SPE 164837

Multi-Scale Simulation of WAG Flooding in Naturally Fractured Reservoirs

Mohamed Ahmed Elfeel, Adnan Al-Dhahli, Sebastian Geiger and Marinus I.J. van Dijke; Heriot-Watt University

Copyright 2013, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the EAGE Annual Conference & Exhibition incorporating SPE Europec held in London, United Kingdom, 1013 June 2013.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper have not been
reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its
officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to
reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract
Naturally Fractured Reservoirs (NFR) contain a significant amount of remaining petroleum reserves and are now being
considered for water-alternating-gas (WAG) flooding as secondary or tertiary recovery. Reservoir simulation of WAG is very
challenging even in non-fractured reservoirs because a proper set of saturation functions that describe the underlying physics is
vitally important but associated with high uncertainty. For NFRs, another challenge is the upscaling of recovery processes,
particularly the fracture-matrix transfer during three-phase flow, to the reservoir scale using dual-porosity or dual-permeability
models.
In this work, we approach a solution to this challenge by building models at various scales, starting from pore-scale to an
intermediate scale then to the reservoir scale. We show how pore-network modelling and fine grid modelling where the
fractures and matrix are represented explicitly can be used to increase the accuracy of numerical simulations at the field-scale
in order to predict recoveries for NFR during WAG. We study the sensitivity to WAG design parameters as well as the impact
of matrix wettability on recovery. We also compare the fine grid model with an equivalent dual-porosity model.
Simulation at an intermediate scale showed at least 10% absolute change in recovery due to the choice of the empirical three-
phase relative permeability model. In fine grid simulation with physically consistent pore-network derived three-phase relative
permeability and capillary pressure, injected water and gas are predicted to displace each other, leaving oil behind, therefore
reducing WAG efficiency. For this case, empirical models over-estimate recovery by 25%. Classical dual-porosity model
over-estimates recovery during the early WAG cycles, and fails to adequately match recovery of the fine grid simulation.
Our multi-scale simulation approach identifies important factors and uncertainties when considering WAG flooding in NFR. It
provides a methodology through which WAG recovery can be estimated using available technology while preserving the pore-
scale physics for three-phase flow, which are crucial to making reliable forecasts at the reservoir scale.
Introduction
Naturally Fractured Reservoirs (NFR) comprise highly complex heterogeneities as their most conductive features, the
fractures, have the least storage capacity; and vice-versa, their least conductive features, the rock matrix, has high storage but
normally only a small contribution to flow. This renders the design of enhanced oil recovery (EOR) schemes difficult because
of early water and/or gas breakthrough and the overall recovery factor of NFR is often very low. This has been shown in
numerous case studies (e.g. Davidson and Snowdon, 1978; Denoyelle et al., 1988; van Golf-Racht, 1982; Panda et al., 2009).
Nonetheless, a significant portion of the worlds remaining petroleum resources are located in NFR, including super giant
fields in the Middle East. Hence, a detailed understanding of the recovery processes involved in extracting the hydrocarbons
from NFR using EOR techniques is the key to increase the ultimate recovery for such reservoirs.
Continuous water injection is a well established secondary recovery method which aims primarily to displace the oil and
maintain the reservoir pressure. In NFR, oil is first displaced in the fractures but held back in the rock matrix. Oil displacement
from the rock matrix by injected water is capillary dominated and hugely dependent on the wettability of the rock. Water
flooding has been implemented with various degrees of success in NFR (Brownscombe and Dyes, 1952, Thomas et al., 1987).
For unfavourable, i.e. mixed- to oil-wet, matrix wettability, however, water flooding can be ineffective. This was sometimes
shown by field experience. Secondary recovery plans were hence changed from water to gas injection (O'Neill, 1988, van
Dijkum and Walker, 1991).
2 SPE 164837

