast, effective evaluation of EOR alternatives can
substantially increase asset value and mitigate and control developments risks.

Hydrocarbon displacement in the reservoir is dominated by the balance of capillary, gravity and viscous forces. A
successful screening requires a detailed understanding of these forces, particularly in heterogeneous reservoirs
where depositional environments can heavily influence the advancement of any displacement agent.
Furthermore, quantity and quality of data to model rock and fluid interactions in the presence of the injection agent
heavily influences the EOR selection and have the potential to mislead decisions if the quality is not up to the
required standards.

The ability to comprehensively evaluate and select the correct displacement mechanism to optimize the recovery
of oil both at pore and reservoir level is highly coveted in the industry today, as operators focus their attention on
more effective field management. To optimize decision process, reservoirs need to be evaluated in lights of agent
compatibility as well as maximum reservoir conformance by balanced of the dominating fluid flow forces.


2 SPE 143570
Measurement Scales and Force Balance
Locating movable hydrocarbon in the reservoir and analyzing displacement potential in gravity/capillarity
dominated flows are key for a successful screening of the best suited enhanced-oil-recovery technique for the
current field conditions. This requires a detailed understanding of present, past and future behavior of the
reservoir in terms of recovery mechanisms, flow patterns as well as geological setting, aiming to take advantage
of the current reservoir forces distribution to augment the EOR displacement efficiency. Displacement efficiency
estimation is therefore of paramount importance not only on the technical but also the commercial ranking and
selection of any enhanced-oil-recovery technique.

Estimation of this displacement efficiency is not without a challenge, and one of the major components of the
uncertainty is that of scale (often not properly investigated and in some cases ignored altogether); from what is
observed at the core level where viscous forces dominate, to near the injectors where viscous and capillary forces
are stronger, to formation and field level where the balance of viscous, gravity and capillary forces determines the
real efficiency of the displacement.

Core plug and to some extent full core displacement processes are often dominated by viscous forces, resulting
in a high capillary number and a more efficient sweep of the pore space, the exposed injection surface area of the
core (per unit volume) is orders of magnitude greater than
the ones expected in the field; providing a high velocity
front which is likely to contact most of the pores. Due to
the size of the sample, and the duration of the test, the
effect of gravity is negligible. Several authors have studied
the effect of force balance (at a core scale) on
displacement efficiency and the concept of de-saturation
curves is widely accepted in the industry
1,2,3,4
, where the
balance of the viscous and capillary forces is taken into
account to determine the pore level sweeping efficiency.
As a result, areas with 100% contacted hydrocarbon (with
the EOR agent) will have, at a pore level scale, different
displacement efficiencies (depending on the dominating
force balance), furthermore different displacement
processes (i.e. water, gas, solvent injection) follow
different de-saturation curves requiring not only a static
but dynamic estimation of the pore level sweeping
efficiency. Fig. 1 shows a typical example of a de-
saturation curve. Figure 1 Example of a de-saturation curve
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
1.E-07 1.E-06 1.E-05 1.E-04 1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01
R
e
s
i
d
u
a
l
N
o
n
w
e
t
t
i
n
g

o
r

W
e
t
t
i
n
g

S
a
t
u
r
a
t
i
o
n
,

%
Nvc
Nonwetting
critical (Nvc)c
Wetting critical
(Nvc)c
Snwr
Swr

Capillary number relates the ratio of viscous to capi and it is defined as: llary forces,

Equation 1 Capillary Number definition
Where is the fluid viscosity, U flow velocity and is the surface or interfacial tension.

