Institute of Reservoir Studies

Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited

Chandkheda, Ahmedabad, Gujarat

Summer Training Project Report on

“CONCEPTS OF RESERVOIR MANAGEMENT”

In partial fulfilment of the requirements

for the award of the degree of

BACHELOR OF TECHNOLOGY
In

APPLIED PETROLEUM ENGINEERING

with specialization in
GAS ENGINEERING.

By

CHERUKUPALLI V L NARASIMHA SARMA,

(500044685, R820215038),
3rd Year B.Tech (Applied Petroleum Engineering with Specialization in Gas);

AMAN VAIDHYA,
(500044687, R820215017),
3rd Year B.Tech (Applied Petroleum Engineering with Specialization in Gas).

Under the supervision of

Mr. K. BHASKAR,
Chief Manager (Reservoir),
I/c, Rajahundry & Eastern Offshore Assets Development Group,
Institute of Reservoir Studies, Ahmedabad,
Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd
 Institute of Reservoir Studies
Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited
Chandkheda, Ahmedabad, Gujarat

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

It gives us great pleasure to represent this report titled “Concepts of Reservoir Management”. It is very
fortunate to work on an exciting project with Rajahmundry-EO Assets Development Group. We express our
sincere gratitude to Shri O.N. Gyani, GM-Head, IRS, ONGC, Ahmedabad for granting us permission and
providing necessary facilities towards completion of this project.
Our special thanks to Mrs. Padmaja Mattey, DGM (Reservoir)-Head Labs and training coordinator at IRS,
ONGC, Ahmedabad for meticulously managing every single requirement of our training.
We are deeply obliged to our mentor, Mr. K. Bhaskar, Chief Manager (Reservoir), Incharge-
Rajahmundry and Eastern Offshore Assets Development Group for his able guidance, motivation and
moral support thought this work despite his busy working schedule.
We express our sincere gratitude towards Mr. Mohit Kumar, EE (Reservoir) for the guidance, supervision
and support thought our training. With his patience and openness, he created an enjoyable working
environment. He created and nurtured our curiosity to learn and cooperated to the best of his abilities for the
completion of this internship.
We also want to express our sincere thanks to Mrs. Karishma Kiran, EE (Reservoir) & Ms. Priyanka
Panigrahi, AEE (Reservoir) for their valuable suggestions.
We are also thankful to Dr. P.Vijay, HOD (Chemical Engineering Dept.), UPES for permitting us to do
this summer internship at IRS, ONGC, Chandkheda, Ahmedabad. We also thank our faculty members for
constant support and encouragement to have this project.

Date: 26-6-2018 NARASIMHA SARMA,

AMAN VAIDHYA.
 Institute of Reservoir Studies
Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited
Chandkheda, Ahmedabad, Gujarat

UNDERTAKING

I, NARASIMHA SARMA, student of 3rd Year B.Tech (Applied Petroleum Engineering with specialization
in Gas) at School of Engineering, University of Petroleum Studies, Dehradun, have successfully completed
my project work at Institute of Reservoir Studies, Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited, Ahmedabad. I
am submitting this project report entitled “CONCEPTS OF RESERVOIR MANAGEMENT” after
successful completion of my Summer Training from May 28, 2018 to June 29, 2018.

I Undertake the Following:

 That I shall not disclose any confidential information (proprietary information) received from IRS, ONGC
to any other person, company, organization and firm. As I know that confidential information cannot be
sold, exchanged, published, or disclosed to anybody by any way including photocopies or reproduced
materials etc. without prior written consent of IRS, ONGC.
 That I shall keep confidentiality to the highest extent in order to avoid the disclosure or the use of
information received during internship.
 That I will not publish/use data provided by IRS, ONGC anywhere in India or outside India.
 That if I am proved to be guilty of the disclosure of the confidential or proprietary information, IRS, ONGC
has the sole discretionary right for the reimbursement of damages born due to the disclosure.

Date: 26-6-2018. NARASIMHA SARMA

Place: IRS, ONGC, Chandkheda, Ahmedabad.
 Institute of Reservoir Studies
Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited
Chandkheda, Ahmedabad, Gujarat

UNDERTAKING

I, AMAN VAIDHYA student of 3rd Year B.Tech (Applied Petroleum Engineering with specialization in Gas)
at School of Engineering, University of Petroleum Studies, Dehradun, have successfully completed my
project work at Institute of Reservoir Studies, Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited, Ahmedabad. I am
submitting this project report entitled “CONCEPTS OF RESERVOIR MANAGEMENT” after successful
completion of my Summer Training from May 28, 2018 to June 29, 2018.

I Undertake the Following:

 That I shall not disclose any confidential information (proprietary information) received from IRS, ONGC
to any other person, company, organization and firm. As I know that confidential information cannot be
sold, exchanged, published, or disclosed to anybody by any way including photocopies or reproduced
materials etc. without prior written consent of IRS, ONGC.
 That I shall keep confidentiality to the highest extent in order to avoid the disclosure or the use of
information received during the internship.
 That I will not publish/use data provided by IRS, ONGC anywhere in India or outside India.
 That if I am proved to be guilty of the disclosure of the confidential or proprietary information, IRS, ONGC
has the sole discretionary right for the reimbursement of damages born due to the disclosure.

Date: 26-6-2018.
AMAN VAIDHYA
Place: IRS, ONGC, Chandkheda, Ahmedabad.
 Institute of Reservoir Studies
Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited
Chandkheda, Ahmedabad, Gujarat

CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that Mr. CHERUKUPALLI V L NARASIMHA SARMA, a student of 3rd year of
B.Tech - Applied Petroleum Engineering with specialization in Gas at School of Engineering, University of
Petroleum and Energy Studies, Dehradun, has successfully completed his Summer Internship and Project
work at Institute of Reservoir Studies, Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited, Chandkheda, Ahmedabad.
He is submitting this project report entitled “CONCEPTS OF RESERVOIR MANAGEMENT” after
the successful completion of his Summer Training from May 28, 2018 to June 29, 2018.

Project Guide Training Coordinator

Mr. K. BHASKAR PADMAJA MATTEY,

Chief Manager (Reservoir), DGM (Reservoir) and Head Labs,
IRS – ONGC. IRS – ONGC.
 Institute of Reservoir Studies
Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited
Chandkheda, Ahmedabad, Gujarat

CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that Mr. AMAN VAIDHYA, a student of 3rd year of B.Tech - Applied Petroleum
Engineering with specialization in Gas at School of Engineering, University of Petroleum and Energy
Studies, Dehradun, has successfully completed his Summer Internship and Project work at Institute of
Reservoir Studies, Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited, Chandkheda, Ahmedabad. He is submitting this
project report entitled “CONCEPTS OF RESERVOIR MANAGEMENT” after the successful
completion of his Summer Training from May 28, 2018 to June 29, 2018.

Project Guide Training Coordinator

Mr. K. BHASKAR PADMAJA MATTEY,

Chief Manager (Reservoir), DGM (Reservoir) and Head Labs,
IRS – ONGC. IRS – ONGC.
 INDEX

Chapter Title Page

Number Number
1 INTRODUCTION 1
2 SYSTEMATIC AND SUSTAINED PRACTICE OF DATA COLLECTION 2
Data Acquisition 5
Data Processing 9
 Decline curve analysis for performance prediction of well-A of sand-XY 14
 Decline curve analysis for performance prediction of sand-XY of field- 15
AB
 Measurement of AOFP using isochronal test for well-PQ 17
3 CONSERVATION OF RESERVOIR ENERGY 26
Excessive Gas & Water Production 26
 Diagnostic Plots 26
 Production history diagnostic plots 28
 Decline Curve Diagnostic Plot 28
Excessive Pressure Drop/Drawdown Control 29
Latest Technologies for Maintaining Reservoir Pressure 30
4 EARLY IMPLEMENTATION OF SIMPLE, PROVEN STRATEGIES 31
Immiscible Displacement 31
 Buckley Leverett Frontal Advance Theory 31
 Welge Extension for Buckley Leverett Theory 34
 Application of Buckley Leverett theory for field-ABCD 34
Water Flooding 37
 Voidage Replacement Ratio 38
 Plots of IVC & CVC for a field - ABC with polymer injection 38
Gas Injection 42
5 APPLICATION OF EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES FOR IMPROVED 44
HYDROCARBON RECOVERY
Enhanced Oil Recovery 44
Miscible gas injection process 44
 Nitrogen/Flue Gas Injection 44
 Hydrocarbon Miscible Gas Flooding 45
 Carbon dioxide Gas Flooding 45
Chemical processes 46
 Polymer/Surfactant Flooding 46
 Alkali/Surfactant/Polymer Flooding 47
 Polymer Flooding
47
 Thermal processes 48
 Cyclic Steam Stimulation (CSS) 48
 Steam Drive 48
 Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage
 Water Alternating Steam Process
49
 In-Situ Combustion (ISC)/High Pressure Air Injection (HPAI) 49
50
6 LONG TERM RETENTION OF STAFF IN MULTI-DISCIPLINARY 51
TEAM
7 REFERENCES 52
 CHAPTER – 1
INTRODUCTION
Reservoir Management relies on the use of human, technological and financial resources to capitalize on
profits from a reservoir by optimizing the hydrocarbon recovery while minimizing both the capital investments
and the operating costs.
Main objectives of the reservoir management activities can be summarized as follows:

 Decreasing of the risk

 Increasing of the oil and gas production
 Increasing of the oil and gas reserves
 Minimization of the capital expenditures
 Minimization of the operating costs
 Maximizing of the final hydrocarbon recovery

Reservoir management must be considered as a dynamic process that aims at identifying the uncertainties
affecting the future field behaviour, and tries to reduce their impact by optimizing the field performance
through a systematic application of integrated, multidisciplinary technologies.