Gas has better microscopic sweep efficiency and, depending on fluid properties and reservoir conditions, can be miscible in
the liquid phase oil. Gas oil gravity drainage (GOGD) provides an important drive mechanism that can be effective
irrespective of the rock wettability preferences (e.g. Haggort, 1980). In NFR, fractures extend the exposure of the injected gas
with oil in reservoir rock, which renders GOGD more effective than in unfractured reservoirs. Hence gas injection has been
applied in many NFR (e.g. ONeill, 1988; van Dijkum and Walker, 1991; Jakobsson and Christian, 1994; Saidi, 1996).
However, as the gas mobility is very high compared to water and oil, so is the risk of by-passed oil and gravity override, which
can lead to very early gas breakthrough (e.g. Panda et al., 2009). This is particularly true for NFR. In addition, the availability
of gas may be limited to implement a recovery scheme the solely relies on gas injection.
Water-alternating-gas (WAG) flooding combines the merits of the two injection fluids described above on macroscopic and
microscopic scales while stabilizing the injection front, delaying breakthroughs, and therefore leading to increased oil recovery
compared to continuous water or gas injection. This has been demonstrated in micromodel experiments that mimic multi-phase
flow in conventional (Sohrabi et al., 2004) and fractured porous media (Dehghan et al., 2012, Er et al., 2010). In almost all
reported cases, WAG application on the field-scale was observed to improve recovery (Christensen et al., 2001, Awan et al.,
2008, Brodie et al., 2012).
Gas (continuous or as part of WAG flooding) injection represents more than 80% of EOR projects in carbonate reservoirs in
the United States (Manrique et al., 2007), where the majority of the worlds WAG injection cases are applied (Christensen et
al., 2001). In the North Sea, WAG dominates the applied EOR methods (48%), and in terms of incremental recovery has been
regarded as the most successful EOR method in the region (Awan et al., 2008). This is excluding other successful forms of
WAG EOR methods, such as the Simultaneous WAG (SWAG) and Foam Assisted WAG (FAWAG). Elsewhere, preparations
are underway to apply WAG to carbonate reservoirs in the Middle East (Kalam et al., 2011, Rawahi et al., 2012) as well as the
pre-salt carbonate reservoirs offshore Brazil (Pizarro and Branco, 2012).
In addition to continuous gas injection in water-flooded reservoirs, reservoir simulation of WAG injection is very challenging
because a representative three-phase saturation model is required to predict relative permeability and capillary pressure as
water and gas saturations increase and decrease alternately. Three-phase relative permeability and capillary pressure data is
extremely difficult to measure experimentally. Even if experimental evaluation becomes feasible, there are an infinite number
of saturation paths that can occur in the reservoir. This necessitates the use of empirical, or interpolation, models to predict
three-phase relative permeability and capillary pressure from two-phase experiments (c.f. Blunt, 2000). Empirical models are
continuously becoming more complex to account more realistically for more physical processes that occur when three phases
coexist (e.g. (Fayers and Matthews, 1984, Larsen and Skauge, 1998, Blunt, 2000). Although producing more accurate results,
these complexities cannot overcome the major deficiency of the empirical models because they are mainly based on
interpolating much simpler physics of two-phase saturation functions, and therefore often fail to predict experimentally
derived three-phase relative permeability and capillary pressure functions accurately, particularly when the rock is mixed or
oil-wet (Van Spronsen, 1982, Delshad and Pope, 1989, Oak et al., 1990, Petersen et al., 2008).
In NFR, capillary pressure and relative permeability functions have a major impact on fluid exchange between matrix blocks
and fractures. Predicting the effects of the interplay of viscous, capillary and gravity forces is challenging, as fluid flow is
viscous dominated in the fractures, while transfer between fractures and matrix blocks is dominated by capillary and gravity
forces. Since most of the oil is contained inside the matrix, capillary and gravity forces can be more important in NFR than in
conventional reservoirs. For example, capillary forces play a vital role in recovery from matrix blocks in different ways
depending on rock wettability and the phases exchanged. They help displacing oil by water spontaneous imbibition, oppose
gravity drainage in gas-oil systems or both during three phase flow in WAG flooding (Gilman and Kazemi, 1988, Gang and
Kelkar, 2008). Hence the impact of three-phase saturation functions on flow and subsequent recovery predictions can be
higher in NFR than in conventional reservoirs.
This capillary-gravity driven exchange between fractures and matrix is commonly modelled using dual-porosity or dual-
porosity dual-permeability models. Both approaches employ simplified transfer functions to model the exchange of fluids
between fractures and matrix and hence resemble a fundamental upscaling process. It is therefore likely that some important
recovery processes are lost or misrepresented in this upscaling process, leading to more uncertainty in the production forecasts.
In this paper, we use a novel pore-network model to predict three-phase relative permeability and capillary pressure functions
of arbitrary wettability to model fracture-matrix transfer processes during WAG flooding. While it is difficult, time-
consuming, and costly to obtain all hysteretic two- and three phase relative permeability and capillary pressure functions
experimentally for the same rock sample, pore-network models can generate a complete saturation function for the same pore
structure. We can hence obtain more consistent flow functions needed for WAG flooding simulation in NFR in a limited time
frame.
Furthermore, we seek to preserve small-scale recovery processes at the field-scale, as to ensure that they are well represented
in porosity models. We hence introduce a step-wise upscaling procedure (Fig. 1) to preserve these processes across various
scales. At the pore-scale, we use a recently developed pore-network model (Al-Dhahli et al., 2011; Al-Dhahli et al., 2012a; Al-
Dhahli et al., 2012b; Al-Dhahli et al., 2013) to generate two and three-phase relative permeability and capillary pressure
SPE 164837 3

functions. We then compare them with standard interpolation methods of Stone (1970, 1973) and the saturation-weighted
interpolation (SWI) of Baker (1988) using two-phase relative permeability and capillary pressure data computed with the pore-
scale model for the same rock. To show the impact of using the wrong empirical interpolation methods for three-phase flow on
predicting recovery from NFR during WAG, we apply them to simulate WAG flooding on an intermediate-scale model
containing explicit representations of matrix blocks and fractures. We then compare the results with physically consistent pore-
network model derived saturation functions applied to the same model. This includes sensitivity studies on WAG flooding
design parameters and wettability. Finally, we use the explicit fracture model to evaluate the performance of an equivalent
dual-porosity model for WAG flooding.
The paper is organized as follows: First, we introduce the pore-network model, describe the pore structure used to compute the
saturation functions, and the results of the pore-network modelling exercise. Next, we describe the intermediate-scale model
used for comparing pore-network-derived relative permeability and capillary pressure curves with the standard interpolation
methods mentioned above. Sensitivity analysis is performed on WAG design parameters on the intermediate scale. Finally, we
compare the intermediate scale model and an equivalent dual-porosity model. Concluding remarks are given at the end.

Pore Scale Intermediate Scale Reservoir Scale

Single Dual
Porosity Porosity

Figure 1. Step-wise procedural upscaling of recovery processes in naturally fractured reservoirs. Colours represent different phases
(red=gas, green=oil, blue=water).