SPE 143570 3


is reservoir heterogeneity which often times is not adequately
mparison between the different scales of measurement
6
Displacement Efficiency and Rock Quality Distribution
t enhanced-oil-recovery displacement processes is
aboratory and pilot studies maybe used to understand the interaction and compatibility between the EOR
Adding to the complexity of the displacement
captured in numerical models. Due, in some
occasions to the nature of the process the
numerical models were trying to address,
and others to the limitations of the tools
used to image and describe the reservoir.
The first issue is easier to address than the
latter
5
, and it has been the subject of
several investigations; however, the
underlying heterogeneity needs to be
considered in the screening and design so
that the selected EOR technique(s) is
flexible enough to adapt and mitigate to
such unfavorable displacement
occurrences. Figure 2 shows a schematic
representation of the resolution and depth
of investigation of several measurements
taken in the field, and it highlights the need
of a proper representation of the reservoir
heterogeneity
Figure 2 Co


Evaluation of the displacement efficiency under differen
paramount for the technical and economical selection of the EOR methodology best suited for the field.
Displacement mechanisms, however, are subjected to the interaction of the injection agent with both rock and
reservoir fluids, and misinterpretation (such as scale issues) and/or lack of this information may cause bias in the
analysis with results which are not fully representative of the reservoir behavior, yielding a less than optimal
selection for the development.

L
injected agent and the reservoir rock and fluids. Miscibility, solid precipitation, foaming, adsorption, core
displacements at reservoir conditions, etc are among the common test run in the laboratory to substantiate the
selection of any given EOR agent. However, as discussed before, these only partially address the issue of
reservoir displacement efficiency, where scale of measurements becomes key to understand the full potential of
the EOR technique. Figure 3 and Figure 4 show the results of immiscible displacements on a set of two different
rock quality distributions, a younger formation with shallow marine ridge sequence (coarsening upward
distribution); and a deeper formation with a more homogeneous high continuity shallow marine distribution. Down
dip gas and water injection displacements were introduced, (left display shows a gas displacement, and the one
on the right water) and the effect on fluid breakthrough (BT) times and sweeping efficiency were studied. In
addition, a series of displacements were conducted where gas was injected after 1 pore volume (PV) of water
injection.

4 SPE 143570

Figure 3 Influence of vertical heterogeneity on the overall displacement efficiency (Gravity dominated flow -The
warmer colors correspond to the injectant saturation while the blue corresponds to a higher oil saturation)
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
6500
6550
6600
6650
6700
6750
6800
6850
6900
6916
SSTVD
1:500
0.00 0.30 Phie -0.10 1.10 Vsiltcum
-0.10 1.10 Vsandcum
-0.10 1.10 VClcum
N7.5
N7.0
N6.0
N5.0
N4.0
N3.0
N2.0
[ ]
water
gas

Figure 4: Influence of vertical heterogeneity on the overall displacement efficiency (Viscous dominated flow - The
warmer colors correspond to the injectant saturation while the blue corresponds to higher oil saturation)
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
6500
6550
6600
6650
6700
6750
6800
6850
6900
6916
SSTVD
1:500
0.00 0.30 Phie -0.10 1.10 Vsiltcum
-0.10 1.10 Vsandcum
-0.10 1.10 VClcum
N7.5
N7.0
N6.0
N5.0
N4.0
N3.0
N2.0
[ ]
gas water

The results of the numerical investigation
5
show the displacement efficiencies changing with both the property
distribution as well as with the forces which are dominating the displacement (gas reached the producer at
0.05PV injected while water did at 0.2PV). Looking at the saturation snapshot taken at EOR agent BT, it is clear
that, even at small scales, the EOR agent does not contact the whole hydrocarbon in the formation. In addition, it
can be easily shown that the amount contacted is a function of heterogeneity and displacement velocity. Making
this an important issue for the screening of any potential EOR displacement where not only reservoir
heterogeneity but also force balances are required to estimate the 2-D and 3-D displacement efficiency.

Screening
There are several drivers which influence the selection of an enhanced-oil-recovery technique, both on the
technical sub-surface/Surface and the commercial level. An early understanding and delineation of such
challenges greatly aids on the selection process, allowing the technical team to concentrate and acquire data on
the critical path of the project in order to mitigate the major risks.

Traditionally EOR screening has been mainly influenced by the compatibility of the EOR agent and the reservoir
rock and fluid, and a binary approach was used to determine the best suited enhanced-oil-recovery method for a
given formation. These evaluations were often augmented by the use of layer cake models (analytical and
numerical) to estimate recovery. A more detailed analysis was often performed post screening stage, where
analogs as well as full field studies were carried out to further substantiate the enhanced oil recovery selection.