The reservoir management process must be designed and implemented to individual fields on the basis of:

 Logistics and size of the field/reservoirs

 Geological complexity of the field/reservoirs
 Reservoir rock and fluid properties
 Depletion state
 Regulatory controls
 Economics

The reservoir management principles proposed below are designed to guide reservoir management teams in
the development, implementation, and monitoring of sound reservoir management strategies. The principles
are simple, easy to understand, and can be applied to practically all reservoirs. The five principles can be used
as a checklist by reservoir management teams to ensure that they are doing all the “right things” in managing
their reservoirs. The five reservoir management principles are:

 Systematic and sustained practice of data collection.

 Conservation of reservoir energy.
 Early implementation of simple, proven strategies.
 Application of emerging technologies for improved hydrocarbon recovery.
 Long term retention of staff in multi-disciplinary teams.

1|Page
 CHAPTER – 2
SYSTEMATIC AND SUSTAINED PRACTICE OF DATA COLLECTION

The collection, analysis, and assimilation of data can be considered as the foundation on which sound
reservoir management strategies can be devised and implemented. The culture of data collection should start
at discovery of the reservoir and maintained throughout its life, as long as it is economic. This means that the
value of information gained from the data should outweigh the cost of collecting and analysing the data. The
data collection process should include geologic, geophysical, petrophysical, pressure, production/injection
data, and any other data to support reservoir development and management. The objectives of the data
collection program should target continuously improving knowledge on reservoir processes, and applying that
knowledge on devising improved reservoir management strategies. The petroleum industry is rapidly adopting
the practice of sustained data collection by installing monitored downhole gauges and flow control devices on
key wells. This has led to substantial increase in the amount of data available on many reservoirs. It is expected
that this practice will continue to increase in the industry with the ultimate result of key reservoir data available
in real time for improved reservoir management decisions.
Reservoir management due to better-quality techniques and improved knowledge of reservoir behaviour has
helped the interpretation, processing and management of all available data.
Reservoir management requires a deep knowledge of the reservoir that can be achieved only through its
characterization by a process of acquiring, processing and integrating several basic data.

1. Data acquisition, involving the gathering of raw data from various sources, i.e.

 Seismic surveys
 Well logs
 Conventional and special core analyses
 Fluid analyses
 Static and flowing pressure measurements
 Pressure-transient tests
 Periodic well production tests
 Records of the monthly produced volumes of fluids (oil, gas, and water)
 Records of the monthly injected volumes of IOR/EOR fluids (water, gas, CO2, steam, chemicals)

2. Data processing based upon:

 Seismic time maps

 Seismic conversion of time-to-depth maps
 Seismic attribute maps
 Log analyses
 Structural maps
 Cross sections
 Geologic models
 Reservoir fluids modelling (e.g. by EOS)
 Simulation models

3. Data integration and Reservoir Characterization:

The characterization of a reservoir aims at producing the best detailed geological reconstruction both of its
geometry and of its internal structure. The overall process is, therefore, the first basic step in the development
of a reservoir model, and it must consider all the available data, processed and interpreted with the best
technologies always caring to be consistent with the observed historical reservoir performance.
2
Geophysical, geological, and engineering characterization provides also information on the initial distribution
of the fluids, as well as on the hydraulic connectivity between different zones of the reservoir rocks.

Fig. 1 - Workflow of the Reservoir Management process

3
 Fig. 2 - Reservoir characterization aims at the detailed description of the reservoir

Typical information produced by the reservoir characterization process are :

 Field and regional structure maps, including fluid-contact depth and shape and size of aquifers
 Isopach and porosity maps
 Flow units or individual producing zones; location of vertical and horizontal flow barriers
 Description of the depositional environment and evaluation of the effect of the diagenesis on rock
transmissibility
 Variations in fluid saturations and permeabilities.

4
1. Data acquisition:
The following activities are normally performed for the acquisition of the data required by the reservoir
characterization.

a) Seismic: Seismic data acquisition is fundamental for the definition of the reservoir architecture. Seismic
allows reconstructing the reservoir geological setting through different level observations:

 On large scale: reservoir geometry, identification of main structural features (e.g. faults) etc.
 On small scale: detailed structural and stratigraphical features, fluid contacts, etc.

Seismic response of a reservoir depends on petro-acoustic properties of the volume of rock investigated; such
properties can be obtained by the interpretation of specific field data.

Fig. 3 - From seismic to structural reservoir modelling

b) Well Logging: Well logging plays a fundamental role for the formation evaluation process and for the
assessment of production potential of a hydrocarbon process.

The log interpretation, in fact, gives a quantitative evaluation of the “in-situ” value of some important
petrophysical parameter, such as:

 Shale volume (Vsh)

 Gross and net thickness of the drilled layers (hG, hN)
 Depth of the fluid contacts (gas-oil, gas-water, oil-water)
 Porosity (φ)
 Water saturation (Sw)
 Residual hydrocarbon saturation (Sor, Sgr)
 Rock elastic moduli (E, G, ν, etc.).

Depending on the wellbore status, the logs are classified as:

 Open Hole Logs:

o Resistivity, Induction, Spontaneous Potential, Gamma ray
o Density, Sonic Compensated Neutron, Sidewall neutron
o Porosity, Dielectric, and Caliper
o Gamma Ray, Neutron
 Cased Hole Logs:
5
 o Chlorine, Pulsed Neutron and Caliper.

Fig. 4 - A flowchart to analyse well logs for reservoir characterization

c) Core Analysis: Lab analysis on reservoir rock samples (e.g. cuttings, bottom-hole or sidewall cores) are a
traditional and well-established way to obtain basic data for formation evaluation and reservoir
characterization. It is common practice to carry out these analyses according to two different approaches:

 Routine Core Analysis are usually performed on thin sections and on large number of small size
samples (e.g. cuttings, plugs taken from a full size core) to characterize the texture of the reservoir
rock and some of its basic petrophysical properties. Among the more important properties routinely
measured, some of them are:

 Chemical and mineralogical composition

 Petrographic properties (e.g. grain size, sorting, rounding, and grain shape, etc.)
 Volume and type of residual fluid (water, mud filtrate, oil) extracted
 Grain density
 Porosity
 Formation factor
 Absolute permeability both in horizontal and vertical direction
 Others (e.g. Klinkenberg permeability).

 Special Core Analysis (i.e. SCAL) are usually carried out on a limited number of samples because of
the lab time and costs involved with this type of analysis. The samples are chosen in such a way to be
representative of the main rock types found in the reservoir.

The SCAL aim at obtaining information on

 The petro-physical properties of the reservoir rock in presence of two or three different fluids.
 The displacement efficiency of the IOR/EOR processes
 The effect of reservoir pressure decline on porosity and absolute permeability of the reservoir rock.

Among the most important SCAL usually performed we can here list:

 Wettability evaluation (e.g. by Amott or USBM method)

6
  Capillary pressure curves
 Resistivity index (e.g. for Archie exponent)
 Two-phase relative permeability curves by steady state methods (e.g. Hafford or Penn State)
 Two-phase relative permeability curves by unsteady state methods (e.g. Welge)
 Displacement experiments (e.g. to optimize WAG cycles)
 Porosity and absolute permeability at varying reservoir overburden pressure
 Others (e.g. NMR imaging of displacement processes).

d) Fluid Properties: The phase and volumetric behaviour of hydrocarbon systems is commonly characterized
through a set of lab experiments known as “PVT study”. The type of experiments and the physical quantities
to be measured depends on whether the hydrocarbon system is on liquid or gaseous phase at the initial reservoir
conditions.

In the first case the system is identified as “oil” and will undergo to a “differential liberation test” in a PVT
cell, where the pressure is gradually lowered by steps, keeping the temperature constant and discharging the
gas volume liberated in each step.

The following basic quantities are measured during the study:

 Initial system composition

 Bubble point pressure (Pb)
 Volume of oil both for P>Pb and P<Pb
 Volume and composition of the gas liberated at each step
 Oil viscosity
 Separation tests.

Moreover, a special set of experiments (“separator tests”) is performed flashing a certain volume of oil from
the initial reservoir conditions to the stock tank conditions, so as to simulate the separation process that will
occur through the surface facilities. All the data measured in a PVT study are furthermore processed to obtain
the thermodynamic functions to be used in the reservoir engineering studies, i.e.: Bo, Rs, Bg, ℽg, μo, etc.

If the system is on gaseous phase at the initial reservoir conditions and a retrograde condensation will occur
in the reservoir during the production, it is identified as “gas condensate”. In this case the PVT study will be
a “Constant Volume Depletion” during which the initial pressure of a certain volume of “gas” in “ad hoc”
cell will be gradually lowered by steps, keeping constant the temperature and the cell volume. The total mass
of hydrocarbons in the cell, of course, is decreased during each pressure depletion step

The following basic quantities are measured during the study:

 Initial system composition

 Dew point pressure (pd).

And for each depletion step:

 Volumes of gas and condensate retrograde liquid

 Chemical composition of produced gas phase
 Equilibrium gas phase deviation factor (Z)
 Equilibrium gas phase density
 Chemical composition of remaining liquid at abandonment pressure.

7
All the data measured in a PVT study are furthermore processed to obtain the thermodynamic functions to be
used in the reservoir engineering studies, such as:

 Calculated cumulative produced fluid

 Potential liquid content of the produced gas phase
 Cumulative volume of liquid components produced in the well stream fluid
 Equilibrium gas phase density
 Viscosity of the Equilibrium gas phase.