Pore scale displacements to predict saturation functions

We use a novel three-phase pore-network model (Al-Dhahli et al., 2013) that accounts for all observed microscopic
displacement processes during three-phase flow such as multiple displacement chains, layer formation and collapse, or film
flow. The pore-network simulator has been benchmarked against published three-phase experiments for sandstones and micro-
models of different wettability (Al-Dhahli et al., 2011, Al-Dhahli et al., 2012b). The pore-network model takes realistic 3D
pore structures as input. In this paper, we use a network that is extracted from a process-based reconstruction of Berea
sandstone (ren and Bakke, 2003). Note that we use a Berea sandstone network for demonstration purposes only. Computing
relative permeabilities and capillary pressure curves for more complex pore networks representative of carbonate rocks is
readily possible as well (Al-Dhahli et al., 2012b)
To generate relative permeability and capillary pressure data, the network was initially saturated with water followed by oil
flooding to simulate a primary drainage process. Then, a series of water flooding (imbibition) simulations followed until the
network water saturation reached a predefined value at which gas flooding commenced (Fig. 2). The input pore-topology and
the flooding sequences are described in detail in (Al-Dhahli et al., 2012b).

kro krw krg

Figure 2. Saturation paths during gas flooding at different initial water saturations after water imbibition into a water-wet
sandstone. Colour legends show relative permeability values of oil, water and gas phases, respectively, from left to right.
4 SPE 164837

Two-phase relative permeability and capillary pressure data

Relative permeabilities and capillary pressures for water-oil primary drainage and imbibition, gas-oil drainage and imbibition
at connate water saturation were extracted and considered as two-phase functions, i.e. each relative permeability and capillary
pressure curve is a function of one phase saturation only. The data were smoothed to increase numerical convergence during
reservoir simulation (Fig. 3).

Three-phase relative permeability and capillary pressure data

Three-phase relative permeability and capillary pressure data were represented by two-dimensional tables where relative
permeability and capillary pressure of a respective phase are functions of two saturations. Pore-network results were also
smoothed (Fig. 4) to increase numerical convergence. We ensured that three-phase and two-phase functions are equal at the
saturation field boundaries, i.e. for two-phase systems.

1 1

RelativePermeability
RelativePermeability

0.8 0.8

0.6 0.6

0.4 0.4

0.2 0.2

0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
WaterSaturation GasSaturation
Krw-Dr Kro-Dr Krw-Im Kro-Im Kro-Dr Krg-Dr Kro-Im Krg-Im

1.20E+05 1.20E+05
CapillaryPressure(Pa)
CapillaryPressure(Pa)

1.00E+05 1.00E+05

8.00E+04 8.00E+04

6.00E+04 6.00E+04

4.00E+04 4.00E+04

2.00E+04 2.00E+04
0.00E+00 0.00E+00
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
WaterSaturation GasSaturation
PcIm PcDr PcIm PcDr

Figure 3. Water-oil and oil-gas relative permeabilities and capillary pressure data of primary drainage and imbibition. Relative
permeability data points represent the pore-network model prediction while solid and dashed lines represent smoothed reservoir
simulation input tables for drainage and imbibition, respectively. For capillary pressure, only smoothed data are shown.
SPE 164837 5

Figure 4. Three-phase relative

permeability functions (top) for oil,
water and gas, respectively. Note the
different colour scale for the water
relative permeability. Three-phase
capillary pressure data (right) for
water-oil and oil-gas. Surfaces are
fitted to pore-network model results
(represented by points) to generate
input tables for reservoir simulation.
Capillary pressure values in Pascal.

The Intermediate Scale

A fine grid model was constructed to investigate the impact of three-phase relative permeability and capillary pressure on
matrix-fracture transfer for a grid block scale of 50x50x50 ft with 27 (3x3x3) matrix blocks of 12x12x12 ft dimension each.
This resembles the classical but highly idealized sugar cube array (Fig. 5). This model allows us to bring results from the pore-
scale, in the form of relative permeability and capillary pressure tables, to the continuum scale where fractures and matrix are
present. To simulate WAG cycles, the fractures were instantly filled with water or gas when modelling recovery from the 27
matrix blocks. Matrix blocks were assigned two- and three-phase data discussed in the previous section. For the fractures, we
use linear relative permeability and assume zero capillary pressure.

Figure 5. Fine grid model used to simulate fracture-matrix multiphase transfer (green = oil, blue = water, left). Top view of the
model (top right) and cross-sectional view of the model (bottom right) showing the oil saturation in fractures and matrix.

Previous work has already investigated the impact of using different hysteresis methods to predict three-phase flow in
unfractured reservoirs (Spiteri and Juanes, 2006). The impact of using empirical interpolation methods and pore-network
results for predicting recovery from a clastic reservoir during gas flooding after a prolonged waterflood was also studied
recently (Al-Dhahli et al., 2011, Al-Dhahli et al., 2012a). Here, we advance this previous research in that we compare three-
phase relative permeability and capillary pressure curves derived from pore-network simulations with those from empirical
models for predicting oil recovery from fractured reservoirs during WAG while considering different wettability states. As
6 SPE 164837

discussed above, we used the two Stone models in addition to the saturation-weighted interpolation method to model three-
phase saturation functions empirically. Results for oil recovery from the matrix block in the intermediate-scale models (Fig. 5)
during WAG show more than 10% absolute recovery difference (Fig. 6) based only on the choice of the empirical model for
three-phase flow calculations.

1
W G W G W G
0.8

MatrixOil
Recovery 0.6
(fraction)

0.4

0.2

STONE1 STONE2 SWI Porenetwork

Figure 6. Comparison of oil recovery from matrix blocks in the intermediate-scale model predicted using three-phase saturation
functions from different empirical models and a new pore-network model. Vertical grid lines show the boundaries between
individual WAG cycles with approximately 2 years length each. (G= gas, W= water).

