-.

SPE 37349
The Fundamentals Can Still Solve Engineering Problems
D.C. Freeman, SPE, Marietta College

~1-.

qd~mEn@wwa,

k.

mhmwMp9gw0121wpm0nM0nat UmlS#3SPE
Cdumtxm, ohb, 2>2s

Ockhr

pmenhO,tmwt
ibnnrevi
row(s)

having a production scheduled determined by reservoir

properties as well as external forces, e.g., market demand. 1 To
take full advantage of a reservoir simulator, detailed reservoir
description is required, which in turn necessitates complex
mathematical expressions that may be difficult to understand.
ThLs causes some engineers to avoid the use of simulators and
others to misuse them.z
The most tlequent misuse of reservoir simulation is a kind of
overkill. Some twenty-five years ago it was observed that
decisions concerning reservoir behavior previously made using
only basic reservoir engineering fimdarnentals or analytical
models suddenly r uired the use of models in several
7
thousand grid blocks.
Too often, twenty-five years ago, the
most sophisticated tool available was routinely applied to
engineering problems that could lx solved by the use of the
Rmdamentals, and the same is tme today,
The credibility of resewoir simulation also enhances its
misuse. Because simulation carries such a high degree of
crexibllity and at times even awe, engineers may be !kther
compelled to apply it to support decisions made regarding
reservoir pefiorrnance even if available dat~ due to a lack of
completeness snd/or quality, do not warrant its use.
Practicing engineers are encouraged to maintain a focus on
the fimdarnentals, and this message must be communicated to
students of Petroleum Engineering With numerous small-scale
simulators available for classroom use, students become quite
The perceived accuracy of
comfoflable with their use
simulation and accompanying desire to generate computer
output to solve a problem begins to take shape.
Following are two case histories that illustrate the use of the
fundamentals to solve engineering problems. In both cacceptable solutions were obtained at a fraction of the cost of
the use of more complex tools,

hddin

was.

miipp0rw4sakadf01
pmawMim
ihrrdinn
am18kmd inan8kb8dwbmibd
mwO&m byb
dthasOayd

Eaaturi R@omlh#dinB

ty.

sPEPf0S18m

Cunmilkfc+~reAwrd

byUmaMw(s).~dUw~.s
En@mrsm2a
wsdlryllmS
ocidydFdrolmm
m..

:~wkws&mFsmi&

msubjactto
mhldahldm Pcalti&

Pdmllm

m-irsNwsuW-f~F@L-11-bE&
E-.
Eklmnk
~waion,
d~,
Cwmnwcid purpmas wWwut Um~comutdtlm

CanMbecd
*Qd=wr-d~wSoddy

SwSaklyd~m
fIX
dPWc4mnn

En@nwsb

~.~i-~w~rnwn
Ns8kiMt3mIabdmddndnwm*~
wodsi tlw&Xwmmny
natbOcO@d Th0at6bact mwt~amapwundmWdgmm
dwhmmtb
jtittmwvmspmsarw.
Wr&Lkim$m,
SPE, P.O. Eiox S33KU3,
R-ftbon,
TX 7SO&MS3,
U SA., hxO1.214452%4SS

Abstract
Significant technical advances have been made over the past
half century with regard to the kinds of tools available for
solving petroleum engineering problems.
In particular,
reservoir simulators are now widely used and provide a means
of solving problems that previously could not be handled.
The credibility of reservoir simulation is well documented.
The usefidness of a particular simulation is governed by the
completeness and quality of the input data; in cases where
either factor is inadequate resulting performance predictions
are suspect. However, because of the high degree of credibility
generally atForded simulation, it is at times employed when
simply the application of basic petroleum engineering principles
is the better choice, Practicing engineers, as well as students of
Petroleum Engineering, are encouraged to maintain a f~us on
these fimdamentals.

Introduction
The primary objeetive of Petroleum
Engineers is to
economically maximize the recovery of oil and gas from each
reservoir discovered. To accomplish th{~ the behavior of the
resetwoir under a variety of production schemes must be
examined. Basic reservoir engineering fundamentals, analytical
models, and reservoir simulators, the latter two based on the
former, are available for use.
Although its potential was first recognized some fitly years
ago, at present the use of reservoir simulation is increasing,
largely due to the proliferation ot high speed computers.
Simulation is the only means available to quantitatively
describe multiple phase fluid flow in heterogeneous reservoirs

Casa History I
A reservoir study on a California waterflood was performed to
address the following specific objectives:
1. Confirm original resavoir oil-in-place,
2.
Evaluate primary and waterflood production,
3. Assess the degree to which numerical simulation would
increase the understanding of historical resesvoir pertlmnance
and assist in planning for thre operations.