Special PVT Experiments can also be performed for the reservoir engineering studies of IOR/EOR projects.
For instance, in case of (miscible or not miscible) natural gas or “exotic” gas (N2, CO2) injection the execution
of a “swelling study” is usually recommended.

Fig. 5 - Comparison between PVT experiments: flash liberation and differential liberation experiments

e) Well Testing: Well test is a well-established and really powerful technique for characterizing some of the
basic transport properties of a porous rock, and for evaluating the performance and the potential productivity
of a well. Pressure build-up, falloff tests, interference and pulse tests can provide a good assessment of the
in situ value of the effective permeability-thickness of a reservoir in addition to its pressure, as well as

8
information on stratifications, and on the possible presence flow barriers such as sealing or partially sealing
faults, strong permeability-thickness variations, etc.

Fig. 6 - Well test analysis

This short review of the data necessary for a good reservoir characterization and the techniques employed to
get them, has shown that a huge amount of data is usually collected and analysed during the life of a reservoir.

An efficient data management program-for collecting, analysing, storing and retrieving them is, therefore,
required for good reservoir management.

2) Data Processing:
The Data processing is all about using the data acquainted for the reservoir modelling. The data acquainted
can be used to

 Estimate the Hydrocarbon reserves

 Match the history data
 Identify the future performance prediction
 Reservoir deliverability
 Create fluid models
 Obtain Rock-Fluid Properties
 Initial Reservoir Conditions.

a) Reserve Estimation: Reserves usually indicate the oil and/or gas, which may be recovered at economic
rates using only the natural reservoir forces (primary recovery). Estimating hydrocarbon reserves is a complex
process that involves integrating geological and engineering data.
Depending on the amount and quality of data available, one or more of the following methods may be used
to estimate reserves:
 Volumetric
9
  Material balance
 Reservoir Simulation

Method Application Accuracy

Volumetric OOIP, OGIP, recoverable reserves. Used early in life of field. Dependent on quality of reservoir
description. Reserves estimates often
high because this method does not
consider problems of reservoir
heterogeneity.

Material OOIP, OGIP (assumes adequate production history available), Highly dependent on quality of
balance recoverable reserves (assumes OOIP and OGIP known). Used reservoir description and amount of
in a mature field with abundant geological, petrophysical, and production data available. Reserve
engineering data. estimates variable.
Production Recoverable reserves. Used after a moderate amount of Dependent on amount of production
history production data is available. history available. Reserve estimates
tend to be realistic.

Analogy OOIP, OGIP, recoverable reserves. Used early in exploration Highly dependent on similarity of
and initial field development. reservoir characteristics. Reserve
estimates are often very general.

A-1) Volumetric method:

One basic volumetric equation for an Oil Reservoir is:

Where,

 N = OOIP (STB)
 7758 = conversion factor from acre-ft to bbl
 A = area of reservoir (acres) from map data
 h = height or thickness of pay zone (ft) from log and/or core data
 ø = porosity (decimal) from log and/or core data
 Sw = connate water saturation (decimal) from log and/or core data
 Boi = formation volume factor for oil at initial conditions (reservoir bbl/STB) from lab data

Another basic volumetric equation for gas reservoir is:

Where,

 G = OGIP(SCF)
 43560 = conversion factor from acre-ft to ft3
10
  Bgi = formation volume factor for gas at initial conditions ( ft3/SCF)

Recoverable reserves are a fraction of the OOIP or OGIP and are dependent on the efficiency of the reservoir drive
mechanism. The basic equation used to calculate recoverable oil reserves is

Where,
RF = Recovery factor

A-2) Material balance:

The General Material Balance Equation (GMBE) is derived from the basis that the reservoir pore volume as
existing at its initial conditions is constant. Thus, the sum of the volume changes of gas, oil, water, and the
formation rock caused by fluid production is equal to zero.

The GMBE in reservoir barrels can be represented volumetrically as:

Net change in oil and water production volume = Gas cap volume change + Released solution gas +
Oil Volume change + connate water expansion + Rock
expansion

Fig. 7 – General Material Balance Equation Components

11
Basic assumptions for GMBE:
 Constant Reservoir Temperature
 Reservoir characteristics- uniform porosity, permeability and thickness. In addition GOC and OWC
is uniform throughout the reservoir.
 Fluid recovery is considered independent of rate, no. of wells or location of wells.
 All parts of the reservoir have the same pressure and fluid properties are therefore constant
throughout.
 Reservoir volume is assumed to be constant expect for those conditions of rock and water expansion
or water influx that are specially considered in the equation.

Straight line Solution Method to GMBE (HAVLENA-ODEH PLOTS):

The straight-line solution method requires the plotting of a variable group versus another variable group, with
the variable group selection depending on the mechanism of production under which the reservoir is
producing.

The significance of the straight-line approach is that the sequence of plotting is important and if the plotted
data deviates from this straight line there is some reason for it. This significant observation will provide the
engineer with valuable information that can be used in determining the following unknowns:
• Initial oil in place (N)
• Size of the gas cap (m)
• Water influx (We)
• Driving mechanism

The Straight Line Equation of GMBE by Havlena and Odeh can be represented by
F= N( Eo +mEg + Ef,w) + (We + WinjBw + GinjBginj)
Where,
F is underground withdrawal and given by:
F= Np(Bo + (Rp-Rs)Bg) +WpBw
In terms of 2-phase volume factor
F= Np[Bt + (Rp-Rsi)Bg] + WpBw
Eo describes the expansion of oil and its originally dissolved gas and is expressed in terms of the oil
formation volume factor as:
Eo= (Bo-Boi) + (Rsi-Rs)Bg
Eo= Bt-Bti
Eg is the term describing the expansion of the gas cap gas and is defined by
Eg= Boi[(Bg/Bgi)-1)]
Eg= Bti(Bg/Bgi-1)
Ef,w represents the expansion of the initial water and the reduction in the pore volume and is given by:
Ef,w= (1+m)Boi[(cwSwi+cf)/(1-Swi)](Pi-P)

12
b) History matching & c) Performance Prediction using Decline Curves:

We need to have a proper understanding of decline curve analysis as it is a means of predicting future oil
well or gas well production based on past production history. Production decline curve analysis is a traditional
means of identifying well production problems and predicting well performance and life based on measured
oil well production. Decline curves are characterized by three factors:
1. Initial production rate
2. Curvature of the decline
3. Rate of decline

Assumptions for performing rate time decline curve analysis:

 The well is draining the constant drainage area i.e. the well is under boundary dominated flow conditions.
 The well is produced at or near capacity.
 The well is produced at a constant bottom-hole pressure.
 The well is under decline (decreasing production-rate).

Main characteristics which can be used to select the flow rate decline model are:
 For exponential decline: A straight line relationship will result when flow rate is plotted versus time on
a semi log scale and also when the flow rate vs cumulative production is plotted on a Cartesian scale.
 For harmonic decline: Rate vs cumulative production is a straight line on semi log scale with all other
types of decline curve having some curvature. There are several shifting techniques that are designed to
straighten out the resulting curve of plotting flow rate vs time when plotted on a log-log scale.
 For hyperbolic decline: none of the above plotting scales, i.e., Cartesian, semi log or log-log will
produce a straight line relationship for a hyperbolic decline. However if the flow rate is plotted vs time
on a log-log paper, the resulting curve can be straightened out by using shifting technique.

Fig. 8 – Types of Decline

Fig. 9 - Curves of Types of Decline

13
DECLINE CURVE ANALYSIS FOR PERFORMANCE PREDICTION OF WELL-A
OF SAND-XY:

Production Profile With Time of Well - A

80000

70000

60000

50000

40000

30000

20000

10000

0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000

Fig. 10 – Production Profile of Well - A

FLOWRATE(M3/D) VS TIME(DAYS FROM PRODUCTION)

80000

70000

60000
y = 586221e-6E-04x
FLOW RATE (M3/DAY)

50000

40000

30000

20000

10000

0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000
TIME (DAYS)

MATCHED HISTORY FUTURE PREDICTION

DECLINE TREND - 1 (BASIS) DECLINE TREND - 2
DECLINE TREND - 3 Expon. (DECLINE TREND - 1 (BASIS))

Fig. 11 - Decline Curve Analysis of WELL – A

14
DECLINE CURVE ANALYSIS FOR PERFORMANCE PREDICTION OF SAND-XY
OF FIELD-AB:

Rate Vs Time graph of Sand-XYZ of Field-AB

400000

350000

300000

250000

200000

150000

100000

50000

0
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000

PRODUCTION DECLINE TREND PREDICTED PRODUCTION

Fig. 12 - Decline Curve Analysis of FIELD – AB

d) Reservoir deliverability:

Reservoir deliverability is defined as the oil or gas production rate achievable from reservoir at a given bottom-
hole pressure. Reservoir deliverability determines types of completion and artificial lift methods to be used.
Absolute Open Flow (AOF) is a common indicator of well productivity and refers to the maximum rate at
which a well could flow against a theoretical atmospheric backpressure at the reservoir.

The productivity of a gas well is determined with deliverability testing. Deliverability tests provide
information that is used to develop reservoir rate-pressure behaviour for the well and generate an inflow
performance curve or gas-backpressure curve. If the case is Gas Reservoir, the gas reservoir deliverability
tests are:

 Tests that use all stabilized data – FLOW AFTER FLOW TEST
 Tests that use a combination of stabilized and transient data – ISOCHRONAL & MODIFIED
ISOCHRONAL
 Tests that use all transient data – MULTIPLE MODIFIED ISOCHRONAL TESTS.