During the first two water-gas cycles, recovery predicted for all empirical models reasonably matches recover predictions for
the pore-network derived three-phase relative permeability and capillary pressure. This is because the total average oil
saturation is relatively high and hence close to two-phase relative permeability and capillary pressure curves. However,
empirical models predict that oil recovery continues to increase in subsequent WAG cycles whereas the pore-network derived
functions predicted no substantial increase in oil recovery after the first two flooding cycles. This is because relative
permeabilities and capillary pressure functions from the pore-network model cause water and gas phases to displace each other
but do not recover additional oil, leaving the oil phase undisplaced (Fig. 7).
SPE 164837 7

1000 0

900
100
800

700 200

600
300
CumulativeWater
CumulativeGas 500
Inflow(STB)
Outflow(MSCF) 400
400

300 500
200
600
100

0 700

Porenetworkgas STONE1gas
Porenetworkwater STONE1water

Figure 7. Cumulative gas and water flow from matrix blocks to fractures (negative: inflow to matrix blocks, positive: outflow to
fractures) for simulations using relative permeabilities and capillary pressure curves from the pore-network and Stone1 model,
respectively. Results are shown during the third WAG cycle of Fig. 6.

Simulation results shown in Fig. 7 compare the fluid exchange during the third WAG cycle. They clearly show that the
difference between oil recovery using saturation functions from the empirical and pore-network models is very pronounced.
The pore-network derived saturation functions cause a symmetrical and equivalent water-gas exchange, whereas the gas
outflow for saturation functions from the Stone1 model is not symmetrical and significantly less than the water inflow. For
saturation functions from the pore-network, the behaviour of the liquid exchange suggest that during the third WAG cycle
water inflow into the matrix displaces the free gas which had just entered the matrix during the second WAG cycle. For
saturation functions from the Stone1 model, however, water mainly displaced the oil phase in the matrix, hence predicting that
oil continues to be displaced from the matrix and hence an increase oil recovery.
WAG Flooding Sensitivities
Based on the pore-network derived saturation functions, we ran a series of sensitivities to WAG flooding design parameters,
i.e. WAG cycle duration and cycle order, as well as studying the effect of altering the matrix wettability.
Cycle Length
Often, the cycle length and WAG ratio are subject to availability of the injectant fluids and the economics involved. In
conventional reservoirs, this can have an impact on the success of the WAG flooding. For example, very short cycles prevent
full gravity segregation of the injected fluids in the reservoir, leading to reduced sweep efficiency. On the other hand, long
WAG flooding cycles in very heterogeneous media can lead to early water and/or gas breakthrough. For the non-viscous
dominated flow between matrix blocks and fractures, we observed that the overall WAG recovery exhibits little to no
sensitivity to the WAG cycle length. However, the results also show that the shorter the WAG cycle, the higher the speed of
recovery (Fig. 8). This is because most of the oil is produced during the first two water-gas cycles due to combination of water
imbibition and gas gravity drainage. During later WAG cycles, little additional oil recovery is achieved when using pore-
network model derived relative permeabilities.
Cycle Order
The order of WAG cycles also has an impact on oil recovery from the matrix (Fig. 9). At first, oil displacement by
spontaneous water imbibition occurs faster than gas-oil gravity drainage if the matrix is water-wet. Then, recovery by water
imbibition begins to diminish due to the reduction in oil phase mobility as water saturation increases at the boundaries of
matrix blocks. Gas gravity drainage displacement continues to increase and eventually outperforms recovery by spontaneous
8 SPE 164837

water imbibition. The difference in recovery profiles during gas and water injection for the first and a subsequent WAG cycles
is an indication of the competition between the phases. This is because of the following reason: When gas flooding occurs after
water flooding, the average initial water saturation is high. Hence, oil recovery is slow in the beginning because gas displaces
water first (Fig. 10). The water cycle follows the same explanation.
When WAG cycles are compared against cases of continuous water or gas injection (Fig. 11), recovery for WAG flooding was
always higher compared to continuous water injection (56.7% vs. 49.8%). However, continuous gas flooding predicts the
highest recovery at 65%. The reason for the somewhat poorer performance of WAG flooding compared to continuous gas
injection is as follows: Water imbibition during WAG flooding has an adverse impact on recovery from isolated matrix blocks
if the matrix rock is strongly water-wet: In this case, spontaneous imbibition is counter-current and creates a low oil mobility
region at the matrix-fracture interface, hence trapping oil in the centre of matrix blocks. Gas-oil gravity drainage is a co-
current displacement process that works best without the low oil mobility region created by spontaneous, counter-current water
imbibition.

0.7

0.6

0.5

MatrixOil 0.4
Recovery
(Fraction) 0.3

0.2

0.1

4years 3years 6years

Figure 8. Predicted oil recovery from matrix blocks during WAG flooding with different cycle lengths.

0.7

0.6

0.5

MatrixOil 0.4
Recovery
(Fraction) 0.3

0.2

0.1

0
01/07/2012 01/07/2015 30/06/2018 29/06/2021 28/06/2024
WGWG GWGW
Figure 9. Comparison of oil recovery from matrix blocks during two WAG flooding with different WAG cycle order.
SPE 164837 9

1400 120
1200 100
MatrixOil
1000
Recovery 80
(STB) 800
60
600
40
400
200 20

0 0

1600 400
1400 350
MatrixOil 1200 300
Recovery 1000 250
(STB) 800 200
600 150
400 100
200 50
0 0

Figure 10. Comparison of recovery profiles of first (left) and subsequent (right) WAG cycles during water imbibition (top) and gas
gravity drainage (bottom).

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4
MatrixOilRecovery
(Fraction)
0.3

0.2

0.1

ContinuousGasInjection ContinuousWaterInjection

Figure 11. Comparison of oil recovery as a result of continuous water and gas injection. Also shown for comparison in gray are the
recovery profiles from the different WAG flooding cases depicted in Fig. 8.