187

SPE 37349

D.C. FREEMAN

Production and injeetion data fkom 1975-1986 were utilized in

conjunction with corresponding idle well fluid level data to
construct a plot of the dit%renee in net production tlom the
rewrvoir and injected water volume versus reaewoir fluids
expansion. The resulting straight line diagnostic plot (F% 1)
yields an OOIP of 120 MMSTB, with a regression coefficient of
0983
A seeond diagnostic plot (Fig. 2) was generated excluding
data points eorresponding to 1975 and 1976. An improved fit
was obtained (regression coefficient of 0.998) and the
calculated OOIP of 153 MMSTB was in exoellent agreement
with a volumetric estimate of 157 MMSTB generated by an inhouse petrophysieal study.
Woter Znjkx Regression Sdutiom Regression analysis
assuming aquifer influx in addition to water injection yields an
OOIP of 145 MMSTB. However, there is more data scatter
(Pig. 3).
It appears, then, that the prdwtion
mechanisms active in
Zone C were solution gas drive with some aquifer
encroachment followed by waterflood.

It was recommended to evaluate the waterflood petiormance

through reservoir aiion
at the outset of the study, but afler
some discussion, the above three-step approach was accepted.

Introduction. The reservoir zone (Zone C) studied is part of a

multizone, unitized operation. The unit is a simple doublyphmging anticline elongated in a NW-SE direction there is a
lack of major faulting. Zone C consists of mid-~
charnel-fill
The
sandstones associated with a submarine Em complex.
channels are likely to be laterally continuous in a NE-SW
direetion, but discontinuous in a NW-SE directiom with the
effeetive interconneetedness of these latter channels likely to be
low, overall a high degree of Iithologic varitiility exists, with
six Zone C subzones identified.
Zone C produced 64.2 MMSTBO from February, 1923
through June, 1989, The oil rate at the time of the study
measured approximately 1000 BOPD.
Production was by
primary until 1971 when waterfkmding operations were
initiated.

Material Balance Cakulations.

SchiIthuis4 presented the
general material balance equation in 1936, a volumetric balance
equating the algebraic sum of volume changes of oil, f% gas,
water, and reservoir rock to zero (since reservoir volume
remains constant). Cra.tl and Hawkinss noted that although
sophisticated models were replacing the zero dimensional
Schihbuis equation in many applications. if fully understood it
significant
insight into reservoir
could
still provide
@ormanee.
In the early 1960s, Havkna and Odehb- published straight
line material balance calculation tee~lques.
An in-house
analytical model based on tlds work was utilized to examine
the hktorical performance of Zone C. Fluid and reservoir
properties and reservoir pressure history were required input.
Estimated initial conditions included a reservoir pressure of
1950 psia (normal hydrostatic
gradient),
a reservoir
temperature of 135 W, a solution gas-to-oil ratio of 340
scf/STB, gas and oil gmvities of 0.7 and 34 API, respectively,
and a bubble point pressure of 1500 psia. Utilizing these datA
fluid properties were generated as a tlmction of pressure
according to standard correlations. To facilitate these latter
calculations, the Gruy Reserve and Evaluation Library, a
compilation of DOS reservoir engineering applications, was
Formation and water compressibilities were also
used.
determined from standard correlations, and a connate water
saturation of 51% was derived in an in-house petrophysical
study.
Historical reservoir pressure data were unavailable.
However, a pressure history encompassing 1975-1986 was
generated tlom idle well fluid level data. An average of 26
data points/year were available for this time span.
No Wafer Influx Regmsion Solntion Initial material
balance calculations were performed assuming no aquifer intlux.