SPE 143570 5
This paper proposes a new approach to screening where a guided, data driven process was developed to
incorporate all the key reservoir and eor agent drivers at the early stages of the screening; allowing for the
selection of the optimum enhanced oil recovery
technique for the current conditions and for the
spectrum of heterogeneity levels expected in
the field. This novel workflow analyzes and
evaluates the available field information, and
the proper screening technique is selected such
that the screening results are reliable and in
line with the current field understanding; with
hard coded engineering knowledge, decisions
are guided through the process to ensure
consistency on the results as well as allowing
for a faster, repeatable analysis.
Figure 5 shows the conceptual schematic of the
screening process, where an early evaluation of
the current reservoir conditions, is used to
understand the location of the remaining
hydrocarbon in relation to the rock quality
distribution and reservoir driving mechanism.
The process recognizes and qualifies the force
balance in the reservoir, providing the means of
maximizing the contacted hydrocarbon in the
field by working together with the existing
driving forces of the reservoir to achieve an
efficient sweep.
Figure 5. Data driven EOR screening

After the hydrocarbon and force distribution of the field have been understood, the existing data validated and the
EOR techniques with most potential identified,
present and past successful EOR project information
is used to guide the second step of the screening,
where reservoirs with rock and fluid properties similar
to the ones under study are identified from the
published literature data
16-37
, and used to guide EOR
ranking, in conjunction with the reservoir architecture
analysis and local displacement efficiency
calculations. Figure 6 shows an example of the data
mining technique applied for one of the EOR
methods were clear trends are observed for different
clusters of reservoir and fluid properties. This
analysis not only helps substantiate the EOR
selection but, in fact allows for an easy identification
of field analogues.




Figure 6 Example of Data Mining for EOR Screening


6 SPE 143570
Displacement Efficiency Estimation
Once the reservoir forces, hydrocarbon saturation distribution and historical data have been reconciled, the
following step is to qualify the potential displacement efficiency under the most likely EOR techniques. Two
approaches have been taken in order to quantify the displacement efficiency (data driven), one involving an
analytical estimation (traditionally based on a Buckley-Leverett modified approach
7,8,9,10,11,12
where local
displacement efficiencies and recovery profiles, are calculated for a given producer/injector flow pattern and a
second one which incorporates a higher degree of heterogeneity on a 3-D space, allowing for a different balance
of capillary, gravity and viscous forces in order to determine the flow paths of the injected EOR agent onto the
reservoir. Results of the analytical optimization are directly incorporated onto the numerical estimation (such as
optimum EOR agent concentration, injection ratios and slug sizes). Displacement efficiencies are compared
between the analytical and numerical methods to determine the influence of heterogeneity on the contacted and
mobilized hydrocarbon. Figure 7 shows the proposed guided workflow for the screening.


Figure 7. EOR screening Workflow*
*Schlumberger TM

The challenge described with the scale measurements also relevant when looking at the displacement efficiency
estimation, where a representative portion of the reservoir is often used for the estimation of the performance of
the EOR agent when contacting the hydrocarbon at reservoir conditions. Analytical methods, alone, do not fully
encompass the full heterogeneity of the reservoir; however, when used in conjunction with numerical models,
have the potential of helping understanding each of the components of the recovery, from pore level to vertical
and volumetric. Furthermore, the results of these methods provide an important guidance for the numerical
optimization of the enhanced-oil-recovery techniques. Representative sampling of the reservoir heterogeneity
becomes a key feature for the displacement efficiency estimation, driven not only by static reservoir rock features
(porosity, permeability, pore throat size distribution) but also by dynamic ones such as pressure and hydrocarbon
saturation
5,13,14,15
. By its nature, the designed workflow caters for the incorporation of both static and dynamic
considerations on the representative reservoir element (RRE) selection, aiming to sample (on a systematic guided
fashion) the two end members of the EOR potential (one where reservoir rock is better connected and
hydrocarbon saturation is relatively high, and the other one where the connectivity is poorer and the potential
recoverable hydrocarbon is lower. A full detailed discussion of the workflow used for the RRE selection will be
presented on a follow up paper. Figure 8 shows the results of the displacement efficiency using a combination of
analytical and numerical methods for a given representative reservoir element:

SPE 143570 7
E
n
h
a
n
c
e
d

D
i
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y
,

%

E
n
h
a
n
c
e
d

D
i
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y
,

%

Injected Pore Volume, %
Injected Pore Volume, %

Figure 8 Results of Analytical and Numerical Displacement Efficiencies

As mentioned before, completeness and quality of the data drives the selection of the two approaches, however,
when the results of the analytical methods were translated onto the numerical ones, and used as guidance on the
numerical optimization, a significant improvement on the results quality was observed. The numerical estimation
of each EOR method is computationally demanding as each enhanced-oil-recovery technique requires an
independent optimization to ensure the results are free of any limitations. Capillary, Gravity and Viscous forces
are balanced on a case-by-case basis to ensure reservoir conformance, local displacement efficiencies are also
optimized based on the concentration and type of EOR agent injected, and finally an optimum injection schedule
is formulated to minimize the use of the EOR agent while maintaining an optimum global recovery. Figure 9
shows the results of a systematic optimization (using the analytical results as guidance) and an independent
optimization algorithm; it was clear that the same recovery level may be reached with nearly half the iterations
when a systematic approach was used.




Figure 9 Efficiency comparisons between two optimization approaches
Independent Optimization
(42 Iterations)
Systematic Optimization
(17 Iterations)

Discussion
Screening reservoirs for their suitability, both technically and economically, for EOR processes often relies on
limited data, particularly at the early stages where the interaction of the EOR agents and the reservoir rock and
fluid is not completely understood. Recognizing and understanding these challenges and the impact of uncertainty
on the enhanced oil recovery technique selection is critical for the successful selection of the optimum EOR to suit
the field under study.
While the traditional binary-type screening selection does address some of these issues, it falls short of tackling
the dominant force balance of the reservoir and its impact on the hydrocarbon saturation distribution, potentially
8 SPE 143570
limiting the ability of the eor agent to contact the most hydrocarbon within the reservoir. The proposed new
approach aids the enhanced-oil-recovery selection incorporating reservoir rock quality distribution as well as the
hydrocarbon fluid flow in the selection, with the data-driven model, data quality is assessed and engineering
decisions are hardwired within the process such that a technical justifiable decision is reached with the existing
information. Furthermore, when dealing with limited and often poor quality data, the approach allows for access to
the collective present and past experience on EOR methods not only to validate the EOR selection but also to
provide guidance on the subsequent laboratory and pilot design (for the prove of concept phase).
A combination of both analyses provides means of a more robust conceptual enhanced-oil-recovery selection.
These analyses are substantiated with the use of analytical and/or numerical methods depending on the type
and quality of data available, such that the benefits of the selected enhanced-oil-recovery techniques maybe
quantified and compared against each other in terms of incremental sweep as well as efficiency. This paper
presents an integrated approach which incorporates all of these considerations in order to provide a data based
screening workflow, applicable to a wide range of reservoir types and data quality. Analytical and numerical
methods were used on the development of the workflow, on a data-driven basis, demonstrating the validity and
relevance of the analytical methods as either estimation of the pore level recovery efficiency or as basis of the
numerical optimization.

Conclusion
We have presented an integrated workflow data driven workflow for EOR screening based on an evaluation of
reservoir dominant forces, hydrocarbon and rock quality distribution, as well as present and past EOR experience,
empowered by the use of both analytical and numerical methods for displacement efficiency quantification. This
allows for dynamic optimization of each EOR method, where different agent properties may be incorporated. We
demonstrated their usefulness through a series of automated screening processes. The next stage is to
incorporate more physics in the models as well as adding more workflow to be able to explore the best EOR
combinations and aid on the field prove of concept design.

Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank Schlumberger for permission to publish this paper.