Impact of Matrix Wettability

The rock matrix wettability has a significant impact on recovery from NFR. For example, by performing experimental and
numerical analysis, Haugen et al. (2008) showed how the presence of fractures dramatically reduces recovery from a limestone
block when its wettability is changed from strongly water-wet to slightly oil-wet rock. Pore-network modelling can predict
10 SPE 164837

three-phase relative permeability and capillary pressure at various degrees of wettability for the same pore structure by
changing contact angles (Al-Dhahli et al., 2011; Al-Dhahli et al., 2012a; Al-Dhahli et al., 2012b; Al-Dhahli et al., 2013). This
allows the fast quantification of uncertainty and sensitivity of recovery processes due to wettability differences.
To study the impact of wettability, three-phase relative permeability functions, capillary pressures, and saturation paths were
recomputed but now for different contact angles representing an oil-wet rock. Fig. 12 and Fig. 13 show the resulting relative
permeability diagrams and saturation.

kro krw krg

Figure 12. Saturation paths during gas flooding at different initial water saturation after water injection into an oil-wet sandstone.
Colour legends show relative permeability values of oil, water and gas phases, respectively (from left to right). See Fig. 2 for
comparison with the water-wet case.

Figure 13. Three-phase relative

permeability functions for oil, water and
gas phases respectively (top) and capillary
pressure functions of oil-water and gas-oil
(right) in an oil-wet pore-network.
Capillary pressure values are given in
Pascal. Note that water-oil capillary
pressure is negative. See Fig. 4 for
comparison with the water-wet case.
Surfaces are fitted to pore-network model
results (represented by points) to generate
input tables for reservoir simulation.

As expected, water-oil capillary pressure values are negative in the oil-wet case. This dramatically changes the efficiency of
water injection for recovering oil from matrix blocks: Capillary forces act against water entering the matrix blocks. However,
gravity forces, due to the density difference between the oil and water phases, enable the water phase to start displacing oil in
matrix blocks in the bottom-up direction. Recovery as a result of water displacement by gravity forces alone in oil-wet
reservoirs is significantly less than that of the combined gravity and capillary forces in water-wet reservoirs (Fig. 14). Only
15.2% are recovered in the oil-wet case compared to 42.8% in the water-wet case. However, water gravity displacement in an
oil-wet reservoir is a co-current displacement and does not lead to the trapping of oil inside blocks by the low-oil mobility
region (Fig. 15); this renders subsequent gas gravity drainage displacement more effective compared to a water-wet reservoir
(Fig. 14).
SPE 164837 11

0.6
W G
0.5

0.4
MatrixOil
Recovery 0.3
(Fraction)
0.2

0.1

Waterwet Oilwet

Figure 14. Comparison of oil recovery from matrix blocks of different wettabilities during water injection followed by gas injection.
(G= gas, W= water). Saturation functions where computed using a pore-network model (see Figs. 4 and 13).

Figure 15. Cross-sectional view of water saturation distribution after the first water injection cycle in Fig. 14 for a water-wet (left)
and oil-wet (right) rock matrix.

Equivalent Dual-Porosity Model

The analysis performed above on the fine gridded intermediate scale helped us to understand the importance of three-phase
saturation functions for predicting three-phase fracture-matrix fluid transfer during WAG accurately. However, it is not
possible to represent all matrix blocks in NFR explicitly in a reservoir simulation due to numerical costs; nor can we actually
obtain such information with the current technology. Also, the above geometry of the fractures and matrix blocks is highly
idealized and reservoir simulators would need unstructured gridding techniques to represent fracture more correctly. Hence,
dual-porosity models are still used in standard industry workflows to simulate recovery from NFR.
In dual-porosity models, each grid block may contain numerous matrix blocks and recovery processes are approximated using
transfer functions between the fracture and matrix domains. The classical dual-porosity model of Warren and Root (1963) has
long been extended to account for multiphase flow (Kazemi et al., 1976, Thomas et al., 1983, Sonier et al., 1988, Gilman and
Kazemi, 1988, Quandalle and Sabathier, 1989, Lu et al., 2008).
When viscous forces in the matrix can be neglected, for example for regions away from wells, a general transfer function for
three-phase flow, describing the transfer of water ( ) and gas ( ) can be written as (Ramirez et al., 2009):
12 SPE 164837

/ /
,

/ /
,

and
,
where

, ,

and

, .

The above equations show the importance of three phase relative permeability and capillary pressure functions when
computing the transfer rate between the fracture and the matrix blocks. The three phases compete with each other and
therefore influence oil recovery. In cases where - , oil recovery is close to zero, as we observed in our fine grid
simulation results (Fig. 7).
The equations also identify the dual-porosity parameters used to estimate the fastness of recovery which is determined by
matrix block geometries. These are the imbibition shape factor ( ), gravity drainage shape factor ( ) and matrix block hight
( ). Furthermore, capillary pressure should be pseudouised to properly match fine grid simulation (Gurpinar and Kossack,
2000), this is also described in (AbuShaikha and Gosselin, 2008). Modification parameters applied to relative permeability of
water and/or gas phases also exist to help matching fine grid recovery within an engineering accuracy (Gurpinar and Kossack,
2000) although without any physical background. To increase simulation accuracy, matrix blocks can be subdivided into
concentric sub-regions, each storing its own saturation values, which is known as multiple interacting continua or MINC
method (Pruess, 1985, Rubin, 2007).
The capillary pressure pseudoisation is currently implemented in commercial reservoir simulators assuming gas-oil capillary
pressure is a function of its own saturation only and therefore is not suitable to be used with three-phase capillary pressure.
Hence, the dual-porosity model significantly over-estimates oil recovery during the first WAG cycles (up to 20% absolute
difference). Overall it shows a similar behaviour to single porosity simulation although it still over-predicts recovery by 8%
absolute (Fig. 16).

0.8

0.6

MatrixOil
Recovery 0.4
(Fraction)

0.2

SinglePorosity DualPorosity

Figure 16. Comparison of oil recovery in a single porosity (Fig. 6) and an equivalent dual-porosity model.