15
1) Flow after flow test: The test consists of a series of flow rates. The test is often referred to as a four-point
test, because many tests are composed of four rates, as required by various regulatory bodies. This test is
performed by producing the well at a series of stabilized flow rates and obtaining the corresponding
stabilized flowing bottom-hole pressures. In addition, a stabilized shut-in bottom-hole pressure is required
for the analysis. A major limitation of this test method is the length of time required to obtain stabilized
data for low-permeability gas reservoirs.

Fig. 13 – Flow after Flow Test

2) Isochronal Test: The isochronal test was proposed to overcome the need to obtain a series of stabilized
flow rates required for the flow-after-flow test for the slow-to-stabilize well. This test consists of
producing the well at several different flow rates with flowing periods of equal duration. Each flow period
is separated by a shut-in period in which the shut-in bottomhole pressure is allowed to stabilize at
essentially the average reservoir pressure. The test also requires that an extended stabilized flow point be
obtained. The test method is based on the principle that the radius of investigation is a function of the flow
period and not the flow rate. Thus, for equal flow periods, the same drainage radius is investigated in spite
of the actual flow rates.

Fig. 14 – Isochronal Test

3) Modified Isochronal Test: The modified isochronal test is essentially the same as the isochronal test,
except the shut-in periods separating the flow periods are equal to or longer than the flow periods. The
method also requires the extended stabilized flow point and a stabilized shut-in bottomhole pressure. The
modified isochronal test method is less accurate than the isochronal method because the shut-in pressure
is not allowed to return to the average reservoir pressure.

16
 Fig. 15 – Modified Isochronal Test

MEASUREMENT OF AOFP USING ISOCHRONAL TEST OF WELL-PQ:

Time Cum Time Qg(m3/day) BHP(Ksc) BHP(psi) (Psi2)-(Pbo2) X=LOG(Qg) Y=LOG(deltaP2)
0 0 281.116 3998.31287
12 12 101015 280.9 3995.2407 24557.53948 5.004385868 4.390184851
18 30 0 281.1 3998.0853 1819.724338 3.260005604
6 36 162739 280.6 3990.9738 58633.91813 5.211491643 4.768148916
3 39 0 280.9 3995.2407 24557.53948 4.390184851
11 50 232780 279.7 3978.1731 160644.5769 5.366945664 5.205866069
60 110 0 280.8 3993.8184 35920.37824 4.555340901
9 119 396647 278.6 3962.5278 284879.2246 5.598404174 5.454660779
15 134 0 280.3 3986.7069 92673.88391 4.966957364
8 142 393213 278.2 3956.8386 329934.084 5.594627868 5.518427183
24 166 0 279.9 3981.0177 138003.8627 5.139891242
6 172 0 279.7 3978.1731 160644.5769 5.205866069
3 175 586016 276.7 3935.5041 498313.2693 5.767909474 5.697502452

LOG(Q) Vs LOG(deltaP 2)
7

5
y = 1.7427x - 4.2799
4

0
4.9 5 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9

Fig. 16 – LOG(Q) Vs LOG(deltaP2) of WELL-PQ.

17
Observations and Conclusions:

For Pbo=14.7psia,
(Psi2) - (Pbo2) = 15986289.87 and hence LOG(deltaP2) = 7.203747.
Replacing for Y=7.203., we get X=6.58914328.
Therefore, Qsf=3882784.4351 m3/day.
Slope=1.7427. Therefore n=0.5738.
Solving for c (Q=3.882 MMm3/day, Pbo=14.7psi, Psi=3998.31psi);
c=1.084x10-6.
AOFP=3.882MMm3/day.
Actual AOFP = 4.19.
Therefore, error = 7%
Thus, the maximum Absolute Open Flow Potential of WELL-PQ is 3.882 MMm3/day.

e) Reservoir Fluid Models:

1) Black Oil:
It is a type of reservoir which consists of wide variety of chemical species also including large heavy non-
volatile molecules. Therefore, its phase envelope is the widest of all type of reservoir fluids with its critical
temperature well above the reservoir temperature. It should be noted that in case of black oil the quality
lines are approximately equally spaced as a result of which upon isothermal depletion the liquid shrinkage
curve yields a straight line except at very low pressures. This type of oil is often characterized by GOR
ranging between 200-700 scf/STB, oil gravity of 15 to 40 deg API and oil FVF less than 1.2 bbl/STB. This
type of oil is generally brown to dark green in colour.

Fig. 17 - P-T diagram for black oil

18
 Fig. 18 - Liquid Shrinkage curve for black oil
2) Volatile Oil:
 Low Volatile Oil:
A typical pressure-temperature phase diagram for a low-shrinkage oil is shown in Figure below. The
diagram is characterized by quality lines that are closely spaced near the dew-point curve. Therefore, on
isothermal depletion this type of crude oil shows considerably less shrinkage than black oil; this is also
evident from the liquid shrinkage curve shown below. This type of crude is often characterized by GOR
less than 200 scf/STB, oil gravity of less than 35 deg API and oil FVF less than 1.2 bbl/STB. This type of
crude is generally, black or deeply coloured.

P-T diagram for low volatile oil

19
 Liquid Shrinkage curve for low volatile oil
 High Volatile Oil:
The P-T diagram of such crude is often characterized by closely spaced quality lines just below the bubble
point. Thus, the crude oil undergoes considerable shrinkage during isothermal depletion. The quality lines
are far away from one another near the dew point curve and therefore, the shrinkage decreases as dew point
approaches. This change in shrinkage of oil with respect to pressure is clearly depicted by the liquid
shrinkage cure shown below. This type of crude is often characterized by GOR of more than 2000 scf/STB,
oil gravity of more than 40deg API and oil FVF of more than 2.0 bbl/STB. This type of crude is generally
greenish to orange in colour.

P-T diagram for high volatile oil

20
 Liquid Shrinkage curve for high volatile crude
3) Near Critical Crude:

In this type of crude oil reservoirs the reservoir temperature is very close to the critical temperature Because
all the quality lines converge at the critical point, an isothermal pressure drop in case of such crude oil
results in shrinkage of the crude oil from 100% of the hydrocarbon pore volume at the bubble-point to 55%
or less at a pressure 10 to 50 psi below the bubble point. The shrinkage characteristic behaviour of the near-
critical crude oil is shown in Figure below. The near-critical crude oil is characterized by ahigh GOR in
excess of 3,000 scf/STB with an oil formation volume factor of 2.0 bbl/STB or higher.

P-T diagram near critical crude oil

21
 Liquid Shrinkage curve for near critical crude oil
4) Gas Condensate:

In a typical gas condensate reservoir the reservoir temperature lies between critical temperature and
cricondentherm temperature. This is also depicted by the P-T diagram shown below. This category of gas
reservoir is a unique type of hydrocarbon accumulation in that the special thermodynamic behaviour of the
reservoir fluid is the controlling factor in the development and the depletion process of the reservoir. When
the pressure is decreased on these mixtures, instead of expanding (if a gas) or vaporizing (if a liquid) as
might be expected, they vaporize instead of condensing.
 Consider that the initial condition of a retrograde gas reservoir is represented by point 1 on the
pressure-temperature phase diagram. Because the reservoir pressure is above the upper dew-point
pressure, the hydrocarbon system exists as a single phase in the reservoir.
 As the reservoir pressure declines isothermally during production from the initial pressure (point 1)
to the upper dew-point pressure (point 2), the attraction between the molecules of the light and
heavy components causes them to move further apart further apart. As this occurs, attraction
between the heavy component molecules becomes more effective; thus, liquid begins to condense.
This retrograde condensation process continues with decreasing pressure until the liquid dropout
reaches its maximum at point 3.
 Further reduction in pressure permits the heavy molecules to commence the normal vaporization
process. This is the process whereby fewer gas molecules strike the liquid surface and causes more
molecules to leave than to enter the liquid phase. The vaporization process continues until the
reservoir pressure reaches the lower dew-point pressure. This means that all the liquid that formed
must vaporize because the system is essentially all vapours at the lower dew point. A typical liquid
shrinkage volume curve for a condensate system is also shown below. The curve is commonly
called the liquid dropout curve. In most gas-condensate reservoirs, the condensed liquid volume
seldom exceeds more than 15%–19% of the pore volume. This liquid saturation is not large enough
to allow any liquid flow. It should be recognized, however, that around the wellbore where the
pressure drop is high, enough liquid dropout might accumulate to give two-phase flow of gas and
retrograde liquid. Gas condensate is generally characterized by GOR of more than 3300 scf/STB
and by oil gravity generally lying in the range of 49 to 60 deg API. Gas condensates are lightly
coloured, brown, orange, and greenish or water white.

22
 Liquid Dropout Curve

P-T diagram for gas condensate

23
5) Wet Gas:
Wet gas reservoirs have temperature greater than cricondentherm temperature of hydrocarbon mixture. The
reservoir fluid remains in vapour phase as the reservoir is depleted below bubble point because the
temperature exceeds the cricondentherm temperature. As the gas is produced from the wells its pressure
and temperature declines and if the gas enters the two-phase region, a liquid phase will condense out of the
gas and will be produced from the surface separators. This is due to a sufficient decrease in the kinetic
energy of heavy molecules with temperature drop and their subsequent change to liquid through the
attractive forces between molecules. Wet Gas reservoirs are often characterized by Gas oil ratios between
60,000 to 100,000 scf/STB, oil gravity above 60 deg API, and liquid is water-white in colour, separator
pressure and temperature, lie within the two-phase region.

P-T diagram for Wet Gas

6) Dry Gas:
If a reservoir contains dry gas then the reservoir fluid will exist in the form of gas in the reservoir and also
on the surface. The only liquid associated with dry gas is formation water. The kinetic energy of the gas
mixture is so high and attraction between molecules so small that none of them coalesce to a liquid at stock-
tank conditions of temperature and pressure. Usually reservoirs having GORs of more than 1, 00,000
scf/STB are considered as dry gas reservoirs. A typical P-T diagram/ plot for a dry gas reservoir is shown
below.