References
1. Ramakrishan, T.S and Wasan, D.T: The Relative Permeability Function for Two-Phase Flow in Porous Media:
Effect of Capillary Number, paper SPE 12693 presented at the 1984 SPE/DOE Symposium on Enhanced Oil
Recovery, Tulsa, OK 15-18 April.
2. Stegmeier, G.L.: Mechanisms of Entrapment and Mobilization of Oil in Porous Media in Improved Oil
Recovery by Surfactant and Polymer Flooding, D.O. Shah and Schechter Academic Press, Inc. New York (1977(
3. Taber, J.J., Kirby, J.C. and Shroeder, F.U.: Studies on the Displacement of Residual Oil: Viscosity and
Permeability Effects, AIChe Symp. Series (1973), 127, 53-56.
4. Melrose, J.C. and Bradner, C.F.: Role of Capillary Forces in Determining Microscopic Displacement
Efficiency, J. Canad. Pet. Tech. (1974) 54-62.
5. Moreno, J; Flew,S : EOR: Challenges of Translating Fine Scale Displacement into Full Field Models, paper
SPE 143568-PP presented at the 2011SPE Enhanced Oil Recovery Conference, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 19
21July.
6. Gurpinar et al,: Has the time come for EOR? Oilfield Review Magazine, Winter 2010.
7. Pope, G: The Application of Fractional Flow Theory to Enhanced Oil Recovery. Paper SPE 7660, January 29
1980.
8. Buckley, S.E. and Leverett, M.C.: Mechanism of Fluid Displacement in Sands. Trans. AIME (1942) 146, 107-
116
9. Welge, Henry J.: A Simplified Method for Computing Oil Recovery by Gas or Water Drive Trans. AIME (1952)
195 91-98
10. Craig, F.F. Jr. The Reservoir Engineering Aspects of Waterflooding Monograph Series, Society of Petroleum
Engineering, Dallas 1971
11. Patton, J.T., Coats, K.H., and Colegrove, G.T.: Prediction of Polymer Flood Performance Society of
Petroleum Engineering Journal March 1971, 72-84; Trans AIME, 251
12. Mayberry, D.J.: The Use of Fractional Flow Theory for Foam Displacement in Presence of Oil paper SPE
100964 presented at the 2006 SPE Asia Pacific Oil & Gas Conference and Exhibition, Adelaide, Australia 11-13
September
13. Guzman, R.E. et al.: The Use of Dynamic PseudoFunctions in Reservoir Simulation, paper presented at the
1994 Intl. Forum on Reservoir Simulation, Muscat, Oman, 1014 December.
14. Pickup, G.E. and Stephen, K.D.: Steady-State Scale-up Methods, paper presented at the 1998 European
Conference on the Mathematics of Oil Recovery, Peebles, Scotland, 811 September.
SPE 143570 9