During the first two WAG cycles, matrix saturation distribution is non-uniform in the matrix (see the water-wet case in Fig.
SPE 164837 13

14). This creates a low-oil mobility region at the fracture-matrix interface. Although the oil saturation, and therefore mobility,
can be higher at the centre of the matrix block, its recovery is still controlled by the low oil-mobility-region. This affects the
speed of recovery during the early flooding cycles. In dual-porosity models, the saturation in the matrix is assumed to be
uniform unless a MINC method is applied. In reality, dual-porosity models are much more uncertain. One key parameter is the
shape factor ( ). The classical of Warren and Root (1963) has been developed under the assumption of pseudo-steady state
pressure boundary conditions. Hence, speed of recovery does not change with time. This is clearly contrary to decreasing
speed of oil recovery observed in the single porosity simulation. Even if is arbitrarily changed to history match the single
porosity oil recovery, it can only increase or decrease the overall speed of recovery but not the shape of the recovery curve,
that is the changes in recovery speed over time. In addition, it is likely that at the scale of a typical reservoir simulation grid-
block matrix blocks have various sizes and each matrix block has different permeabilities and, possibly, wettabilities. In such
cases, the speed of recovery can also changes with time as different matrix blocks at different size (and permeability) are
drained at different rates. Classical transfer functions are inadequate to describe the recovery process. Hence, current research
interests include the modification of transfer functions to account for variable speed of recovery (Sarma and Aziz, 2006,
Donato et al., 2007, Rangel-German et al., 2010, Maier et al., 2013, Geiger et al., in press).

Discussion and Concluding Remarks

Viscous flow effects of WAG flooding are reasonably well understood: Water and gas reduce each others mobility. This
delays breakthroughs and improves sweep efficiency. In NFR, especially away from wells, viscous forces have little to no
influence on recovery from isolated matrix blocks and flow between fracture and matrix is dominated by capillary and
gravitational forces. In this work, we examined the capillary and gravity dominated flow between matrix blocks and fractures
during WAG flooding using models of multiple scales. Three-phase relative permeability and capillary pressure data were
derived from a state-of-the-art pore-network model.
The application of three-phase saturation functions showed that the empirical interpolation methods to estimate three-phase
saturation functions, which are commonly used in standard industry simulation practice, over-estimated oil recovery during
late WAG cycles by an absolute difference of 25% compared to physically consistent and pore-network derived relative
permeability and capillary pressure functions, (Fig. 6). We conjecture that the reason for such a tremendous difference is the
more accurate representation of intra-pore displacement processes in relative permeability and capillary pressure functions that
are computed from pore-network simulation. A sensitivity analysis revealed that water imbibition during the water-injection
cycles in WAG flooding creates a region of low-oil mobility around matrix blocks. At such low oil saturations, empirical
interpolation models over-estimate relative permeability, allowing for more oil to be released from the centre of matrix blocks.
The sensitivity analysis also showed that recovery speeds up with decreasing length of WAG flooding cycles, but final
recovery always converged to a similar value (Fig. 8). Final recoveries were also similar for cases where the order of the WAG
cycles was changed (Fig. 9). Surprisingly, continuous gas injection in water-wet rocks yielded higher oil recoveries compared
to WAG flooding, whereas continuous water injection recovered less oil compared to WAG. Hence we hence conclude that
water imbibition has an adverse impact on recovery from matrix blocks if gas is available for injection. This is due to the low-
oil mobility region at the fracture-matrix interface described above.
To simulate an oil-wet rock matrix, we changed contact angles in the network model to recompute the three-phase relative
permeability and capillary pressure functions. The difference in absolute recovery during continuous water injection in an oil-
wet and water-wet rock is 28% but once gas injection commences during WAG, recovery for both wettability cases reaches
similar values because water-oil displacement in the oil-wet case is co-current (Figs. 14 and 15).
The equivalent dual-porosity equivalent shows broadly similar recovery behaviour compared to a single porosity model where
fractures and matrix are represented explicitly. This is particularly true for late WAG cycles as saturation profiles are more
homogeneous although the dual-porosity model still over-predicts recovery by 8% compared to the single-porosity model.
During early WAG cycles, the dual-porosity over-predicts recovery up to 20%. We assume this is due to the lack of three-
phase capillary pressure pseudoisation in dual-porosity model.
The results we obtained cannot be used to evaluate WAG flooding success in general, as viscous displacement is not taken into
consideration in our work. A likely question is hence if heterogeneity in the viscous flow field, arising from non-uniform
fracture networks, will dominate recovery or if uncertainty in the fracture-matrix transfer prevails and controls the overall
recovery behaviour during WAG.

Acknowledgement
MAEs PhD project is supported by an Ali Danesh Scholarship. This support is highly appreciated. We would like to thank
Schlumberger Information Solution for providing access to ECLIPSE.
14 SPE 164837