24
P-T plot for dry gas reservoir

25
 CHAPTER – 3
CONSERVATION OF RESERVOIR ENERGY

The central principle of the five reservoir management principles is conservation of reservoir energy. This
principle applies to controlled and optimized use of the energy stored in the reservoir at discovery or at any
stage of depletion to maximize economic and efficient recovery of its hydrocarbons. The principle should not
be interpreted to mean that the reservoir should not be produced until the “correct” strategies for managing it
have been devised. It does require, however, that management strategies applied on the reservoir should avoid
depleting reservoir energy inefficiently, especially during the early stages of reservoir development and
production. Common production practices that should be avoided because they could deplete reservoir energy
include excessive production of gas from the gas cap of a saturated reservoir, high production rates due to
excessive pressure drawdown, comingling of production from separate reservoirs, as examples. In
applying this principle, the reservoir management teams should strive to achieve a balance between conserving
reservoir energy and maximizing economic recovery of hydrocarbons from the reservoir.

1) Excessive Gas & Water Production:

Well Diagnostics for Excessive Water Production:

In the past, water control was thought of as simply a plug and cement operation, or a gel treatment in a
well. The main reason for the industry’s failure to consistently control water has been a lack of
understanding of the different problems and the consequent application of inappropriate solutions. The key
to water control is diagnostics-to identify the specific water problem at hand. Well diagnostics are used in
three ways:
 To screen wells that are suitable candidates for water control
 To determine the water problem so that a suitable water control method can be selected
 To locate the water entry point so that a treatment can be correctly placed

 Diagnostic Plots: A diagnostic log-log plot of WOR versus time can be used to help deter- mine the
specific problem type by making comparisons with known behaviour patterns. These are generally
called “Chan’s-Plots”.

The types are:

Diagnostic plot profile characterizing water breakthrough in an open flow path

26
  An open flow path shows a very rapid increase as shown in the figure. This profile indicates flow
through a fault, fracture or a channel behind casing, which can occur at any time during the well
history.

Diagnostic plot profile characterizing water breakthrough in an Edgewater flow

 Edgewater flow generally shows a rapid increase at breakthrough followed by a straight line curve.
For multiple layers, the line may have a stair-step shape depending on the layer permeability
contrasts.

Diagnostic plot profile characterizing water breakthrough in water coning

 A gradual increase in the WOR indicates the build-up of a water cone early in the well’s life. It
normally levels off between a WOR of 1 and 10. The slope of WOR decreases. After the water cone
stabilizes, the WOR curve begins to look more like that of edge flow.
It can be concluded that the log-log plot of the production data and the WOR provide more insight and
information for well performance evaluation. Using the WOR’, coning and channelling can be discerned.

27
Furthermore, the change in slope of the WOR and WOR’ and the value of the WOR’ become good
indicators to differentiate normal displacement and production behaviour, multilayer water breakthrough
behaviour, rapid layer depletion and water recycling behaviour.
 Production history diagnostic plots:

QO/QW VS TIME (LOG-LOG) PRODUCTION

HISTORY DIAGNOSTIC PLOT
1000

100

10

1
1000 10000

0.1

0.01

 A time day plot of the water and oil flow rates against time can be helpful in identifying water
problems. Any sudden simultaneous change indicating increased water with a reduction in oil is a
signal that remediation might be needed.

 Decline Curve Diagnostic Plot:

Q OCUM VS Q O (DECLINE CURVE DIAGNOSTIC

PLOTS)
Qo Qo-2 Linear (Qo) Linear (Qo-2)

140
y = -0.0017x + 476.86
120
100
80
60 y = 0.0003x + 17.483
40
20
0
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000 300000

Any sudden change in the slope of the usual straight line decline in oil production rate is a warning that
excess water, as well as other problems, may be affecting normal problems.
28
Causes for Excessive Water Production:

a) Casing, tubing or packer leaks —Leaks through casing, tubing or packers allow water flow from non-
oil-productive zones to enter the production string.
b) Channel flow behind casing — failed primary cementing can connect water-bearing zones to the pay
zone.
c) Moving up of oil-water contact — a uniform oil water contact moving up into a perforated zone in a
well during normal water-drive production can lead to unwanted water production.
d) Water-out layer without crossflow — a common problem with multilayer production occurs when a
high-permeability zone with a flow barrier above or below is watered out.
e) Fractures or faults between injectors and producers — in naturally fractured formations by water-
flooding, injection water can rapidly break through into producing wells.
f) Fractures or faults from a water layer — Water can be produced from fractures that intersect a deeper
water zone.
g) Coning or cusping — Coning occurs in a vertical well when there is an OWC near perforations in a
formation with a relatively high vertical permeability.
h) Poor areal sweep - Edge water from an aquifer or injection during water-flooding through a pay zone
often lead to poor areal sweep.
i) Gravity-segregation layer — in a thick reservoir layer with good vertical permeability, gravity
segregation sometimes can result in unwanted water entry into a producing well.
j) Watered-out layer with crossflow — water crossflow can occur in high-permeability layers that are not
isolated by impermeable barriers.

Problems caused by leaks or flow behind pipe can be diagnosed by:

(1). Leak tests/casing integrity tests (e.g., hydro testing)
(2). Temperature surveys
(3). Flow profiling tools (e.g., radiotracer flow logs, spinner surveys, production logging tools)
(4). Cement bond logs
(5). Borehole tele-viewers
(6). Noise logs.

2) Excessive Pressure Drop/Drawdown Control:

Optimising the production rates such that it doesn’t exceed the Maximum Efficient Production Rate
(MER) is the key for controlling the reservoir pressure thus the reservoir energy. Controlling the declining
pressure of reservoir can prevent the formation of secondary gas cap and thus the GOR can be optimised.

3) Latest Technologies for maintaining Reservoir Pressure:

Using Horizontal Wells:
The reservoir energy in the Shaybah field was conserved by the management strategy of using horizontal wells
instead of vertical wells for the initial development of the reservoir. The use of horizontal wells minimized
production of free gas from the overlying primary gas cap, thereby conserving reservoir energy. It also reduced
coning of water from the aquifer which could have reduced hydrocarbon recovery potentials of the wells. The
29
use of horizontal wells minimized the potential for early gas breakthrough, while maintaining production at
economic rates.

Installing Multiple Packers:

The reservoir management principle of conservation of reservoir energy was practiced in the 26R reservoir by
controlling excessive gas production. This was achieved by installing multiple packers in wells located high
on the structure. As the gas-oil contact moved down-dip, high gas producing intervals straddled with packers
were shut-off. Eventually, these up-structure wells were shut-in as the gas-oil contact reached the lowest
packers in the well. Thus the field GOR was controlled in this reservoir for over a 20-year period.

Installation of Downhole Separators:

Downhole separators separating water downhole reduces the cost of lifting excess water. In general these are
50% efficient.

30
 CHAPTER – 4
EARLY IMPLEMENTATION OF SIMPLE, PROVEN STRATEGIES

The principle of early implementation of simple, proven strategies is directed at supporting the concept of
conserving reservoir energy. Simple, proven strategies are reservoir management practices that are known
from industry experience to conserve reservoir energy. Some of these simple, proven strategies include some
form of pressure maintenance by fluid injection, limited pressure drawdown at production wells, isolation of
separate reservoirs at producers, optimal well spacing, and selective perforation of productive zones. The costs
of implementing these strategies should be weighed against their expected benefits by the reservoir
management teams so that economic recovery of hydrocarbons is always maintained.

1) Immiscible Displacement:
Most of the oil and gas recovered from reservoirs is displaced immiscibly by water and/or gas. The
displacement could be in the form of solution gas drive, gas cap expansion, water influx from aquifers or
injection of water and/or gas. Solution-gas drive, gas cap expansion, and water influx from aquifers are
essentially natural processes that supply energy to the reservoir for hydrocarbon recovery. Gas and water
injection are designed and installed to artificially supply energy to the reservoir and thereby improve
hydrocarbon recovery. It is important to understand the fundamental processes that occur when reservoir fluids
are displaced immiscibly by gas or water. The displacement process is affected by the wettability of the rock,
and the mobility ratio between the displaced and the displacing fluids. The total efficiency of the displacement
process is measured in terms of the effectiveness of water or gas in displacing the reservoir fluids, and the
proportion of the reservoir actually contacted by the displacing fluids.

A) Buckley Leverett Frontal Advance Theory:

Buckley and Leverett presented what is recognized as the basic equation for describing two phase
immiscible displacement in a linear system. The equation is derived based on developing a material balance
for the displacing fluid as it flows through any given element in the porous media.
Volume entering the element-Volume leaving the fluid= change in fluid volume

Water flow through a linear differential element

Qtfwdt- Qt(fw-dfw)dt=AᴓdxdSw/5.615

31
Separating the variables gives:

Where,
(v)sw = Velocity of any specified value of Sw ft /day
A= cross-sectional area ft2
qt = total flow rate ( oil+water) bbl/day
(dfw/dSw) at sw = slope of fw vs Sw curve at Sw
Integrating and solving for “x”
5.615iwt dfw
(x)sw= ( )( )Sw
ᴓA dSw

Where,
(x)Sw = distance from the injection for any given saturation Sw, ft
t= time, day
iw= water injection rate, bbl/day
Winj= tiw

Mathematically difficulty arises when using the derivative curve to construct the water saturation profile at
any given point of time.

fw and its saturation derivative curve

Conclusions from Frontal Advance and Buckley Leverett Theories:

 The distance travelled by a given saturation in a specified time interval is proportional to the slope of
the fractional flow curve at that saturation assuming the total flow rate and reservoir properties are
constant.
 Using this approach, the distribution of water saturation in the reservoir as a function of time can be
calculated by determining the slope of the fractional flow curve at that saturation.