188

Reservoir Pressure Hktosy Match. The in-houw volumetric

Zone C OOIP estimate of 157 MMSTB was generated using
the Arcbie method, which yields conservative oil saturations as
shaky-sand contributions are excluded. An alternate OOIP
value of 179 MMSTB was also calculated by the more
which
optimistic
Saturation
teehnique,
Dual-Water
incorporates some shaky-sand contribution.
Historic and calculated resesvoir pressures versus time plots
were generated for both OOIP values (F=
4 and 5).
Calculated pressures were based on a an in-house modified
Tamer method. ~ can be seen a significantly improved match
is obtained when an 00iP of 157 MMSTB is assumed, again
supporting use of this estimate.
Aeeepting this latter value as OOIP, primary production from
Zone C tlom February, 1923 to August, 197 I was 38.6%
OCNP. From September, 197 i to June, 1989, an additional
2,3% OOIP was rezovered horn continued primary production
and watertlooding operations. Deeline cusve analysis indicated
1.6V. OOIP (2.5 MMSTBO) of this 2.3% OOIP recovered
could be contributed to watertlooding. The seeond phase of
the study was aimed at understanding this poor waterflood
performance.

011 Saturation At Waterlbod

Stast-Up. Average oil
saturation at waterflood kod stsut-up measured only 28/0 of
the reservoir PV. Of the remaining PV, 214 was gas saturated
as a result of the decline in resenoir pressure below the crude
oil bubble point pressure during primafy production.
Average oil saturation at flood start-up was obtained from the
followi;g equation8:
So=(

-NppiNob)(Bn/Bob)(

-SWC)

SPE 37349

THE FLINDAMENTALS CAN STILL SOLVE ENGINEERING

PROBLEMS

of the waterflood. Such an efliort was not supported by either

potential significant gains in understanding nor impact on
ultimate recoveIY.

The estimated void space corresponding to a 21%0PV gas

saturation was 83.5 MMrb
Ascanbeseen
in the
produetionkjection
history of Zone C (l@ 6), sustained
waterflood response mxurred in JurR, 1981, after the injecdon of
84.7 MMBW, confirming calculated liquid and gas saturations.
In general, reservoirs with kss than 3543% PV oil saturation
not
considered
favorable
water-flood
prospects.
are
Additionally, where water saturation exceeds oil saturation, as
it did in Zone C, it is unlikely an oil bank wil[ develop during
water!looding. The upper limit for acceptable reservoir water
saturation prior to watertlooding is 40-45/0 PV.90

Cass Htstofy II
A reservoir study was conducted to select the best waterflood
candidate from among neighboring Appalachian Basin Fields
& B, and C. Reservoir data were lacking; those data used
were extracted from literature published on the region. The
use of basic reservoir engineering principles and industryaccepted rules-of-thumb
for a scoping-type
study is
illustrated.

Analytical Modeling of Waterflood Performance. The

performance of the Zone C waterflood was evaluated through
use of the Dykstra-Parsons analytical model, a predication
method concerned primarily with reservoir stratification and
developed by analysis of data from California watertloods.s
Predicted ultimate recoveries ranged t?om 2-IO% OOIP at a
WOR of 100 STBLSTB as residual oil saturation to
watertloodlng and areal sweep efficiency were varied from 2030~o
PV and 60- 100V0,respectively.
Key input data required in addition to that already described
included geometric mean permeability (42 I red), permeability
variation factor (0.49). and relative permeability endpoints
(Fig. 7). The geometric mean permeability and permeability
variation factor were calculated in-house from core data from
ten Zone C wells, Relative permeability curves were arrived at
from tests conducted on core from two Zone C wells.
At an areal sweep efficiency of 80?! and a residual oil
saturation to waterflood of 25/0 PV, predicted ultimate
recovery from the Zone C waterflood was only 3. 2/0. This
value of waterflood residual oil saturation is typical for
sandstone reservoirs.g However, note that the residual oil
saturation for Zone C, according to the available relative
Additionally, reported
permeabilityy curves (Fig. 7), is 32~0.
waterflood residual oil saturation for 300-500 md sandstone
reservoirs typically averages 32-3 5Ag, in good agreement with
the aforementioned curves. Hence a 25% PV residual oil
saturation may be considered optimistic.
Finally, an
operational overview suggested areal sweep was incomplete,
so an areal sweep efficiency of 80?+ may be optimistic as well

Comparison of Waterflood Candidates. Large gas caps

associated with Field A and Field B minimized their waterflood
potential, The gas cap associated with Field A had an areal
extent of 406 acres and was 14.1 tl thick, wmpared to 916
acres of 17.8 tl thick oil pay. The Field B gas cap covered the
areal expanse of the field and was 8.3 R thick; the oil pay was
8.5 tt thick.
Published data did not suggest Fie{d C had an associated gas
cap,
However, the primary production mechanism was
apparently solution gas drive and gas injtxtion had taken place
to enhance recovery through pressure maintenance; the
reservoir gas saturation resulting from these activities would of
course have to be liquid-filled prior to realizing any significant
waterflood response. As shown later, this production delay did
not preclude the possibility of waterflood development.
Additionally, remaining Field C reservoir oil saturation at the
time of the study was approximately 50%, adequate for
waterflooding.