References
ABUSHAIKHA, A. S. & GOSSELIN, O. R. 2008. Matrix-Fracture Transfer Function in Dual-Medium Flow Simulation:
Review, Comparison, and Validation - SPE-113890-MS. Europec/EAGE Conference and Exhibition. Rome, Italy:
Society of Petroleum Engineers.
AL-DHAHLI, A., DIJKE, M. I. J. V. & GEIGER, S. 2012a. Pore-to-reservoir modelling of three-phase flow processes in
mixed-wet carbonate reservoirs. 13th European Conference on the Mathematics of Oil Recovery. Biarritz, France:
European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers.
AL-DHAHLI, A., GEIGER, S. & DIJKE, M. I. J. V. 2011. Three-Phase Pore-Network Modelling for Mixed-Wet Carbonate
Reservoirs - SPE-147991-MS. SPE Reservoir Characterisation and Simulation Conference and Exhibition. Abu
Dhabi, UAE: Society of Petroleum Engineers.
AL-DHAHLI, A., GEIGER, S. & DIJKE, M. I. J. V. 2012b. Accurate Modelling of Pore-scale Film and Layer Flow for
Three-phase EOR in Carbonate Rocks with Arbitrary Wettability - SPE-154019-MS. SPE Improved Oil Recovery
Symposium. Tulsa, Oklahoma, USA: Society of Petroleum Engineers.
AL-DHAHLI, A., GEIGER, S. & DIJKE, M. I. J. V. 2013. Three-phase pore-network modelling for reservoirs with arbitrary
wettability. SPE Journal, in press.
AWAN, A. R., TEIGLAND, R. & KLEPPE, J. 2008. A survey of North Sea enhanced-oil-recovery projects initiated during
the years 1975 to 2005. SPE RESERVOIR EVALUATION & ENGINEERING, 11, 497-512.
BAKER, L. E. 1988. Three-Phase Relative Permeability Correlations - SPE 17369. SPE Enhanced Oil Recovery Symposium.
Tulsa, Oklahoma: 1988.
BLUNT, M. J. 2000. An empirical model for three-phase relative permeability. SPE Journal, 5, 435-445.
BRODIE, J. A., JHAVERI, B. S., MOULDS, T. P. & HETLAND, S. M. 2012. Review Of Gas Injection Projects In BP - SPE
154008. SPE Improved Oil Recovery Symposium. Tulsa, Oklahoma, USA: Society of Petroleum Engineers.
BROWNSCOMBE, E. R. & DYES, A. B. 1952. Water-imbibition Displacement-A Possibility for the Spraberry-API-52-383.
American Petroleum Institute.
CHRISTENSEN, J. R., STENBY, E. H. & SKAUGE, A. 2001. Review of WAG Field Experience. SPE RESERVOIR
EVALUATION & ENGINEERING, 4, 97-106.
DAVIDSON, D. A. & SNOWDON, D. M. 1978. Beaver River Middle Devonian Carbonate: Performance Review of a High-
Relief, Fractured Gas Reservoir With Water Influx. SPE Journal of Petroleum Technology, 30, 1672-1678.
DEHGHAN, A., GHORBANIZADEH, S. & AYATOLLAHI, S. 2012. Investigating the Fracture Network Effects on Sweep
Efficiency during WAG Injection Process. Transport in Porous Media, 93, 577.
DELSHAD, M. & POPE, G. A. 1989. Comparison of the three-phase oil relative permeability models. Transport in Porous
Media, 4, 59-83.
DENOYELLE, L., BARDON, C. P. & COUVE DE MURVILLE, E. 1988. Interpretation of a CO2/N2 Injection Field Test in
a Moderately Fractured Carbonate Reservoir. SPE Reservoir Engineering, 3, 220-226.
DONATO, G. D., LU, H., TAVASSOLI, Z. & BLUNT, M. J. 2007. Multirate-Transfer Dual-Porosity Modeling of Gravity
Drainage and Imbibition. SPE Journal, 12, pp. 77-88.
ER, V., BABADAGLI, T. & XU, Z. H. 2010. Pore-Scale Investigation of the Matrix-Fracture Interaction During CO2
Injection in Naturally Fractured Oil Reservoirs. ENERGY & FUELS, 24, 1421-1430.
FAYERS, F. J. & MATTHEWS, J. D. 1984. Evaluation of normalized Stone's methods for estimating three-phase relative
permeabilities. Society of Petroleum Engineers Journal, 24, 224-232.
GANG, T. & KELKAR, M. 2008. History Matching for Determination of Fracture Permeability and Capillary Pressure. SPE
RESERVOIR EVALUATION & ENGINEERING, 11, 813-822.
GEIGER, S., DENTZ, M. & NEUWEILER, I. in press. A Novel Multirate Dual-Porosity Model for Improved Simulation of
Fractured and Multiporosity Reservoirs. SPE Journal.
GILMAN, J. R. & KAZEMI, H. 1988. Improved Calculations for Viscous and Gravity Displacement in Matrix Blocks in
Dual-Porosity Simulators (includes associated papers 17851, 17921, 18017, 18018, 18939, 19038, 19361 and 20174
). Journal of Petroleum Technology, 40, 60-70.
GURPINAR, O. M. & KOSSACK, C. A. 2000. Realistic Numerical Models for Fractured Reservoirs. SPE Journal, 5, 485-
491.
HAGOORT, J. 1980. Oil Recovery by Gravity Drainage. Society of Petroleum Engineers Journal, 20, 139-150.
HAUGEN, A., FERNO, M. A. & GRAUE, A. 2008. Numerical Simulation and Sensitivity Analysis of In-Situ Fluid Flow in
MRI Laboratory Waterfloods of Fractured Carbonate Rocks at Different Wettabilities - SPE-116145-MS. SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Denver, Colorado, USA: Society of Petroleum Engineers.
KALAM, M. Z., NEGAHBAN, S., AL-RAWAHI, A. S. & HOSANI, I. A. 2011. Miscible Gas Injection Tests in Carbonates
and its impact on Field Development - SPE 148374. SPE Reservoir Characterisation and Simulation Conference and
Exhibition. Abu Dhabi, UAE: Society of Petroleum Engineers.
KAZEMI, H., MERRILL, L. S., PORTERFIELD, J. L. & ZEMAN, P. R. 1976. Numerical simulation, of water-oil flow in
naturally fractured reservoirs. SPEJ.
LARSEN, J. A. & SKAUGE, A. 1998. Methodology for Numerical Simulation With Cycle-Dependent Relative
SPE 164837 15

Permeabilities. SPE JOURNAL -RICHARDSON-, 3, 163-173.