32
 However, because of the shape of the fractional flow curve, it is possible that two slopes of equal value
can exist for two different water saturations.
 Thus it can be interpreted that two different water saturations can exist at the same location in the
reservoir at the same time.
 The appearance of this contradiction in the application of the frontal advance equation is illustrated in
figure below.

 Buckley and Leverett recognized that a portion of the saturation distribution curve is imaginary and
that the real curve is discontinuous at the flood front. The location of the flood front as determined by
material balance is represented in figure below by a solid line such that areas A and B are equal. Note
the sharp discontinuity of the saturation curve at the flood front because capillary and gravity effects
were assumed to be negligible.

 If capillary and gravity effects are considered, the distribution of water saturation at the flood front is
more gradual as represented below:

33
B) Welge Extension for Buckley Leverette Theory:

 Welge proposed a method for computing oil recovery from gas or water drive that simplified the
application of the Buckley-Leverett method. The Welge method is presented with graphical
illustrations for the case of water drive in a linear reservoir.

 It says that by drawing a straight line from S wc (or from Swi if it is different from Swc) tangent to the
fractional flow curve, the saturation value at the tangent point is equivalent to that at the front Swf.

APPLICATION OF BUCKLEY LEVERETT THEORY FOR FIELD-ABCD:

The following base data is available for a FIELD-ABCD:

Oil formation volume factor Bo = 1.25 bbl/STB

Water formation volume factor Bw = 1.02 bbl/STB
Formation thickness h = 20 ft
Cross-sectional area A = 26,400 ft
Porosity = 25%
Injection rate iw = 900 bbl/day
Distance between producer and injector L = 600 ft

34
Oil viscosity = 2.0 cp
Water viscosity = 1.0 cp
Dip angle = 0°
Connate water saturation Swc = 20%
Initial water saturation Swi = 20%
Residual water saturation Sor = 20%

Sw Kro/Krw Fw Fw'
0.25 30.23 0.062019 0.669571
0.3 17 0.105196 1.083432
0.35 9.56 0.17289 1.64592
0.4 5.38 0.270955 2.273668
0.45 3.02 0.397886 2.757482
0.5 1.7 0.540218 2.858883
0.55 0.96 0.676278 2.51984
0.6 0.54 0.787884 1.923583
0.65 0.3 0.868495 1.314572
0.7 0.17 0.921523 0.832387
0.75 0.1 0.954293 0.502042
0 529.39 0.003707 0.042511

Relative Permeability Ratio Curve:

100

90
Sw Vs Kro/Krw
80

70

60

50

40

30

20 y = 529.39e-11.47x

10

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
1 0.8
- Sor 0.9 1

35
Fractional Flow Curves:

Average water

SLOPE = 1.969

Swi =

Formulae used for Relative Permeability and Fractional Flow Curves:

kro
 =aebSw
krw

1
fw = µw
1+( µo )ae^bSw
µw
dfw −( )abe^bSw
 µo
(dSw) = µw
[1+( µo )aebSw ]^2

36
 Flood Saturation change with change in Time and Distance:

Sw Vs Distcance b/w P&I wells for various time intervals

1

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600

30 days 60 days 90 days 120 days 240 days 365 days 396.857 days

2) Water Flooding:
It is required to maintain the reservoir pressure above certain value by injecting water, gas or any other
immiscible fluid from surface into the reservoir. As a normal practice the reservoir pressure is required to
be maintained above bubble point pressure to prevent segregation of solution gas from oil.
The pressure maintenance is therefore aimed at:
 Decreasing depletion drive
 Replacing the natural displacing forces with more efficient displacing force i.e replacing gas with
artificial water drive.

Pressure Maintenance can be done by Water and Gas injection.

Water flooding is the use of water injection to increase the production from oil reservoirs. Use of water to
increase oil production is known as "secondary recovery".
The principal reason for water flooding an oil reservoir is to increase the oil-production rate and, ultimately,
the oil recovery. This is accomplished by "voidage replacement"—injection of water to increase the reservoir

37
pressure to its initial level and maintain it near that pressure. The water displaces oil from the pore spaces, but
the efficiency of such displacement depends on many factors (e.g., oil viscosity and rock characteristics).

Advantages of Water Injection:

 Water is the cheapest fluid.
 It is most efficient displacing fluid
 It is available in abundance
 Less treatment is required to make it compatible
 It co-exist with crude oil in the reservoir therefore it is slightly compatible
 Less problem in disposal
 Most reservoir rocks are water wet
 Water has the tendency to enter even in the smallest pore of the rock and displace oil resulting in
higher displacement efficiency

 VOIDAGE REPLACEMENT RATIO:

Voidage replacement ratio refers to replacing the volume of oil, gas and water produced from the reservoir
by injected fluids. Voidage replacement ratio is the ratio of reservoir barrels of injected fluid to reservoir
barrels of produced fluid. Mathematically for water and gas injection VRR can be expressed as
Injected reservoir volume Winj∗Bw+Ginj∗Bginj
VRR= =
Produced reservoir volume Qo∗Bo+Qw∗Bw+Qg∗(Rp−Rs)∗Bg

 In denominator, the third term accounts for the free gas produced that is in excess of gas in the
reservoir that is dissolved in the oil.
 VRR can be calculated on an instantaneous basis using injected and produced fluids over any
specific time period (typically daily or monthly), with GORs calculated from instantaneous
volumes. It can also be calculated on a cumulative basis using cumulative injected and produced
fluids, with GORs calculated from instantaneous volumes.
 If the Instantaneous VRR for a given month is equal to or greater than 1, the reservoir pressure is
being maintained or increased for the month. If the ratio is less than 1, reservoir pressure declines
for the month.
 As long as cumulative VRR is equal to or greater than 1, after taking into account injection losses,
reservoir pressure since the start of water injection will be maintained or increased. When the
cumulative VRR calculated since the start of production reaches 1, reservoir pressure will have
increased to near original reservoir pressure (pi).

PLOTS OF IVC & CVC FOR A FIELD - ABC WITH POLYMER INJECTION:
PVT data given:

P Rs Viso, Visg,
Bo Bg Co
kg/cm2 m3/m3 cP cP
1.03323 0.39022 1.05917 1.23463 39.4435 0.01298 0.00043
9.63102 2.10081 1.06289 0.13089 35.6987 0.01306 0.00043
18.2288 4.13061 1.06733 0.06835 32.0558 0.01319 0.00043

38
 26.8266 6.35282 1.07224 0.04591 28.8115 0.01333 0.00043
35.4244 8.71811 1.07751 0.03438 25.9931 0.0135 0.00043
44.0222 11.199 1.08309 0.02736 23.5632 0.01368 0.00043
52.6199 13.7775 1.08894 0.02265 21.4694 0.01389 0.00043
61.2177 16.4413 1.09503 0.01927 19.6603 0.01411 0.00043
69.8155 19.1807 1.10136 0.01673 18.0905 0.01435 0.00043
78.4133 21.9885 1.10789 0.01476 16.7215 0.01461 0.00043

Pressure (Kg/cm2) y = -126.1ln(x) + 1420.3

160
140
120
Pressure, Ksc

100
80
60
40
20
0

SBHP

Pressure profile was plotted from given production data

The following graphs for Oil formation volume factor Bo, Gas formation volume factor, Gas Solubility
were plotted against reservoir pressure and analysed using given PVT data.

39
 y = 0.0006x + 1.0563
1.2
1.1
1 Bo below Pb
0.9
0.8
Bo

0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
P, ksc

Bo vs P (<Pb) Plot
Below the bubble point pressure, Bo increases with pressure. This is because more gas goes into the
solution. Above the bubble point pressure as pressure increases Bo decreases as no more gas is available
to go in the solution

y = 0.2821x - 0.7795
25

20 Rs below Pb
15
Rs

10

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
-5 P, ksc

Solution Gas Oil Ratio vs Pressure Plot. (P<Pb)

Below the Pb, Rs increases with increase in pressure as more gas goes into the solution hence solubility is
increased.

40
 y = 1.3028x-1.022
1.4
1.2
1
Bg below Pb
0.8
Bg

0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
P, ksc

Gas formation volume factor vs Pb plot

IVC & CVC VS Time

250

200

150

100

50

0
5/3/1964 1/10/1978 9/19/1991 5/28/2005 2/4/2019

-50

INST VRR (IVC) CUM VRR (CVC)

41
 1200 100
Ql (m3/d) Qo (m3/d) WC (%)
1000
80
Ql, Qo (m3/d)

800
60

WC (%)
600

40
400

20
200

0 0

2003
1968

1970

1972

1973

1975

1977

1979

1981

1983

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1995

1997

1999

2001

2005

2006

2008

2010

2012

2014

2016

2017
 Q liq (Oil+water) v/s Time curve indicated by Pink area.
 Watercut v/s Time curve indicated by blue line shows linear increase in watercut.
 The green area in the plot indicates oil flow rate Qo

160
1400 Polymer Inj Rate, m3/d Pressure, Kg/cm2
140
Poly Inj rate (m3/d)

1200
120
1000
100
800
80

600
60

400 40

200 20

0 0
1984
1968

1971

1973

1976

1979

1982

1987

1990

1993

1995

1998

2001

2004

2006

2009

2012

2014

2017

 Tertiary recovery (polymer injection) was used for the given well to produce oil. Purple line shows
the Polymer injection rate. The blue circles shows the Pressure decline rate. As it can be seen the
drop in pressure is normal after using tertiary recovery. Better sweep efficiency.