Field C Potential Waterflood Recoverable Oil. The orderly

development of Field C on 20-acre spacing would allow
water-flooding on 5-spot patterns to be relatively easily
initiated. 25 such patterns would be required to develop the
500 acre field. An alternative development scenario called for
the conversion of selected producing wells to injection such
that approximately 12 40-acre patterns would result. New
injection well costs would be less in this case but increased
injectivity would be required to achieve flood response in a
reasonable time.
The following analysis was prepared for 20-acre spacing to
minimize required water injection rates as Field C potential
injectivity was unknown.
Theoretical ultimate waterflood
recovery is unaffected by pattern size, but in practice this is
generally not true due to pay zone continuity considerations.
FIoodable pay is generally less than continuous pay. whick in
turm is less than primary production net pay. Further, as the
average distance between injectors and producers increases,
For these reasons, a preflood
floodable pay decreases.
geological continuity assessment of Field C would be critical

Conclusion. At the time of the study, estimated waterflood

recovery was 1,6/0 OOIP; predicted ultimate recovery was
only approximately double this value at best. [t is evident that
the low oil saturation value at flood start-up was primarily
responsible for this outcome. Some additional recovery was
possible by improvements in areal sweep.
Based on the results obtained by applying basic engineering
fi.mdamentals, facilitated by the use of analytical models, it was
recommended and agreed to not undertake a reservoir
simulation study of Zone C to tiu-ther assess the performance

189

more sophisticated approaches, will ofien result.

to selecting the appropriate pattern size.

It was estimated that a 20-acre pattern in Field C
watertlooded atarate of250BWPD would yield 40.1 NIBOin
approximately 5 years. Waterflood response was expected in
about 6 months with a peak pattern production rate of
Fieldwide this corresponds to
approximately 50 BOPD.
1,002,000 bbls of waterflood recoverable oil and a peak rate of
1250 BOPD.
Reservoir data used included a pay zone
thickness of 18 ft. a porosity of 7.50A, and a connate water
saturation of 20h Recovew atthe time of the study measured
32.4% of an estimated 3,612,000 bbls OOIP, reflecting the
benefit of pressure maintenance operations.
A waterflood production schedule, presented in Table 1, was
developed through application of industry-accepted waterflood
performance rules of thumb due to lack of prior waterflood
experience in Field C. Employed assumptions included:
Time to first oil response equals 0.7 PV
water injection.
2. Time to peak rate equals fillup of gas space.
3. Time at peak rate equals 7 months.
4. Peak rate is equivalent to an injection
production rate ratio of 5.
5, The decline nate atler peak production is
from 30-50% per year.
6. Water injection is equivalent to 14 BPD\fi
BPD/ac-R,
7. The gross production rate equals 80%
injection rate.
Note that the projected secondary to primary
was 0.9, matching industry experience.
1.

SPE 37349

D.C. FREEMAN

Nomenclature
B. ~ oil formation volume factor at waterflood start-up,
rbiSTB
Bob oil formation volume factor at bubble point
pressure. rbNT13
E, = reservoir fluids expansion
F= net production from the resmvoir
NOh oil-in-place at bubble point pressure, STB
N~P primary production between bubble point pressure
and reservoir pressure at waterflood start-up,
STB
OOIP -- original oil-in-place, STB
P~ = reservoir pore volume, bbls
.$W - connate water saturation, A
We =-injected water volume
W(M = water-to-oil ratio. bblhbl

of cumulative

rate to peak

Reference
1. Mattax, C.C. and Da[ton. R. L.: Reservoir Simulation, Society of

attained varies

Pctrokurrr Engineers, Richardson, TX ( 1990) 1.

-?. Odch, A. S.: R~oir

of pay, or 0.7
3,

of the water

4.

recovery ratio

5.

6.