LU, H., DONATO, G. D. & BLUNT, M. J. 2008. General Transfer Functions for Multiphase Flow in Fractured Reservoirs.
SPE Journal, 13, pp. 289-297.
MAIER, C., SCHMID, K. S., ELFEEL, M. A. & GEIGER, S. 2013. Multi-Rate Mass-Transfer Dual-Porosity Modeling Using
the Exact Analytical Solution for Spontaneous Imbibition - SPE 164926. SPE Europec/EAGE Annual Conference.
London, United Kingdom: Society of Petroleum Engineers.
MANRIQUE, E. J., MUCI, V. E. & GURFINKEL, M. E. 2007. EOR field experiences in carbonate reservoirs in the United
States. SPE RESERVOIR EVALUATION & ENGINEERING, 10, 667-686.
O'NEILL, N. 1988. Fahud Field Review: A Switch From Water to Gas Injection. SPE Journal of Petroleum Technology, 40,
609-618.
OAK, M., BAKER, L. & THOMAS, D. 1990. Three-phase relative permeability of Berea sandstone. Journal of Petroleum
Technology, 42, 1054-1061.
REN, P. E. & BAKKE, S. 2003. Reconstruction of Berea sandstone and pore-scale modelling of wettability effects.
JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING, 39, 177-199.
PANDA, M. N., AMBROSE, J. G., BEUHLER, G. & MCGUIRE, P. L. 2009. Optimized EOR Design for the Eileen West
End Area, Greater Prudhoe Bay. SPE RESERVOIR EVALUATION & ENGINEERING, 12, 25-32.
PETERSEN, E., LOHNE, A., VATNE, K. O., HELLAND, J. O., VIRNOVSKY, G. & REN, P. E. Relative Permeabilities
for Two-and Three Phase Flow Processes Relevant to the Depressurization of the Statfjord Field. International
Symposium of the Society of Core Analysts. Abu Dhabi, UAE, 2008.
PIZARRO, J. O. D. S. & BRANCO, C. C. M. 2012. Challenges in Implementing an EOR Project in the Pre-Salt Province in
Deep Offshore Brasil - SPE 155665. SPE EOR Conference at Oil and Gas West Asia. Muscat, Oman: Society of
Petroleum Engineers.
PRUESS, K. 1985. A Practical Method for Modeling Fluid and Heat Flow in Fractured Porous Media. Society of Petroleum
Engineers Journal, 25, 14-26.
QUANDALLE, P. & SABATHIER, J. C. 1989. Typical Features of a Multipurpose Reservoir Simulator. SPE Reservoir
Engineering, 4, 475-480.
RAMIREZ, B., KAZEMI, H., AL-KOBAISI, M., OZKAN, E. & ATAN, S. 2009. A Critical Review for Proper Use of
Water/Oil/Gas Transfer Functions in Dual-Porosity Naturally Fractured Reservoirs: Part I. SPE RESERVOIR
EVALUATION & ENGINEERING, 12, pp. 200-210.
RANGEL-GERMAN, E. R., KOVSCEK, A. R. & AKIN, S. 2010. Time-dependent shape factors for uniform and non-uniform
pressure boundary conditions. Transport in Porous Media, 83, 591-601.
RAWAHI, A., HAFEZ, H. H., AL-YAFEI, A., GHORI, S. G., PUTNEY, K. & MATTHEWS, T. R. 2012. Maximize the
Ultimate Recovery by Designing & Optimizing a CO2 Miscible Gas Injection Pilot in Giant Carbonate Oil Reservoir,
Abu Dhabi -SPE-162277-MS. Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Conference and Exhibition. Abu Dhabi, UAE:
Society of Petroleum Engineers.
RUBIN, B. 2007. Simulating Gravity Drainage and Reinfiltration With a Subdomain-Dual-Permeability Hybrid Fracture
Model - SPE 106191. SPE Reservoir Simulation Symposium. Houston, Texas, U.S.A.: Society of Petroleum
Engineers.
SARMA, P. & AZIZ, K. 2006. New Transfer Functions for Simulation of Naturally Fractured Reservoirs with Dual-Porosity
Models. SPE Journal, 11, pp. 328-340.
SOHRABI, M., TEHRANI, D. H., DANESH, A. & HENDERSON, G. D. 2004. Visualization of oil recovery by water-
alternating-gas injection using high-pressure micromodels. SPE Journal, 9, 290-301.
SONIER, F., SOUILLARD, P. & BLASKOVICH, F. T. 1988. Numerical Simulation of Naturally Fractured Reservoirs. SPE
Reservoir Engineering, 3, 1114-1122.
SPITERI, E. J. & JUANES, R. 2006. Impact of relative permeability hysteresis on the numerical simulation of WAG injection.
JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING, 50, 115-139.
STONE, H. 1970. Probability model for estimating three-phase relative permeability. Journal of Petroleum Technology, 22,
214-218.
STONE, H. L. 1973. Estimation of Three-Phase Relative Permeability and Residual Oil Data. JOURNAL OF CANADIAN
PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY, 12, 53.
THOMAS, L. K., DIXON, T. N., EVANS, C. E. & VIENOT, M. E. 1987. Ekofisk Waterflood Pilot. SPE Journal of
Petroleum Technology, 39, 221-232.
THOMAS, L. K., DIXON, T. N. & PIERSON, R. G. 1983. Fractured Reservoir Simulation. Society of Petroleum Engineers
Journal, 23, 42-54.
VAN DIJKUM, C. E. & WALKER, T. 1991. Fractured Reservoir Simulation and Field Development, Natih Field, Oman -
SPE 22917. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Dallas, Texas: 1991 Copyright 1991, Society of
Petroleum Engineers, Inc.
VAN GOLF-RACHT, T. D. 1982. Fundamentals of fractured reservoir engineering, Elsevier Science.
VAN SPRONSEN, E. 1982. Three-phase relative permeability measurements using the centrifuge method. K/Shell Explor en
Prod Lab, Neth.
16 SPE 164837

WARREN, J. E. & ROOT, P. J. 1963. The Behavior of Naturally Fractured Reservoirs.