3) Gas Injection:
Gas injection projects are undertaken when and where there is a readily available supply of gas. This gas
supply typically comes from produced solution gas or gas-cap gas, gas produced from a deeper gas-filled
reservoir, or gas from a relatively close gas field. Such projects take a variety of forms, including the
following:

 Reinjection of produced gas into existing gas caps overlying producing oil columns.
42
 Injection into oil reservoirs of separated produced gas for pressure maintenance, for gas storage, or as
required by government regulations.
 Gas injection to prevent migration of oil into a gas cap because of a natural water drive, downdip water
injection, or both.
 Gas injection to increase recoveries from reservoirs containing volatile, high-shrinkage oils and into gas-
cap reservoirs containing retrograde gas condensate.
 Gas injection into very under-saturated oil reservoirs for the purpose of swelling the oil and hence
increasing oil recovery.

The primary physical mechanisms that occur as a result of gas injection are:

1. Partial or complete maintenance of reservoir pressure

2. Displacement of oil by gas both horizontally and vertically
3. Vaporization of the liquid hydrocarbon components from the oil column and possibly from the gas cap
if retrograde condensation has occurred or if the original gas cap contains a relict oil saturation
4. Swelling of the oil if the oil at original reservoir conditions was very undersaturated with gas

Gas injection is particularly effective in high-relief reservoirs where the process is called "gravity drainage"
because the vertical/gravity aspects increase the efficiency of the process and enhance recovery of updip oil
residing above the uppermost oil-zone perforations.

43
 CHAPTER – 5
APPLICATION OF EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES FOR IMPROVED
HYDROCARBON RECOVERY
Enhanced Oil Recovery:
Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) is a term for special techniques to increase the amount of crude oil that can be
extracted from a field, over and above conventional primary depletion or basic water flooding which typically
will recover 20- 40% of the stock tank oil initially in place (STOIIP). Using typical EOR methods, an
additional 10- 20% of STOIIP can be extracted from a field.

A typical EOR process involves injecting a fluid other than water into the reservoir. These injectant usually
have economic values either as marketable fluids or the cost incurred to procure and process them for injection.

EOR processes can be classified under three main groups. These are Miscible Gas Injection Processes,
Chemical Processes, and Thermal Processes. Under these main groups are specific types of applications of
the EOR processes which are named as follows:

A. Miscible Gas Injection Processes

1. Nitrogen injection
2. Hydrocarbon (HC) gas injection
3. Carbon dioxide (CO2) injection
4. Sour gas, flue gas, etc. injection
B. Chemical Processes
1. Polymer flooding
2. Polymer/surfactant flooding
3. Alkali-Surfactant-Polymer (ASP) flooding
C. Thermal Processes
1. In-Situ Combustion (ISC) or High Pressure Air Injection (HPAI)
2. Steam/Hot water injection
3. Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage (SAGD)
D. Other Processes
1. Microbial Flooding

A) MISCIBLE GAS INJECTION PROCESS:

Miscible displacement can be achieved by injecting different types of gases or gas mixtures, depending on the
composition of fluids in the reservoir, reservoir conditions, and injection pressure. The types of gases used for
miscible flooding include nitrogen, flue gas, light hydrocarbons (C1 to C6), and carbon dioxide. Flue gas is
generated from power plants, internal combustion engines, etc. and contains a mixture of gases including a
high percentage of nitrogen (66%), carbon dioxide (9%–12%), and other gases, such as sulphur dioxide and
oxygen in smaller amounts.

1) Nitrogen/Flue Gas Injection:

Nitrogen/flue-gas is sometimes selected as the injection gas for miscible flooding because it is relatively
cheap and abundantly available in comparison with other potential injection gases such as hydrocarbon (HC)
gas or carbon dioxide. Nitrogen/flue-gas can achieve miscibility at higher MMP than either HC gas or CO2
at the same reservoir conditions. This condition limits the application of nitrogen/flue gas to reservoirs with
relatively high pressures. The mechanism by which nitrogen/flue-gas achieves miscibility with oil is through
vaporization of the light intermediate components present in the oil. This is essentially the mechanism of

44
vaporizing gas drive. For this reason, nitrogen/flue-gas is suitable for light oil reservoirs as candidates for
miscible flooding. Evaluation of nitrogen for use as an injection gas should include the cost of removing
nitrogen from the produced gas before it can be sold. Note that flue-gas is corrosive and may not be suitable
for application in many reservoirs without preventative procedures implemented to combat corrosion in
processing equipment.

2) Hydrocarbon Miscible Gas Flooding:

In hydrocarbon (HC) miscible gas-flooding, light hydrocarbons (C1 to C6) are injected into the reservoir at
pressures sufficiently high to achieve miscibility with the reservoir oil. Many pressure maintenance projects
with HC gas injection involve some aspects of miscible gas-flooding, if reservoir pressures are maintained
above MMP. HC gas injection can be classified broadly into three categories. The first category involves the
injection of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), such as propane at pressures sufficiently high to achieve FCM.
The second category involves the injection of enriched gas (containing C2 to C6 at enriched levels) to
achieve MCM by predominantly condensing gas drive mechanism. The third category entails the injection of
lean gas (containing mostly methane) at high pressures to achieve MCM by vaporizing the light components
(C2 to C6) in the oil using predominantly the vaporizing drive mechanism. In most real applications, the drive
mechanisms for the second and third categories involve some degree of combination of condensing-
vaporizing gas drives. In addition to enhanced oil recovery due to miscible conditions, HC gas-flood
improves oil recovery by swelling the oil, reducing oil viscosity, and physical displacement of the oil from
the pore spaces. The application of HC gas-flooding is limited by poor sweep efficiencies due to potential for
viscous fingering, and the high economic value of hydrocarbon gases.

3) Carbon dioxide Gas Flooding:

Carbon dioxide (CO2) gas is a very effective agent for miscible displacement of oil. In most cases, CO2
achieves miscibility with reservoir oil by extracting light to intermediate (C1 to C6) components of the oil in
a MCM, vaporizing gas drive mechanism. Also, CO2 improves oil recovery by swelling the oil, reducing its
viscosity, and lowering interfacial tension between the oil and the CO2-enriched fluid. CO2 can cause
45
extensive corrosion and should be used in a field project after extensive corrosion preventative measures have
been implemented. Carbon dioxide can be obtained from naturally occurring CO2 reservoirs or separated from
flue gases for injection. There is a persistent clamour around the world to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide
in the atmosphere which is considered as a major contributor to climate change. The amount of carbon dioxide
emitted into the atmosphere can be reduced by removing carbon dioxide from flue gas and injecting it into
reservoirs to improve oil recovery.

 If water and gas are injected in alternating cycles, the process is called water-alternating-gas (WAG)
injection strategy.
 In some application, water and gas are injected simultaneously. This injection strategy is called
simultaneous-water and-gas (SWAG). SWAG injection strategy is considered to be a variant of
WAG.
 Some miscible gasfloods are initiated with the strategy of continuous gas injection (CGI) which can
be switched later to WAG or SWAG to achieve better mobility control.
 The volume of gas injected can be reduced as the flood progresses to reduce cost and improve mobility
control. This injection strategy is described as tapering. Tapering is used in most carbon dioxide and
hydrocarbon injection projects to reduce the cost of injecting these gases into reservoirs for
hydrocarbon recovery.

B) CHEMICAL PROCESSES:
Chemical flooding processes are displacement processes that improve oil recovery from reservoirs with the
aid of chemicals that are generally called surfactants, polymers, and alkalis. These chemicals are combined
in various proportions to create injection systems which are termed polymer/surfactant (micellar) process,
and alkali/surfactant/polymer (ASP) process. Only polymers are injected for mobility control and improved
oil recovery in polymer flooding. Chemical flooding processes improve oil recovery by lowering the
interfacial tension (IFT) between oil and water, solubilisation of the oil in the micelles, emulsification of
the oil and water, alteration of the wettability of the rock, and enhancement of the mobility of the displacing
fluids. For each application of chemical flooding, the chemicals must be formulated and tailored to the
properties of the reservoir rock and its fluid system. This usually requires extensive testing of various
combinations of the chemicals in laboratory core-flood tests followed with a pilot test in the field. There are
few field-wide chemical flooding projects in the world in comparison with either CO2 or HC gas injections
projects. The decline of chemical flooding can be attributed to the high cost of the chemicals and higher risk
associated with achieving predicted oil recoveries with field-wide projects. The chemical flooding processes
that have been applied in the field are surfactant/polymer floods, ASP floods, and polymer floods.

1) Polymer/Surfactant Flooding:

In a typical polymer/surfactant flood (also called micellar/polymer flood), a slug of micellar solution
(consisting of water, surfactant, electrolytes, etc.) is injected into the reservoir. The size of the micellar slug
can vary from 3% to 30% of the flood pattern pore volume (PV) depending on the flood design. The micellar
slug is followed with a mobility buffer slug made up of polymer and water for mobility control. The entire
micellar/polymer slug is then chased with drive water. The polymer solution sometimes contains a biocide
to control microorganisms that can degrade the polymer and reduce the viscosity of the solution. The micellar
slug is formulated such that a favourable mobility ratio exists between the slug and the oil bank that is formed
by the flooding process. This sometimes requires the addition of small amounts of polymers in the composition
of the micellar solution. The micellar slug is usually the most expensive solution used in micellar/polymer
flooding. The surfactants in the micellar slug are degraded with the advancement of the flood due to adsorption
on rock surfaces and trapping of some of the micellar solution as a residual phase. Adsorption of surfactants
on rock surfaces can be reduced by preflushing the flood zone with fresh water. Preflushing with fresh
water also reduces incompatibilities between the surfactant and formation brine. The application of

46
micellar/polymer floods have declined because of the high cost of micellar solution and limited economic
success of the process in field tests.