15. Kumar, A., Farmer, C.L. and Jerauld, G.R. : Efficient Upscaling from Cores to Simulation Models, paper SPE
38744
16. Zhou Wan fu, Wang Xian jun, LI Jian ge, Zhang Li mei: Application of Colloid Dispersal Gel in Post Polymer
Flooding to Improve Recovery, J. Petroleum Geology & Oilfield Development In Daqing, Vol.2 (2001)
17. Wang De-min, Cheng Jie-cheng, Wu Wen-xiang: Combining Small Well Spacing with Polymer Flooding to
Improve Oil Recovery of Marginal Reservoirs, J.Special Oil & Gas Reservoirs, Vol.3 (2006)
18. Wang Qimin, JI Baofa, Sui Jun, Guo Wankui, JI Bingyu:Practice And Knowledge Of Tertiary Recovery
Technique In Daqing Oilfield, J.Petroleum Geology & Oilfield Development In Daqing, Vol.2 (2001)
19. Liu Yikun, Wang Fulin, Sui Xinguang: Theory research on EOR method of high concentration polymer
flooding, J.Oil Drilling & Production Technology, Vol.6 (2008)
20. Gong Yanfu, Wang Jinmei, Zhang Yanqing: Polymer Flooding Effect In Medium To Low Permeability
Reservoir In Daqing Oilfield, J.Petroleum Geology & Oilfield Development In Daqing, Vol.2 (2001)
21. Gao Shu-ling, et al: Improvement of Polymer Flooding in No.13 Xing Pilot Area, J.Petroleum Geology &
Oilfield Development In Daqing,Vol.6(2005)
22. Bi, Yanchang, Su Yanchang & Li Yanxing: The Use Of Hydraulic Fracturing For Improving Polymer
Flooding,J.Petroleum Geology & Oilfield Deuelopment In Daqing, Vol.3(1999)
23. Zhou Zhi Qi, Duan Qing Hua, Guo Yan Jun, Wang Lu Shan: Additional Injection Of Chromium Crosslinker
Together With Polymer Into Low Pressure Wells During Enlarged Polymer Flooding Tests At Gudao Oil Fields,
J.Oilfield Chemistry, Vol.3(2000)
24. Zhu Huaijiang: A Study On The Interaction Of Alkali And Partially Hydrolized Polyacrylamide (Hpam) In The
Chemical Flooding Processes For Eastern Portion Of Jin 16 Reservoir,Huanxiling Oilfield,Liaohe, J.Petroleum
Expoloration And Development,Vol.5(1992)
25. Li Yongtai And Wen Zhehao: Analysis Of Effect Of Polymer Flooding In Triassic Extra-Low Permeability
Reservoirs With High Salinity In Northern Shanxi Oilfield, J.Drilling & Production Technology, Vol.3 (2007)
26. Kou Yong-Qiang: Foam Flood To Enhance Oil Recovery In Block Tuo-11: Laboratory Study And Field
Practice, J.Oilfield Chemistry, Vol.2 (2005)
27. Liu Wei, Qin Xue-Cheng, Tang Jian-Xin, Li Shi, Sun Lei: Improving Recovery Via Co_2 Huff And Puff In
Complex Fault Block Oilfield In Subei Area, Journal Of Southwest Petroleum University(Science & Technology
Edition), Vol.2(2009)
28. Liu Renjing, Liu Huiqing, Li Xiusheng: Study On The Adaptability Of Nitrogen Foam Flooding For Heavy Oil
Reservoir In Shengli Oilfield, Journal Of Basic Science And Engineering, Vol.1 (2009)
29. Wang Guo-Min, Gao Jiang-Qu, Liu Kong-Zhang, Hu Xin-Ling, Fu Chun-Hua: Nitrogen Drive Eor Study For
Complex Faulted Reservoir, J.Special Oil & Gas Reservoirs, Vol.3 (2004)
30. Yang Bin, Zhang Mao-Lin, Mei Hai-Yan, Guo Ping, Peng Yu-Lin: Numerical Simulation Of Immiscible
Displacement By Water Alternating Nitrogen In Ma36 Reservoir, J.Special Oil & Gas Reservoirs, Vol.5(2002)
31. Liu Ping, Zhou Yu, Feng Pei Zhen, Zhao Zhong Xian, Li Jian Rong: Nitrogen-Gas Flooding In Extremely Low
Permeability Reservoir In Block Wei, Journal Of Jianghan Petroleum Institute,Vol.2(2001)
32. Li Shi-Kui, Zhu Yan, Zhao Yong-Sheng, Lan Yu-Bo: Evaluation Of Pilot Results Of Alkali-Surfactant-Polymer
Flooding In Daqing Oilfield, Acta Petrolei Sinica, Vol.3 (2005)
33. Sun Chun-Hui, Liu Wei-Dong, Tian Xiao-Chuan: An Alkaline/Surfactant System For Injection Well Stimulation
In Low Permeability And High Temperature Oil Reservoirs, J. Oilfield Chemistry, Vol.4 (2009)
34. Liu Yigang, Shan Jincheng, Lu Xiangguo, Zhao Lanlan: Polymer Flooding Agent Selection And Performance
Evaluation In Chengbei Oilfield, J.Offshore Oil, Vol.2 (2009)
35. Li Shu-Xia, Jiang Han-Qiao, Ye Hui-Min, Et Al: Numerical Simulation Of Surfactant Flooding At Zhen 12
Block, Journal Of The University Of Petroleum, China, Vol.5 (2003)
36. Wang Zhong-Yuan: Study On Steam Sweep In Block Qi40 Steam Drive Process, J. Special Oil & Gas
Reservoirs, Vol.4 (2007)
37. Weng Gaofu: Pilot Research On Oil Displacement By Air-Foam In Shangfa Calcareous Rock Of Baise
Oilfield, J.Oil & Gas Recovery Techinology, Vol.2 (1998)