Conclusion. A scoping study was conducted to determine the

best waterflood candidate ffom among three Appalachian Basin
fields, Fiefd C appeared to have the most potentia[, primarily
due to the apparent existence of large gas caps in Fields A and
B. Because of the lack of other than limited. published dat~
Field C production
projections
were based primarily on
industry experience in waterflooding.
Although the results
generated are far from definitive, this type of cursory solution
to an engineering problem using basic principles and history
can provide dh-eetion for more comprehensive, firture work,

7.

8.
9

Simulation...What is it?, JPT (Nov.

1969) i383.
Coats, K. H.: Use and Misuse of Reservoir Simulatiea Models,
JPT (Nov. 1969) 1391.
Schilthuis. R.J.: Active Oil wrd Reservoir Encr~, Trans.
A[ME(1936),
118,33.
Cmtl, B.C. and Hawkins. M. (Revised ~ R.E. T~)
Applied
Pctroteurn Reservoir Engineering, Prentice Hall, Errgkwocd
Cliffs. NJ(1991) 56.
Hiwlcn% D. and Odch, A. S.: The Material Bidancc as an
Equation of a Straight Line, Part 1.JPT (Aug. 1963) 896.
Havkna, D. and Odek AS.: The Material Batance as arr
Equation of a Straighl Line. Part 11-Field Cases. JPT (July
1964)815.
Smith, J.T., and Cobb, W. M.: Watcrflooding Short Course
Memzie, D. M.. Secanr@
Recowy
for Engineers Manual.
Pctrokum Engineering Edwtors, Ncmnan. OK.

10, BUCIGJ.R.: Ekrnents of WaterInjection-Engineering

Factors in
Property Selection. Kqs
to Successfid Water Injection,
Petroleum Engineering Publishing Company (I %5) 6-8.
11, W illhite. G. P.: Watertlooding. society of Petroleum Engineers.
Richardmn. TX ( 1986).

Conclusion
The case histories presented illustrate that WIC engineering
principles, even industry-accepted rules-of-thumb, may still be
used to solve engineering problems. This is not to say that the
use of more sophisticated tools, such as reservoir simulators, is
never appropriate; on the contr-aq, the proper treatment of
many engineering problems requires their use. One should first
consider, however. applying the simplest tools available when
Solutions of
presented with an engineering problem.
acceptable accuracy, likely achieved at a fraction of the cost of

I 90

SPE 37349

THE FUNDAMENTALS CAN STIU SOLVE ENGINEERING

PROBLEMS

TABLE 1
PROJECTEDWATERFLOOD PRODUCTION
SCHEDULE
Year

(B%)

Water
(BW)

Water Cut
(%)

5,800

21,000

79

16,800

56,000

77

10,000

63,000

86

5,000

68,000

93

2,500

70,000

97

Comapcda

to 7 BOPD/pattem.

Fig. 1. - Difference in net production from the reservoir end in acted water volune
versus reservoir fluids expensicm.
No water influx assunad.
001 J equals 120 M6TB.

ZE9

F
m
i
n
u
s

w
e
.

-.

DATE --07-20-1990
S10 11P - i .28E+f18
(IQ UOL - 0 .00E+80
AQ PI -El
1
I
I

/-

m.
-. /-e _#---H
8

Et

191

18

Fig. 2.

- Refined diagnostic

plo:k

(1975 and 1976 data excluded).

OOIP equals

FNSIB.

5E8

F
m
.i
n
u
s

II

1%1
.

DfiTE --:
07-28-1998
STOIIP 1.53E+E18
flQ UOL - Ei.fMIE+M!
AQPI -0
I
I
I

e
e

Et

Fi.3.
- Regression analysis
00f Pequals 145 twSm.

assuning

aquifer

influx

in addition

to water injection.

2E8

m
/

F
/

--

------ .
.

E
t

1E8
0

DATE --07-20-1990
STOIIP - 1.45E+0EI
. OQ VOL - 6.31E+09
f)QPI-1.19
I
I
I
ble/Et
192

4E7

Fi
4. - Historic
159MISIB assuned.

Fi . 5.

- Historic

175 M4STTJassumed.

and calmlated

and calculated

reservoir

reservoir

193

pressure versus

pressure

versus

tire.

OOIPof

time.

OOIPof

w..

6.

- Zn!w CprcdmLion

ad

injectmn

history,

1971

- 1989.

10T

10

Fig. 7.

-zn?crelatiw

pmdJiJiq/~d

1
0.9

0.8
0.7

0.6
0.5
0.4

0.3

0.2
WATER

0.1
o

18.7

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

WATER SATURATION (%)

194

67.7