2) Alkali/Surfactant/Polymer Flooding:

Alkali/surfactant/polymer (ASP) flooding is more widely used than micellar/polymer flooding in field
applications. ASP formulation utilizes the favourable mechanisms of its key components (alkali, surfactant
and polymer) to improve oil recovery. The main functions of the alkaline component are to promote
emulsification of the crude oil, reduce IFT, reduce adsorption of the surfactants, and regulate phase
behaviour of the mixtures. The main function of the surfactants is to reduce IFT between the oil and the
injected slugs. The polymers are used for mobility control and improvement of sweep efficiencies. The
favourable attributes of ASP formulations have been tested and proven in many laboratory and field tests.
ASP flooding has been applied in most cases to sandstone reservoirs but laboratory and pilot tests suggest
that it can also be applied to carbonate reservoirs.

3) Polymer Flooding:

Polymer flooding is the most widely used chemical flooding process for both sandstone and carbonate
reservoirs. Polymer flooding can be considered as a water flooding process in which polymers have been
added to the solution to improve mobility control. Thus, polymer flooding is able to achieve higher oil
recovery than ordinary water flooding due to improved volumetric sweep efficiency resulting from better
mobility control. Factors affecting the application of polymer flooding are the cost of the polymers, the
permeability of the reservoir, and the temperature of the reservoir. The cost of polymers limits the
concentration and slug size of the polymers that can be used to achieve higher oil recovery. Low rock
permeability can limit the use of more viscous polymers to improve mobility control, and can cause low
injectivity. Polymers are not stable at reservoir temperatures higher than 175 F. Many field applications of
polymer flooding have been reported as technical and economic success.

47
C) THERMAL PROCESSES:
Thermal EOR processes are defined to include all processes that supply heat energy to the rocks and fluids
contained in a reservoir thereby enhancing the ability of oil (including other fluids) to flow by primarily
reducing its viscosity. The oil caused to flow by the supply of thermal energy is produced through nearby
wells. The two main thermal processes that are presented in this section are steam-flooding and in-situ
combustion. Steam-flooding has achieved substantial commercial successes around the world and is ranked
as one of the top EOR processes. In-situ combustion process, by comparison, has attained limited commercial
success, and is actively applied in few reservoirs around the world. The main obstacle to the application of in-
situ combustion technology is ability to manage and control the advancement and progression of the
combustion process. Steam-flooding has been used on highly viscous, shallow reservoirs at depths of 200 to
3600 feet while in-situ combustion can be applied to less viscous, deeper reservoirs at depths reaching 8300
feet.

1) Steam-flooding Methods:

A) Cyclic Steam Stimulation (CSS):

Cyclic steam stimulation (CSS) is a simple and cheap method of applying thermal recovery process on a
reservoir. It involves injecting steam into a well for several weeks, shutting the well in as long as necessary
to allow the steam to heat the oil in the areas around the well, and putting the well back on production to
recover the heated oil. This process is repeated when the production from the well declines to a low level. The
cycle is repeated many times until the ratio of oil produced to steam injected termed oil-steam ratio (OSR)
drops to a level that is considered uneconomic. CSS was the first steam-flooding technique used in heavy oil
reservoirs. It can still be used in a limited pilot test on a well to investigate whether steam injection can enhance
oil recovery in a particular field before undertaking more expensive pattern pilot tests that will require more
wells and more equipment.

B) Steam Drive:

In steam drives, steam is injected continuously at injectors with the aim of driving oil towards producers.
Typically in most projects, steam injection is organized in patterns. For instance, in a normal five-spot
pattern, the producer is located in the middle of the pattern and surrounded by four steam injectors. Various
pattern configurations of injectors and producers have been used in many fields. The selection of the pattern
that is best suited for a particular reservoir is an essential part of the design and pilot testing process, before
field implementation of the project. Steam drive was initially described as essentially a frontal displacement
process similar to water-flooding, whereby steam displaces oil towards a producer. Later, experimental and
field evidence showed that the mechanism of oil recovery by steam is dominated by gravity drainage caused
by steam rising towards the top of the formation due to gravity override. The accumulation of steam at the top
of the formation creates a steam zone which continues to expand with more steam injection. This steam zone
can propagate and breakthrough at the producers to cause inefficient utilization of the energy from the steam
due to cycling. The main challenges of managing a steam drive project are monitoring the size and growth of
the steam zone, monitoring producers for early steam breakthrough, adjusting steam inject rates, and
measuring the trend of oil-steam ratio for each pattern.
48
C) Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage:

The SAGD process consists of two horizontal wells about 15 feet apart located close to the bottom of the
formation. Steam is injected into the top horizontal well, while the horizontal well below it functions as the
producer. The steam creates an expanding steam chamber around the injector as more steam is injected.
Within the steam chamber and at its boundaries, as the viscosity of the oil is reduced, its mobility increases
causing it to drain under gravity towards the production well. The SAGD process should be applied to
reservoirs with formation thickness greater than 50 feet, good vertical permeability, and absence of thief
zones. In some SAGD projects, a hydrocarbon solvent (such as methane) is added to the steam to improve
oil recovery. This variation of the SAGD process has been described as the expanding solvent-SAGD (ES-
SAGD). In another variation, vertical wells are used for steam injection, while the producer remains a
horizontal well. This configuration of injectors and producer is termed Cross SAGD (XSAGD).

D) Water Alternating Steam Process:

Water-alternating-gas (WAG) was described as an injection strategy used in gas floods to reduce viscous
fingering, improve vertical sweep, and thereby increase oil recovery. This concept is also used in steam
flooding by injecting water alternating with steam to reduce fingering of steam, and improve its vertical
sweep efficiency. This strategy is called water-alternating-steam process or WASP. The main benefit of
WASP over continuous steam injection is reduction or elimination of premature steam breakthrough at
producing wells. Early steam breakthrough at producers wastes heat energy, and reduces productivity of the
wells.
49
 2) In-Situ Combustion (ISC)/High Pressure Air Injection (HPAI):

In-situ combustion (ISC)/High pressure air injection (HPAI) are EOR processes in which compressed air is
injected into heavy and light oil reservoirs under conditions, such that the oxygen in the injected air reacts
with a small fraction of the crude oil at high temperatures to create a combustion front. The distinction
between ISC and HPAI processes is blurred, although both processes are definitely related. An ISC process is
associated with high peak temperatures (350 C to 600 C), and may require ignition to initiate it, whereas an
HPAI process may not have high peak temperature and does not require ignition. The ISC process appears to
be more applicable to heavy oil reservoirs, whereas HPAI is better suited for light oil reservoirs. Both
processes are generally considered to be air injection processes (AIP). The displacement path consists of an
air zone behind the combustion/reaction zone. The combustion/reaction zone is preceded by a coke zone, a
condensation zone, and mobilized oil bank. High oil recoveries have been reported from laboratory and field
tests of AIP. However, there are few air injection projects around the world. Steam flooding have surpassed
air injection as the preferred EOR process even though both processes can satisfy the screening criteria for the
same light or heavy oil reservoirs. This is the result of air injection being considered as more risky than steam
flooding because the propagation of its combustion/reaction front is more difficult to predict and control.

50
 CHAPTER – 6
LONG TERM RETENTION OF STAFF IN MULTI-DISCIPLINARY
TEAM
In many organizations, reservoir management teams are composed of reservoir engineers, geologists,
geophysicists, petrophysicists, production engineers, drilling engineers, facilities engineers, and other staff.
These multi-disciplined teams have been recognized in the industry as being very effective in fashioning sound
reservoir management strategies. This final principle of reservoir management is necessary because it
puts emphasis on the importance of keeping members of the team together long enough to gain critical
understanding of the reservoir. After this critical level of knowledge has been achieved, management teams
function more efficiently in crafting new strategies or altering existing strategies for improved reservoir
management. When staff changes are necessary or mandated, it is recommended that at least one or two key
members of the reservoir management team should be retained to train and transfer knowledge and experience
on the reservoir to the new team members.

51
 REFERENCES
 Reservoir Engineering Handbook by Tarek Ahmed
 Fundamentals of Reservoir Engineering by L.P.Dake
 Well Testing by John Lee
 Petroleum Reservoir Engineering Practice by Nnaemeka Ezekwe.
 Saputelli, L., Nikolaou, M., and Economides, M.J.: “Self-Learning Reservoir Management,” SPEREE
(December 2005).
 Al-Hussainy, R., and Humphreys, N.: “Reservoir Management: Principles and Practices,” JPT
(December 1996).
 Gates, I.D., Kenny, J., Hernandez-Hdez, I.L., and Bunio, G.L.: “Steam–Injection Strategy and
Energetics of Steam-Assisted Gravity Drainage,” SPEREE (February 2007).
 Collins, P.M.: “Geomechanical Effects on the SAGD Process,” SPEREE (August 2007).
 L. Saputelli, M. Nikolaou, and M. J. Economides PDVSA; “SELF-LEARNING RESERVOIR
MANAGEMENT”- SPE 84064.
 http://www.dghindia.gov.in/assets/downloads/594b77be75491EOR_in_Indian_Context_by_ONGC.
pdf
 http://www.oil-gasportal.com/reservoir-management/
 https://www.slb.com/~/media/Files/resources/oilfield_review/ors00/spr00/p30_51.pdf
 http://petrowiki.org/Reservoir_management

52